Sentences with phrase «obvious answers as»

So, while the obvious answers as to how men can help empower women are directly related to these accounts, there is also the need for women to be more collaborative and supportive rather than competitive and judgemental.

There are a few obvious answers as well as some not so obvious ones.

There are a few obvious answers as well as some not so obvious ones.

Not exact matches

If the divide were strictly geographical, the answer would be as obvious as it is simple: split the baby in half.

If you're feeling like the companies around you aren't tackling the big, hairy, problems you encounter in your life, the answer — as Levchin might say — is obvious.

The lure to that story might be, «You'll never guess how manipulative headlines are backfiring,» but the answer — as it always is — will be obvious.

Besides the obvious answer of hefty family responsibilities in this age bracket, other research suggests that as you rise in the career ladder, competition and support fade just as stress is dialed up, leading to

Besides the obvious answer of hefty family responsibilities in this age bracket, other research suggests that as you rise in the career ladder, competition and support fade just as stress is dialed up, leading to a bump in unhappiness levels during midlife.

While the answer may seem obvious to you, it is not always as cut and dry as it seems.

Given that he rejected the Holy Spirit... it's obvious that he was wrong, and they'll as Mohammed said, have to answer for all their sins... to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob... in that they reject Jesus dying on the cross for their sins.

There is, actually, as simple, obvious answer to your question.

And he could be serious about his faith, as well: In reply to Garry Wills» claim that «being Catholic always mattered more to him than being conservative,» Buckley responded, «If he meant he has a higher loyalty to God than to civil society, then the answer is obvious: God has to be preeminent.»

The answers to those crucial questions, as has become embarrassingly and painfully obvious in recent years, are simply not clear.

As it should be obvious to anyone who saw this portion of the debate, Bachmann did not answer this question.

While it seems obvious that the revisionists are steadily surrendering their distinctively Christian identity and thus threatening their enterprise as a Christian one, it is not clear whether conservative theology is going to be able to rise to the occasion and give the answers which are called for.

It comes as quite a surprise as it seems to be why are so many people leaving organized religions when the obvious answer is that organized religions aren't speaking to people and are becoming polarized and intermixed with politics.

As with #TheDress, the baffling thing about the Shoe is how obvious the answer seems.

The answer to this question is supposed to be as obvious as it is in other moral contexts.

In any case, the question (which is so obvious as to not really need answering) is, why was SHE the only one of the pair brought before Jesus.

The answer to Paul's rhetorical question is obvious, though it seems to have been lost on Mr. Neuhaus» just as the allusion of the article's title was lost on him.

As for the question of whether Pentecostals will choose to become active players in civil society or politics, the obvious answer is both.

A couple ingredient trends became immediately obvious as the answers rolled in: kale, squash, and lentils need to be on your grocery shopping list this week.

Finally, the answer was obvious: puree the riced and dried cauliflower along with some eggs, some really flavorful powdered vegetable bouillon that has a nutritional yeast base (I got that idea from my recipe for low carb cauliflower tortillas), and some tapioca starch to serve as both a binder and add some flexibility so the pizza bends -LRB-!).

As usual, there are no slam - bang obvious answers.

i remember after the first Diaz fight, he was also talking about various things to answer a single question, as if he wanted to divert attention away from the obvious so he doesn't have to face them head - on.

