Cialis is a latest medicine for treatment of disturbances of erection at men. Cialis feature is its high-speed acquit yourself (30 minutes) and a long-term effect (up to 36 hours). In this regard you can pick the moment which is most adequate for sexual intercourse, having trendy a drug in advance. It is practicable to assume Cialis in the day and to be ready even next day. lithe ingredient - Tadalafil.

If an overpayment exists for personal property taxes, the City of Alexandria Finance Department will first determine that no other City funds are delinquent and then prepare a refund.

The journal accepts the following article types:1.

Categories: Erectile Dysfunction | cialis 20 mg for sale


  • Pilebsa


    March 10, 2015, 11:43 am

    >and web software (which is very high level,

    Web software shouldn't necessarily be high level. That's where you're fundamentally wrong. In fact, the lower level it can be the better, because web software can theoretically handle hundreds of thousands of simultaneous transactions. Like I said before, you guys' solution is to just throw more servers and memory at a problem that could be solved by using a lower level language. And I would argue that an OOP app is not necessarily easier to maintain. I'm not saying all OOP is bad, but I think it depends upon the application.

    The problem with modern/younger programmers is they're used to having virtually unlimited resources (memory and cpu power) at their disposal so they really have limited experience coding highly-efficient apps and they take stuff for granted (like you just did suggesting web systems should be high level), but you'd be surprised how much better a small, tight, non-OOP system in a web environment will out perform more "high level" counterparts.

    As an example, basically look at almost any web-based Java application. It's incredibly slow compared to other, lower-level technology, and I see no noticeable improvement in features and flexibility in OOP apps.

    >badly designed OOP is a nightmare.

    I agree, and it's a nightmare several orders of magnitude higher than badly designed regular code

    In a world where most programmers were decent designers, I might say OOP is the way to go, but that's not reality.


  • rajulkabir


    March 10, 2015, 4:26 pm

    I sure hope you're right! My mom just took an all-day class in texting offered at her local community centre. She still writes out all the numbers in advance on a piece of paper before punching them into the phone - if she's going to say "hello" she'll get out her spiralbound notebook and painstakingly write down "4 4 3 3 5 5 5 WAIT 5 5 5 6 6 6". It's only in the past few weeks that she stopped calling me to announce that she was about to send me an SMS.

    I project myself into her shoes 30 years from now and it's not a pretty sight.


  • stevenkneff


    March 10, 2015, 6:30 pm

    Two guys were sitting in a bar. The first guy turns to the second

    and asks: "What do you do?" The second guy answers "I'm a Professor

    and I teach critical thinking.

    The first guy asks: "What's that?" The second guy answers I teach

    how to analyze from different conceptual angles, turn problems inside-

    out, how to make "valid" inferences from given data, how to establish

    and test "facts", how to make valid deductions and not commit logical

    fallacies etc". The first guy says: "Well how does it work?"

    The seond guy asks the first guy "Do you have a dog?" The first guy

    says "yes" and the seond guy asks "What kind?" and the first guy

    answers "A thoroughbred champion golden retriever". The second guy

    says "since you have a golden retriever which is an outside dog and

    since it is an expensive thoroughbred, you must have a backyard and a fence so the dog doesn't run away." The first guy says "You're right". The second guy then says "since you have a backyard and a

    fence you must have a house" and the first guy says "right again".

    The second guy then says "since you have a house you are probably

    married" and the first guy says "right again" and then the second guy

    says "since you are married, you are probably a heterosexual." The

    first guys says "you are right on everything and you can figure all of

    that out just from the kind of dog I have?"

    The bartender was listening and says to both of them "what are you

    guys talking about" and the first guy says "this guy is a professor

    and he teaches critical thinking." The bartender says "what's that?"

    and the first guy, who wants to show off his newly-acquired

    "knowledge" says "he looks at problems inside-out, he figures things

    out from basic facts." So the bartender says "how does it work?" and

    the first guy, still trying to show off, says "Do you have a dog?"

