Image

Cialis is a latest medicine for treatment of disturbances of erection at men. Cialis feature is its high-speed do something (30 minutes) and a long-term effect (up to 36 hours). In this regard you can pick the moment which is most within acceptable limits for sexual intercourse, having trendy a drug in advance. It is realizable to acknowledge Cialis in the day and to be ready even bordering day. alert ingredient - Tadalafil.

Where to buy generic cialis in canada you subscribe to Google Play Music or YouTube Music. SHARPER INSIGHTS The world is as big as you make it.

Categories: Male Enhancement | buy viagra ou cialis

Comments

  • Xet

    Xet

    March 10, 2015, 7:18 am

    I'd say that a lot of people who argue against eating meat, find more of a problem with the way that animals are treated than the simple fact of eating meat.

    We also tend to eat a lot more meat than is necessary, simply because of our easy access to it. Remember our ancestors really had to work for that meat, sometimes tracking animals for days. Hunts were also not always successful.

    A third thing is that in modern times, there is generally no longer that sort of pressure and necessity to eat meat, since there are now plenty of alternatives. It generally costs a lot more resources to produce meat than it costs to produce plant-based food.

    That said, I am not a vegetarian, and I eat a fair amount of meat. However I have spent long periods living in places where meat is not a staple part of the diet, and I can say that generally I've felt healthier when only consuming a nominal amount of meat.

    Edit: Also, just because we can eat meat, doesn't mean we should eat it. Or at least, we should not eat much of it, and we should know how it's being produced. Our ancestors at least had the solace that the animals they killed lived full, free lives, and they mostly would have very strong rituals, thanking the animals for giving up their lives so that they may eat. They had a tremendous amount of respect for the natural world.

    Reply

  • kleinbl00

    kleinbl00

    March 10, 2015, 2:19 pm

    >But the fact remains that the grooming norms for one gender are disproportionately complicated, yes?

    Yes. If you follow the logic, however, this leads to the conclusion that one gender prefers disproportionate complication. For example: Let's say there are two groups of people, both of which like blue. One group tends to wear things that are blue. The other group wears blue, aqua, periwinkle, indigo, turquoise and cornflower. The fact that both groups like blue is in evidence - but one group, and only one group, likes *fussy* blue. If the other group liked "fussy blue" as much as the first group, they'd both be wearing ten shades of blue. However, only one group puts up with it.

    >And the fact remains that the absence of complicated grooming, i.e. the default/control value, signals maleness.

    This is because men interacting with men care much less about appearance. Consider the business suit: men's cuts are pretty indistinguishable from first glance. The fact that I can tell a Brioni from a Brooks Brothers generally calls people to question my sexual orientation. Any fool on the street can tell the difference between something from Banana Republic and something from Burlington Coat Factory, however, when it comes to women's suits. They're cut very differently and show a lot more individual variation. Even in the uniform-like, blase world of business attire, women still focus lots of attention on things that men seldom notice.

    >OK, so I decide to quit carrying purses because I accept your claim that purses are just things women carry to impress other women. Where do I put my stuff?

    You're defending against an argument I didn't make. I did not say you shouldn't carry a purse because men don't notice them - I said men don't notice your purse. Do we notice if you have one or not? Certainly. It's an object. Do I discriminate between big ones and small ones? Yes, because that's the way males think (comes from the hunter/gatherer divide of gender, going way way back). Do I discriminate between a red one and a blue one? Only if I'm at the coat check and need to bring you yours.

    And while I understand your lament about purses, I think you're missing an important consideration: your husband *can't* carry a purse, even though it sounds like it would be handy for him to do so. There aren't even good names for them: You can call them *satchels* but they'll get called *man purses* or "fag bags."

    Reply

  • Lut3s

    Lut3s

    March 10, 2015, 7:42 am

    I never said anything about only having one camera. The bank I worked at had a monitor that we could watch and it would scroll through all of the cameras on the premises. There was about 12 if memory serves me right. There was one behind every teller window (6), cameras for our atms (2), an outdoor camera (1), a drive-through camera (1), a camera monitoring the floor, and one on the back hall.