This is an incredibly difficult question to answer for a variety of reasons, most importantly because over the years our once vaunted «beautiful» style of play has become a shadow of it's former self, only to be replaced by a less than stellar «plug and play» mentality where players play out of position and adjustments / substitutions are rarely forthcoming before the 75th minute... if you look at our current players, very few would make sense in the traditional Wengerian system... at present, we don't have the personnel to move the ball quickly from deep - lying position, efficient one touch midfielders that can make the necessary through balls or the disciplined and pacey forwards to stretch defences into wide positions, without the aid of the backs coming up into the final 3rd, so that we can attack the defensive lanes in the same clinical fashion we did years ago... on this current squad, we have only 1 central defender on staf, Mustafi, who seems to have any prowess in the offensive zone or who can even pass two zones through so that we can advance play quickly out of our own end (I have seen some inklings that suggest Holding might have some offensive qualities but too early to tell)... unfortunately Mustafi has a tendency to get himself in trouble when he gets overly aggressive on the ball... from our backs out wide, we've seen pace from the likes of Bellerin and Gibbs and the spirited albeit offensively stunted play of Monreal, but none of these players possess the skill - set required in the offensive zone for the new Wenger scheme which requires deft touches, timely runs to the baseline and consistent crossing, especially when Giroud was playing and his ratio of scored goals per clear chances was relatively low (better last year though)... obviously I like Bellerin's future prospects, as you can't teach pace, but I do worry that he regressed last season, which was obvious to Wenger because there was no way he would have used Ox as the right side wing - back so often knowing that Barcelona could come calling in the off - season, if he thought otherwise... as for our midfielders, not a single one, minus the more confident Xhaka I watched played for the Swiss national team a couple years ago, who truly makes sense under the traditional Wenger model... Ramsey holds onto the ball too long, gives the ball away cheaply far too often and abandons his defensive responsibilities on a regular basis (doesn't score enough recently to justify): that being said, I've always thought he does possess a little something special, unfortunately he thinks so too... Xhaka is a little too slow to ever boss the midfield and he tends to telegraph his one true strength, his long ball play: although I must admit he did get a bit better during some points in the latter part of last season... it always made me wonder why whenever he played with Coq Wenger always seemed to play Francis in a more advanced role on the pitch... as for Coq, he is way too reckless at the wrong times and has exhibited little offensive prowess yet finds himself in and around the box far too often... let's face it Wenger was ready to throw him in the trash heap when injuries forced him to use Francis and then he had the nerve to act like this was all part of a bigger Wenger constructed plan... he like Ramsey, Xhaka and Elneny don't offer the skills necessary to satisfy the quick transitory nature of our old offensive scheme or the stout defensive mindset needed to protect the defensive zone so that our offensive players can remain aggressive in the final third... on the front end, we have Ozil, a player of immense skill but stunted by his physical demeanor that tends to offend, the fact that he's been played out of position far too many times since arriving and that the players in front of him, minus Sanchez, make little to no sense considering what he has to offer (especially Giroud); just think about the quick counter-attack offence in Real or the space and protection he receives in the German National team's midfield, where teams couldn't afford to focus too heavily on one individual... this player was a passing «specialist» long before he arrived in North London, so only an arrogant or ignorant individual would try to reinvent the wheel and / or not surround such a talent with the necessary components... in regards to Ox, Walcott and Welbeck, although they all possess serious talents I see them in large part as headless chickens who are on the injury table too much, lack the necessary first - touch and / or lack the finishing flair to warrant their inclusion in a regular starting eleven; I would say that, of the 3, Ox showed the most upside once we went to a back 3, but even he became a bit too consumed by his pending contract talks before the season ended and that concerned me a bit... if I had to choose one of those 3 players to stay on it would be Ox due to his potential as a plausible alternative to Bellerin in that wing - back position should we continue to use that formation... in Sanchez, we get one of the most committed skill players we've seen on this squad for some years but that could all change soon, if it hasn't already of course... strangely enough, even he doesn't make sense given the constructs of the original Wenger offensive model because he holds onto the ball too long and he will give the ball up a little too often in the offensive zone... a fact that is largely forgotten due to his infectious energy and the fact that the numbers he has achieved seem to justify the means... finally, and in many ways most crucially, Giroud, there is nothing about this team or the offensive system that Wenger has traditionally employed that would even suggest such a player would make sense as a starter... too slow, too inefficient and way too easily dispossessed... once again, I think he has some special skills and, at times, has showed some world - class qualities but he's lack of mobility is an albatross around the necks of our offence... so when you ask who would be our best starting 11, I don't have a clue because of the 5 or 6 players that truly deserve a place in this side, 1 just arrived, 3 aren't under contract beyond 2018 and the other was just sold to Juve... man, this is theraputic because following this team is like an addiction to heroin without the benefits

is a definite, extremely valid question to ask with an emphatic «no» as the obvious answer.

ng obvious answer to the original question is that some are poor, some better, some good and all other shades in between as well.