    The bartender says "No". So the first guy stares at him and says



  • byAlpacapoint


    March 11, 2015, 5:43 am

    Alpaca sweaters, where no alpaca is killed for its fur – by

    Alpacas are also known as the 'sheep of the Andes' and are a source of livelihood for Andean communities.

    The alpaca, like the llama, has always been a domesticated animal, but unlike the llama, it is usually raised for its luxurious fine fiber. It is more profitable than the llama due to its better wool and tastier meat.

    Alpaca has been the premier fiber of the Peruvian. Inca royalty wore robes made from alpaca fleece for good reason; alpaca is luxurious, strong, warm, and beautiful.

    In adapting to the extreme temperatures of the high mountains, the alpaca developed fleece with unique thermal properties. In addition, yarns made from alpaca fleece are stronger than ordinary yarn and resist soiling, staining and pilling. Beacause an alpaca's coat does not have natural oils, its fleece is less likely to have the characteristic "itchiness" of ordinary wool and is more likely to be hypo-allergenic.

    The wool can be found in 22 distinct, natural colors from white, to brown, to black. An alpaca can produce enough wool to make 6 or 8 warm sweaters. When compared to sheep wool, which only has a clean fiber yield of 43-76% after processing, the alpaca gives 87-95% usuable fiber. Another advantage of alpaca wool over sheep is that it does not require chemicals to be scoured and cleaned due to a much lower grease (lanolin) content. This makes it better for Pachamama, and also less expensive to process. Alpacas can be raised at very high altitudes, and so have developed more thermal capacity than almost any other animal. That´s the reason why the ALPACA is the camelid that serves as the main subsistence for Andean people. Alpacas live in the Andes at altitudes ranging from 3,000 to 4,500 metres above sea level and withstand extreme temperatures.

    Nowadays, in the fashion industry, Alpaca fur is renowned to be one of the most luxurious, softest, resistant and beautiful fibres. It comes in an array of natural colours and it is used to produce beautiful apparel as well as home accessories.

    People who touch an alpaca marvel at how soft its fleece is. This softness is the reason the feel of alpaca is often compared to the feel of cashmere.

    In our online store you can buy different products such as warm alpaca sweaters, socks, shawls, hats (Chullos), and other gadgets.

    In our alpaca garments we use a large percentage of alpaca wool without chemicals and knitted by hand and machine guarding every detail in their development. The quality of our alpaca sweaters makes them suitable for export.


  • tobybuk


    March 11, 2015, 8:33 am

    As we've already ascertained using the IDF as the purveyor of truth is akin to letting the fox run the hen house. They are just not a credible source of information on the subject. They’ve been caught distorting and twisting the facts so many times its disingenuous to even sure present anything like the truth.

    Goldstone on this subject:

    121. International human rights law and humanitarian law require States to investigate and, if

    appropriate, prosecute allegations of serious violations by military personnel. International law

    has also established that such investigations should comply with standards of impartiality,

    independence, promptness and effectiveness. **The Mission holds that the Israeli system of

    investigation does not comply with all those principles.** In relation to the “operational

    debriefing” used by the Israeli armed forces as an investigative tool, the Mission holds the view

    that a tool designed for the review of performance and to learn lessons can hardly be an effective

    and impartial investigation mechanism that should be instituted after every military operation

    where allegations of serious violations have been made. It does not comply with internationally

    recognized principles of impartiality and promptness in investigations. The fact that proper

    criminal investigations can start only after the “operational debriefing” is over is a major flaw in

    the Israeli system of investigation.

    So whats is being said here is Israel will only let an investigation happen once they have told the filthy IDF child killers what to say.


    “127. In the context of increasing unwillingness on the part of Israel to open criminal

    investigations that comply with international standards,”

    and its a shame you didn't read the next paragraph for the best bit of sub human behaviour displayed by the Zionist animal:

    ** 351. Around 15 January the Israeli armed forces began withdrawing from their positions in the

    main areas described above. As they did so, there appeared to be a practice of systematically

    demolishing a large number of structures, including houses, water installations, such as tanks on

    the roofs of houses, and of agricultural land. A renewed aerial phase in Rafah was also

    conducted in the last few days of the military operations. Whereas the strikes in the first week

    appear to have been relatively selective, the last few days saw an increase in the number of strikes with several hundred targets hit, causing not only very substantial damage to buildings

    but also, according to some, underground structural damage**

    Nice - reminds me of a certain bunch of sick cunts who decided to drop hundreds of thousands of cluster bomblets on populated areas.