    Regardless of the resolution the camera is set at, when you zoom into any digital format barring vector images, it gets distorted the more you zoom. Unlike analog cameras which are still in use at some older banks. Analog cameras allowed you to zoom to your heart's content and still keep the same level of clarity. The reason they switched to digital cameras is to cut costs and keep the same level of protection. Even then, they would keep the resolution down in order to not have to buy so much storage. Also, the cameras at my branch were recording at a 30 fps.

    Reply

  • bunny4e

    bunny4e

    March 11, 2015, 12:24 am

    I once had this relationship in grad school where I was really in to the guy and had no idea the breakup was coming. He came over one day and we hung out. At the end of the day, he said "we have to talk" and we sat on the couch.

    He proceeded to tell me "it's not you, it's me" and "my parents once broke up before getting married and got back together later" blahblahblah. After his spiel, I asked him if there was anything else and he said "Well, don't you want to talk?"

    My response: "No, I think you said everything you need to say. Obviously you don't want to be with me, and I don't want to be with someone who doesn't want to be with me" I then told him to wait a minute and got up to get everything he gave me (trinkets, flowers that I later dried, cards, pictures, etc), put it in a bag, and gave it to him. I told him if we were supposed to get back together, he could give it to me then. If not, I had no use for them.

    At the door, he asked me for a hug. I said "No, that's not really appropriate anymore" and let the door close in his face. After all that, I still withdrew from school for a quarter and battled a lot of shit, but at least I have my dignity to this day.

    Reply

  • RandomStalker

    RandomStalker

    March 11, 2015, 7:16 am

    I've been thinking the exact same thing, quite seriously. The countries of Scandinavia should break out of EU and create a Scandinavian Union. We have more in common culturally with each other than with any other country in the EU.

    Sweden would bring, like you say, industry and energy (they have one of the largest deposits of Uranium in the world and are leading in nuclear technology, although there's currently a ban on building new nuclear plants because some stupid fucking hippie cunts decided so in the 70's), Norway has oil and worldwide land possessions, Iceland is a very important strategic base, and Finland, though they are bit retarded, are dangerous fucking people and would be put in charge of the army. Denmark... Is a good buffer on the European mainland. And would provide hasch and porn.

    We'd build some hundred or so nuclear plants, focus a lot of government spending on education towards making a large section of the population nuclear specialists (just building the plants would create a ridiculous amount of various kinds of jobs), and then we would sell the energy really cheap to the rest of the EU and dump prises on the market, thereby seriously fucking up the current Russian energy hegemony and our reliance on coal and gas power, and at the same time become the energy center of Europe, which would give us political leverage and provide good incentive for the EU to protect us. We would invest some of the money in developing hydrogen cell energy and build a nasty guerilla-type army, so that if we were ever invaded we'd wage a Vietnam-like war of attrition.

    Just a thought.

    Reply

  • gliscameria

    gliscameria

    March 11, 2015, 3:40 am

    When they do their 'blue collar' bullshit they do suck pretty hard, but a couple of them do alright stand-up on their own, when they can escape the blue collar fans. Ron White used to be funny. *Bill Engvall has a few good lines, but can be painful and Larry has actually done some decent stand-up lately. I was really surprised. He dropped the git-r-done crap, and even makes fun it.

    I think it's a mixture of who was riding on Foxworthy's coat tails, who floundered, who got lazy and who was actually funny but said, "Well, Fuck it. I'll dumb my routine down for that kinda cash. GET R DONE!!!! Fuck I hate this job."

    *Thx for the catch Stingray

    Reply

  • clever_name

    clever_name

    March 10, 2015, 1:11 pm

    I used to be friends with a couple who were lifestylers and was particularly close to the sub in the relationship (on a friend level). However at one point I had a disagreement with her dom, which led that person to use his submissive to distance me. She in turn changed completely on me and I'm still aghast as to how someone could begin hating a friend so quickly with no real provocation, aside from telling her master that I didn't agree with him. He maintains to this day that the fight is between his slave and I, not us at all.