    Such a sick sick bunch of racist killers the world has ever had the displeasure to know. Shame on you. Shame on your country. Shame on the world for not sorting this abomination out by now.


  • Jorsh


    March 10, 2015, 12:17 pm

    It doesn't seem like many people in this thread have gone through any kind of in depth environmental ethics studies.

    Basically, there is no strong argument that there is ethical imperative to create more life. From a utilitarian standpoint, however, there is a strong argument to be made for the creation of the most total happiness. Creating a large quantity of farm animals who are all unhappy is, on utilitarian terms, a net loss, and a rather large one.

    The grandparent post is succumbing to the naturalistic fallacy, which states that you cannot argue that because something is natural it is ethical. Hunting and agricultural animals were necessary for our survival at one point, but in a majority of the world today it is no longer necessary. In addition, when meat consumption was necessary, it was a comparatively rare occurrence, certainly not the three meals a day exercise it has become in modern society.

    Also, cubed's point about dogs is commonly responded to by discussing moral agents and moral patients. Moral agents have a conscious awareness of morality and ethics, and therefore have an obligation to act on it. A moral patient may be conscious, but does not have the capacity for ethical reasoning and does not act on moral grounds. Nevertheless, they are still participants within the ethical system, and deserve consideration (depending on your specific argument and a few other things). You cannot fault a moral patient for preying upon another, because he doesn't know any better.

    Insects don't really have a capacity for higher conceptions of pain or pleasure, and if the utilitarian argument I introduced above is employed than the primary considerations with regard to killing insects should be the effect they have on the surrounding ecosystem, i.e. don't use DDT to kill them if you'll wind up ruining several higher order species.

    Course, there are plenty of conclusions that a utilitarian environmental ethics makes that seem displeasing to a lot of people. For example, there's no good argument for protecting endangered species more so than others. It's ethics, so it's a huge gray area. If there were one right answer we'd all be agreeing right now.


  • natrius


    March 10, 2015, 11:15 am

    Most people are healthy enough to ride a bike and can carry most of the things they'll need for the day on their back or on the bike itself.

    The real solution, in my opinion, is well placed bike rental kiosks combined with rapid transit lines (bus or rail). Bike from home to the nearest transit line, which should be less than two miles. Get off near work, and perhaps bike the remaining mile or so.

    The current situation of people driving by themselves to work in their SUVs is sillier than expecting everyone to bike. Most people who are healthy enough to bike still use cars for every single trip they take. That's easy to fix without billion dollar transit systems.


  • innocentbystander


    March 10, 2015, 10:32 pm

    I also notice they haven't done Matthew. Attempting to excise "Liberal bias" from the Sermon on the Mount might be one of the single most Orwellian exercises ever undertaken. I'm guessing they're crapping themselves over what do with 'blessed are the peacemakers' and such. Not to mention the parts about the hypocrites who pray in the streets...

    I suppose they could declare the Q Document to be a liberal conspiracy and just leave it out entirely. That'd sure take care of a lot of their problems.


  • Dadotron


    March 11, 2015, 4:25 am

    NO! Think about how fast changes were being made over 50 years ago. One could count on their fingers all the different technological changes being made in a year. Everyone was on the same page as far as new technologies were being made. Nowdays I can't count on my fingers new technologies being made every day, let alone a year. Our generation is used to change. We are used to new technologies everyday and our adaptation to them is as fast as they are being made. I could pretty much pick up any gadget and within an hour i could figure it all out. So NO! not technologically incompetent!


  • MyrddinE


    March 10, 2015, 8:06 am

    I won't be. My sister will. It's all about your focus in life.

    Most people want to get things done. They focus on the task, and use what tools they need to do to solve the problem. Those tools could be on a computer, or in meatspace, it does not really matter. People growing up with computers will learn to use the computer tools to get things done.