    I understand and respect that submissives in these types of relationships are to surrender themselves completely in all aspects of their lives (and do so conscientiously), however in any other relationship I would consider this crossing the line and an abuse of control. I'm not speaking from bitterness, I've had some time to contemplate issue and I still don't know where I'm at morally on this subject. What are your thoughts on this?

    Reply

  • Naomarik

    Naomarik

    March 10, 2015, 7:26 am

    Since everyone is claiming sleep paralysis I'll share my nightmare of having sleep paralysis WITHIN a dream!

    Yes! I was asleep within a dream. I remember being in a house with two of my cousins. I'm sleeping downstairs and one of them comes down and I get woken up by the noise. I decide I'm hungry and I should get us all some food, so next thing I know I'm driving my car down the freeway I've travelled a million times. I approach a gas station that's open 24/7 that I suspect to sell pizza late at night only to find that it's actually close with about three cars parked in front of it, one I remember being distinctively being a black SUV who seems to inquisitively stop in front of the store with its headlights on to see if it's really closed and there are no people inside(this gas station should ALWAYS be open no matter what!). Due to this observation, I never got off the freeway and continued on my way, pondering this strange occurrence. I then passed a bend in the road and see that ALL the street lamps ahead of me are off, and there are absolutely no cars in sight. This is always an extremely well lit road. Another strange occurrence to ponder. I feel solitude and I only hear the natural sounds coming from my car of the tires contacting the ground, a slight engine hum, and wind resistance as I push cruise at 100mph.

    Just as I was about to switch on my brights, all sound fades to nothing. I hear something an intrusive noise that I cannot label, something that pervaded to every crevice of that reality that was so intense my heart stopped from fear. It was as if I was in a fish bowl with a pump to keep the water flowing through a filter, someone cut the power to the pump and very noisily brushed up against the glass. The sound cuts out and I'm still driving my car down this dark road without any other sound to clue me in that I'm really where I see myself in. I felt so alone and confused. I try to scream and I cannot. The effort is being made but my vocal cords paralyzed and there is no sound coming out of me. Figures of my cousins flash before me, and I realize I'm still asleep at that house, and that I never actually woke up to get us food. I keep trying to scream with paralyzed vocal cords, trying to break my way out of that nightmare within a dream and get back to the safety of my cousins and finally after I stop putting forth any effort to make a noise I'm awake with them, and they bring me food. Then just a moment later I wake up to reality, feeling my heart still racing and my vocal cords tense.

    TLDR: Parent story is better than mine.

    Reply

  • lolocaust

    lolocaust

    March 10, 2015, 1:54 pm

    I worked at an oil company in northern Alberta. Mid-may it would often blizzard. My "office" (read: desk packed in with 10 other people in a wood-paneled trailer straight out of the 70s) was in a trailer about 100m from a building. Getting coffee involved putting on a snowsuit and boots and trudging through snow (or mud, a bit later in the year) to the main building. Oh yeah, same thing for finding a washroom.

    My responsibilities? Take a stack of engineering drawings and circle all the valves on them, 10 hours a day. I was bored one day and did the math. It turns out if you took all the paper I "coloured", I could have papered the floors on a 17 000 sq ft building.

    Reply

  • ElectricRebel

    ElectricRebel

    March 11, 2015, 9:16 am

    In the late 90s, Microsoft was without a doubt a monopoly. And even now Microsoft still has monopolistic market share. But in their case, the governments of the US and the EU actively fought the monopoly, rather than helped it as your theory would imply.

    "Standard Oil and US Steel were heavily aided, by tariffs and anti-trust acts."

    No more so than their competitors. Tariffs were standard back then. Carnegie started with nothing. He was just an amazing competitor. It wasn't until after he had monopolistic market share that he was able to manipulate the government. Same for Rockefeller. As for the anti-trust acts, I fail to see how that helped Standard Oil, considering it was used to break the company up.

    "Xerox did not maintain a monopoly for very long."

    True, many monopolies do not last very long. But I'm just refuting your statement that all monopolies are created by the government.

    "Nearly every utility system is a government aided monopoly."

    This is a necessity because certain things, especially utilities, are naturally monopolies. It would be extremely inefficient to have multiple water and electric systems within one locale. Also, with water and fire service, it was thoroughly demonstrated that the private market creates unsafe conditions for people.

    "I don't see that as unfair."

    I'm not saying it is unfair in all cases. My concern is when a monopoly becomes powerful enough that it does use the government to maintain power when it should have competition. This nearly always occurs in the real world, as the examples you cited demonstrates. You are confusing the cause. You seem to think government corruption causes monopolies, while I am arguing that it is the other way around. For example, there was no reason for the government to favor AT&T or Carnegie in the early days until they had near monopolistic power and outrageous amounts of money to bribe the government with.

    This regulatory capture will always happen in the real world unless the government actively fights it. A small government is just easier to corrupt in such cases.

    "I don't propose that a free market will have perfect competition, but nearly all laws passed in attempts to stop monopolies ended up aiding them."

    I agree that some regulations do have unintended consequences, but that doesn't equate to all regulations being bad. This black or white thinking is not going to solve our problems.

    Reply

  • frogmeat

    frogmeat

    March 10, 2015, 5:22 pm

    >Then WTF ARE you saying?

    Not everyone has the same capacity for learning, nor the same desire for learning. Yet you think that the people who don't pursue advanced degrees must be either stupid or lazy, from what you're saying.

    >Everyone will have something that they are skilled in. Again, we're talking about things nobody wants to do.

    And you think that, instead of paying someone to do those things, we should compel everyone to take a turn. Train every single person to drive a trash truck or clean a sewer, train every person to work on a farm, all for your "enforced equality".

    >Because they were born poor? because they were not as privileged as you? Because their race or gender is closing their doors? because they live in a shitty country which the US and the western world has destabilized or exploited? Many many reasons. It's funny that you assume that people do their shitty jobs because they want to.

    I see, and you assume that everyone who doesn't finish high school or go to college is a victim of someone else, and that they have no responsibility for their situation and cannot do anything about it. I know plenty of folks who put themselves through school by WORKING when not in class . . . myself being one of them.

    The world owes NO ONE a living.

    Shall I assume that you do not believe in personal responsibility?

    >People would be allowed to do whatever they wished to do. People would discuss and decide if there is some "chore" that everyone needs to share so that one poor guy/gal doesn't get stuck with it.

    And what of those who wished to do nothing? There are plenty of those.

    >Well, I dunno. Possibly because they don't have a master and nobody is preventing them from leaving society if they do not like the organization which is built to avoid practical slavery like wage-slavery.

    So you would forcibly expel from your utopia anyone who doesn't wish to serve as required, anyone who wishes to make his or her own choices instead of being ordered to work at a specific job as determined by someone else. What's stopping you from leaving society and joining up with one of those highly successful Communist nations? You know, the ones with the high standard of living for everybody. The ones with successful and stable economies. The ones that haven't collapsed under the weight of their mismanaged bureaucracies and the discontent of their slave-citizens.

    Which ones were those again?

    Reply

  • quodestveritas

    quodestveritas

    March 10, 2015, 8:45 pm

    Your dickish response might have had something to do with the breakup. If that was your response when she made it "about her" one can only fathom your response if she had written her breakup note "about you".

    You don't mention any cheating or abuse on her part, just a waning of interest. The breakup via email is kind of wussy, but that's about the only think that makes her an ass based on your description. People fall in and out of love all the time, especially after moving in together and realizing they're not compatible. Grow up.

    Reply

  • NoMoreNicksLeft

    NoMoreNicksLeft

    March 11, 2015, 7:34 am

    It's unreal how much you think Jesus is on your side.

    * Jesus raged about the bankers. He didn't get pissed when the poor wanted to keep their few coins to feed themselves.

    * Jesus didn't order everyone to be thrown in prison unless they consented to half their earnings being taken before they could even touch them, so that they might set up a greater-Judea government health insurance program.