    But this type of person does not learn WHY the computer and tools work the way they do. They will continue to learn new tools, but slowly they will become comfortable with a particular set of tools, and will only learn new tools that are vastly superior... such as old folks who switched over to email, because it is vastly superior to postal mail in many ways.

    Other people, in which group I place myself, care as much about why things work as how. I don't like using tools that I don't understand the background of how they work. I read about new technologies and how they operate, their advantages and disadvantages, etc. If I ever stop being interested in the inner workings of new technology, I'll be dead.


  • visarga


    March 10, 2015, 11:38 am

    The moment he was slandered in the media, his life turned into hell. What perspectives of rehabilitation did he have? People have zero tolerance for pedophiles and for innocents who are suspected of pedophilia just the same. Any amount of retraction would have solved nothing if parents have already changed their opinions. Maybe they thought "why take a risk, maybe he is innocent, but maybe he was a pedophile who got away". They would never have been sure he was innocent. Thus, suicide. Probably he thought he had nothing to live for any more now that his work and life was taken away from him.

    If a boy falsely reported him to play a joke on him or to get revenge, that boy is a murderer. If that is so, then I hope he bears for the rest of his life the weight of his actions. If he still has a conscience. If not, then he is an animal, a force of nature, like lightning striking a man down without any reason. No reason to worry about such individuals.


  • spitz


    March 10, 2015, 8:40 am

    No doubt about it. I even had to throw in that the polls were specifically from the US because I figured you might not be and religion's presence isn't as strong in many other parts of the world.

    However, what you may miss is that part of why things appear to be comparatively better where you're from is the fact that religion isn't as big a concern as it is here. Less people are religious, less people who are religious believe in religious doctrine to the degree they do here, and less people consider religion to be an important part of their lives.

    So it's not that religion is necessarily better over there. It sounds better because religion is less valued, and it's important to realize that when you describe Europe in such a way, it provides reason for us to speak out against the people who are far more religious, believe in the literal truths of more religious doctrines and consider religion to be a much more important part of their lives than the people where you are generally do.


  • simulacrum


    March 11, 2015, 4:32 am

    The Lisbon Treaty, an reform agreement between 27 democratically elected governments, is a **conspiracy** orchestrated by four politicians??? Let's see...

    * Occam's razor - does the alternative story explain more of the evidence than the mainstream story, or is it just a more complicated and therefore less useful explanation of the same evidence?

    * Logic - Do the proofs offered follow the rules of logic, or do they employ fallacies of logic?

    * Methodology - are the proofs offered for the argument well constructed? Is there any clear standard to determine what evidence would prove or disprove the theory?

    * Whistleblowers - how many people – and what kind – have to be loyal conspirators?

    * Falsifiability - Is it possible to demonstrate that specific claims of the theory are false, or are they "unfalsifiable"?

    Nah...same old fear-mongering horseshit.


  • jooliver


    March 10, 2015, 5:03 pm

    Sad story and my heart goes out. However, there are a lot of holes in the mothers story.

    1.This mother states that she was living in such poverty that she was living in shelters. There is no way that the Medicaid for these children just "lapsed." The only way a child is kicked off Medicaid is if the parent makes too much money or fails to complete routine paperwork.

    2. How did both kids get dozens of cavities?~ even at a most homeless shelters, there is toothpaste there to use.

    3. There are several options for low income dental care that any school or shelter social worker could have told her about if she would have bothered to ask- dentistry schools, low income clinics, health departments, community health centers, and The United Way that offers $ for dental services, etc...

    4. There had to be signs of infection before the child was so sick he died- fever, trouble eating, seizures, swelling, etc... Why did she wait until he was on deaths door to carry him to the ER?

    Sure, there is a problem with health care, but the mother was obviously not attending to her children.


  • cr0ft


    March 10, 2015, 1:48 pm

    The big difference is that any society that has single payer will have a real vested interest in making sure people get preventative care. The healthier the population, the less health care will cost, and the more competitive the country is as well (healthy people work, unhealthy people cost money.) Thus any country with single payer will push people to get preventative care and stay healthy through campaigns and on-going follow-ups.