    * Jesus didn't point a sword at people and tell them that they have to pay money into a food stamp program in a nation full of fat people.

    * Jesus didn't pierce his eyebrows, tattoo his ass, and get a wiccan symbol branded on his chest. Not to mention we have at least one documented occurrence of his feet having been washed, which is more than can be said about the average hippie.

    Also:

    > willingly let you die,

    *Let me die*. I don't want your charity. I don't want your help. You ask too high a price for it. I am not your slave, you do not own me. Let me be separate from you peacefully. Let me keep what I earn so that I might actually have some left over for charity. Don't steal it from me and call me stingy when I point out the injustice of this. Don't claim you're being generous in using other people's money to perform your "good works".

    Reply

  • opsidenta

    opsidenta

    March 10, 2015, 2:26 pm

    I think you are like 70% onto something there. And although lots of people here seem to like posting those "I can go all night like a lumberjack! 3 hours of straight fuckin' is ALMOST enough for me!" in reality (as any doctor or sexual health specialist will tell you) the upper limit of a normal fuckin' session time limit is about 10 minutes. MEANING, if you're banging away for longer than that, the girl is going to start feeling some serious physical discomfort. The skin's just not made to get all friction-y for that long!

    So beyond that, yeah I agree with you. But really as long as everyone can be satisfied, amount of time only matters in a "comparing notes" kind of pissing contest thing. Which is stupid anyway. And the people talking about attention, I think there's a good point there - it's ok if a man comes once before the lady person and chills for a sec (there are other things outside of her doing stuff with your junk after all) - get a drink, change the music, but stay sexy - and then start it on up again in a few minutes. Our attention spans, however, have become abysmal. You gotta have follow-through - and by that I mean the women gotta have follow through. If they can't keep their heads in the game, then they can't put all the blame on the guy if he gets his rocks off pretty quick the first time. Or maybe everyone's watching too much porn and it's gotten everyone to unrealistically expect a guy to be 8 inches long & to be able to last for 30 minutes.

    Reply

  • mobileF

    mobileF

    March 10, 2015, 3:07 pm

    I was with you until

    >If you know one guy who also has a bunch of "prospect" friends, tell him to collect their money and pick up for all of them. Minimize number of contacts. (Tell them they can mark it up a little bit to make some change; in this way they do most of the actual dealing but are not even aware of it). This may be tricky if there are lots of competitors, but keep that general guideline. Tell your contacts that they may NOT share your name, and that no unknown individuals will receive service. If someone does spill yer name and you can find out who that is, immediately cut them off. Make an example of it to your other constituents.

    To me, this is a terrible idea. You can judge the trust worthiness of your customers, but not their customers. It's a lot harder to get a sheisty mofo in the "network' if you have people under you, looking to have people under them.

    Reply

  • tripplethrendo

    tripplethrendo

    March 11, 2015, 12:30 am

    Wow thats really strange I just had this problem with a friends computer yesterday. The reason is that (who knows why) you need the NVidia SATA drivers to install XP on some of the Dell XPS systems (our was a XPS710 I believe). Go here and download the NVidia Mediashield drivers. Then you can run the EXE, and copy all of the files onto a blank floppy. When installing XP, push F6 right at the beginning to install third party drivers, when it comes up use BOTH of the drivers that are on the disk. You can select the first one, then it will ask you if you have more, choose yes and then load the second driver.

    Worked like a charm.

    Reply

  • smpx

    smpx

    March 11, 2015, 8:20 am

    I think that's a very good observation-- the funny thing though is that OP identifying herself as a submissive is, in itself, BDSM (Bondage Dicipline/Dominance Submission/Sadism Masochism). Maybe she is referring to that she only relates to the D/s element, not the Bondage, Sadism, Masochism etc that is commonly associated-- to her it's a lifestyle, not a fetish.

    Spanking in D/s is actually more associated to the 50's lifestyle (which is about discipline) than it is to S&M (which is about pain/sex), so if she sees BDSM as strictly fetish, she would be identifying Spanking for punishment as being unrelated to BDSM.

    Reply

Leave a comment