    The reason the Government would do it would be simply because it makes financial sense, and it would of course also be good for the citizenry.


  • 65kerensky


    March 10, 2015, 6:10 pm

    The packages that UPS cant deliver have to be returned to the sorting center, accounted for, and then stored properly. This is all done so you and UPS know where your package is at all times. If we delivered at 11 PM, this means we would have to resort any missed deliveries (and there are always missed deliveries) at midnight~2 AM. Not financially viable.

    Furthermore, you drive to the grocery store and the gas station. So what are you complaining about? You can also drive to UPS. 20 miles by 50 mph is one hour of your life to get your package.

    You said that UPS was told you had to be home, but the business that sent it said otherwise. That sounds like the problem right there. Im willing to bet the business didnt say that to UPS.

    If they leave it on your porch or lawn, and something happens to it, then whose fault is it? Yours? UPS? What if its never found? Who should pay for it's replacement?

    Enough people lost their packages that UPS requires its drivers to deliver to people. This is the default behavior that UPS has towards deliveries and if the *business says nothing* this is what it will do. If the sender specifies that this is not required, then it will be done, but if something does happen to it, you cant get mad at UPS, after all they did exactly what you told them to.


  • ponderouspoles


    March 10, 2015, 2:31 pm

    There are many many ways that an entity can exert control of their pricing power besides regulation manipulation. Just ask John Rockefeller. It just happens that, as government regulation is the biggest threat to corporate control (it's the only entity of comparable size and power in relation to the modern corporation), making a concerted (or maniacally obsessive) effort on the part of those corporations to bend regulatory powers away from them and toward their competitors becomes their most salutary tactic in fulfilling their imperatives. If we got rid of regulation or lessened it, the battlefield for profits would simply shift to a different set circumstances, but both the will and the ability to exploit would continue unabated, and in my opinion would greatly increase.

    It isn't the quantity of government or regulation that is the issue, it is the quality. Something the right seems incapable of acknowledging.


  • popsicle


    March 10, 2015, 10:05 pm

    you know in department stores, those 4 sided mirrors , probably 3 feet on each side? the ones that went from floor to ceiling. well i used to think there was someone sitting in there watching for "stealers" and that they were two way mirrors. no lie, i really think that has something to do with why im so afraid to steal things today. everytime i would walk by i would wink or wave or something, a sort of, *i know you're in there* type of gesture. i felt so sneaky, like i wasnt supposed to know.

    edit:english be hard


  • terronk


    March 10, 2015, 8:25 am

    IMO, political labels are convenient, because I don't carry a card that states my individual position on every issue for when someone asks me how I lean politically. Instead, I tell them I'm a liberal, and they will infer mostly accurate information about most of my views.

    I hate hearing this claim, as though somehow if I use a word to describe my ideology I'm all of a sudden a SHEEPLE (SHPERSON?). There are many people who agree with the basic tenants of a political philosophy, but differ on a few implementation details. For them, it's convenient to use a word that has a common understanding among an informed audience.


  • cheebsmagoo


    March 10, 2015, 3:59 pm

    The most efficient hands down involves a water pipe thats ideally glass on glass, with an ice catcher, ash catcher and at least 4 chambers. Once you pack a bowl of that with your finest caliber kind bud (Kushes, Diesels, Haze's) load up the top with some keef and a *dash* of some hash oil. Get some honey soaked hemp to light (since you dont want to be breathing in lighter fluid) and THAT RIGHT THERE is the most more efficient hit, since at least 90% of it will be THC and no adulterants from your lighter :)


  • naturalperson


    March 11, 2015, 4:18 am

    same with me. i have been a full time bike commuter for 4 years, year round in michigan (so i am comfortable in all weather, -26 is way worse than rainy cold). the key every time is to pick your location. you have control over where you live, and if rent is a little more to put you closer to school or work you should pay it. you won't be paying for gas or parking or repairs for your car, and you don't really have to ride far. you also double duty your commute. not only are you getting where you need to go you are exercising.


  • aveclerobo


    March 10, 2015, 7:24 pm

    here are four main factors motivating the recent rise in popularity of online Poker. First and foremost, Poker has recently made the evolutionary jump from being viewed as a game to being viewed as a sport in the United States. This mainstream acceptance is due to increased media coverage of high-stakes Pokertournaments such as the 2003 World Series of Poker and various weekly tournaments on the World Poker Tour. While ESPN and The Travel Channel have provided the primary coverage of such events, other television stations have been quick to duplicate these efforts. For example, the BRAVO network began airing weekly celebrity Poker tournaments near the end of 2003. Most recently, Fox Sports Net began airing episodes of its "Late Night Poker" program.

    Although there are a wide variety of ways that Poker can be played, the tournament format covered by all of these entities is Texas No Limit Hold'em. This particular version of Poker is more confrontational and explosive than traditionally accepted formats such as 5-card draw or 7-card stud. In high stakes games, Hold'em is simply the most exciting format of poker, especially when an audience is watching.

    The third and fourth reasons behind the meteoric rise in poker's popularity have much to do with the 2003 World Series of Poker. As the name indicates, this particular poker championship is the most sought after by poker players around the world. The tournament itself has a rich history, not to mention a rich payout. In 2003, the person who ended up winning the WSP was a 27-year-old accountant named Chris Moneymaker, and his rise to the pinnacle of the poker world was nothing short of a Cinderella story.

    The WSP commands a $10,000 entrance fee, but the opportunity to win a spot in the tournament was made available by several online poker services, including By playing in a "satellite" tournament for $40 at PokerStars, Moneymaker eventually earned entry into the WSP tournament by virtue of his success online. Despite the fact that the 2003 WSP was his first "live" tournament, Moneymaker went on to win the $2.5 million first prize and the respect of professional players worldwide. This accomplished two things - it legitimized the notion that online poker players are just as skilled at the game as those who play in Casinos , and it truly illustrated that anyone can win. Said Moneymaker, "I was a little underestimated because no one knew who I was. If I can win it, anybody can."

    The concept of "anybody" winning caught hold of the American public like wildfire, and almost overnight the number of people trying to become that "anybody" exploded. The fact that ESPN (a nationally recognized cable television network) kept replaying the phases of the tournament that showed Moneymaker's rise to the top simply added fuel to the proverbial fire. Thus, it wasn't long before people who had a few dollars and a couple of free hours began trying their hands at a game that, with a little luck, could make them wealthy overnight. The Internet aided this rags-to-riches mentality immeasurably: users quickly realized that they could access a wide array of online poker games in a manner of seconds instead of having to drive to a Casino.


  • greediculous


    March 10, 2015, 8:21 pm

    I stayed at that same hotel over a weekend when working in Cork. My coworker and I got shitfaced and didn't remember coming home that night. In the morning, I woke up and took a massive piss from all the beer I drank and crawled back into bed. I could hear my coworker snoring in the bed next to me. A minute or two later, he got up to take a piss as well, but I could still hear the snoring in the bed. I yelled and my coworker switched on the light. Turns out some random Scotsman had somehow made his way into our room and crawled into bed with my coworker. We asked him what he was doing there to which he exclaimed "it's my room!". We called security to get rid of him, but managed to get him out of the room before they showed up, though I did take a picture of him beforehand sitting on the edge of my coworker's bed in his underwear. We both sat their and laughed about it for like 20 minutes because it was so surreal.

    Later that morning when we went to check out, we were examining the lock on the door to figure out how he got in. As we were doing so, three guys walking down the hall, one in a kilt, asked us if we had a visitor last night. Turns out his friend got drunker than we were and wandered out of the room the four of them were sharing (he was sleeping on the floor previously). We walked with them downstairs to check out and there he was. He was quite red-faced once he saw us and kept apologizing. My coworker and I just started cracking up and talking about how funny it was.

    Sorry, not a ghost story, but the hotel sparked the memory. Everyone usually has a good laugh when I tell the story.


Leave a comment