There is no real answer to the question you have posed because this club has once again hedged their bets on doing the bare minimum then hoping for the best... if they were serious about changing the stagnant culture that has permeated the club since our move from the Highbury, we would have immediately released and / or moved several players in the early days of the window... this would have demonstrated to the fans that they were serious about addressing our obvious inadequacies... likewise this would have forced them to bring in replacements because they couldn't have used the lame excuse Wenger is presently spewing about having too many players... we functionally have the same amount of players as we did when the window first opened but he didn't say jack about it then... he simply waited until the inevitable happened then pulled out his excuse Rolodex, closed his eyes and randomly drew the «too many players» card... the more he opens his mouth, the more I understand his «god» complex when it relates to all things Arsenal... what other manager could continually do the same dumb shit, not address obvious concerns for years, speak to the fans in such a condescending manner, face enormous criticism from many of his former star players and be the architect of so many failed player signings yet be one of the highest paid managers with the longest tenure in Europe... maybe Kroenke is colourblind and instead of seeing all the red flags he can only see the GREEN ones ($ $ $)

When the question is asked as to who is the most prolific goal scorer in the history of the San Jose Earthquakes, the obvious answer is Chris Wondolowski.

are you trying to sell nic to us or convince yourself andy becos, even tho i like him myself, hes not a goalscorer and is forced wide away from goal all to easy.not our answer cant even begin to tell you how wrong you are when you said we wer gettin by quite nicely without a recognised goalscorer, as iv always said you cant expect our little midfielders and little beast verm to continue in the great vain thev shown this season, big teams will negate them, you need another outlet, an ian wright or defoe that goes in behind and turns a back 4, its painfully obvious and riles me when fellow fans ignore or dismiss it and tell me to keep the faith with players who hav had so much time to show their capabilities and not delivered, so how their now gonna excel just becos thev been absent a while is beyond me but that old proverb must be true.....»

The obvious answers appears to lye with their forwards, as Fulham scored just twelve goals away from home last season, although that's not surprising considering the forward offensive contains Bobby Zamora and Erik Nevland, two players which for all their best efforts simply don't score enough at this level.

As the answer is obvious — one should never work in a machine shop without safety glasses — the same can be said for those who work in front of a computer.

Perhaps the most obvious answer to this question is the same as to «Why do some houses sell and some houses don't?»

As obvious as the answer to your question would've been if you'd read the posAs obvious as the answer to your question would've been if you'd read the posas the answer to your question would've been if you'd read the post.

Do you want to know what the «only white people can be racist» crowd use as a coping mechanism to explain obvious racism in other cultures (the answer would be doublethink)?

@DVK If there is evidence that it's a very small fraction engaged, that'd answer the question, but I discuss why this possibility alone doesn't seem to answer the question in the 1st paragraph after the bullet list (tldr; ISIS are split between as many if not more fronts too, so there's no obvious reason why the % of Iraqi / Peshmerga troops engaged with ISIS would be lower than the % of ISIS fraction engaged with Peshmerga)

Clinical translation is the obvious answer, and hopefully this research will represent an important step in reducing the risk of stem cell treatment for diabetes, as well as other diseases.

The question is obvious as well as the answer and the simple reason is because it shows the core strength of the person who is able to show abs.

It might seem like an obvious question but the answer is not as obvious.

Well yes, I know all the obvious answers, but even if it didn't fit me any more, I'd still want to have it around, maybe as a cushion cover or even to frame a square of the material as a mount for a beautiful photograph.

The answer should be as obvious as my love for it.

So what causes teeth marking and well the answer to this is just about everything we come in to contact with will stain the teeth and this ranges from the obvious perpetrators like coffee, tea and nicotine to stuff like cherries but the thing isnot to get too stressed about as there's a good solution.

The fact is, it's never too late to clean your life up and that's why I'm (re) posting this as I felt it was truly inspirational for young and older worldly people alike who are perhaps thinking of getting married and pondering the; «should I not have sex before marriage» question (the answer to which is incredibly obvious from reading The bible and yet we all get bogged down in questioning it's clear abstinence stance on the issue because the world confuses Christians and no - Christians alike).

I was a big fan of the X-Files in the beginning but it became increasingly obvious that the alien conspiracy storyline was just being made up as they went, leading to one unsatisfying plot development after another that never contained any real answers.

There's the nagging suspicion that it's something more than that obvious answer, as well as the thought that there's more to Tully than what movie shows us.

It's not like Hiltzik is generous with the anecdotes, or even a cooperative interview subject — he has a habit of declining to answer questions, as if his real motivations are either so obvious that the line of inquiry is insulting, or so obscure that providing straight answers would undermine the movie's endless complexity.

The answers, which I of course will not provide, are not as obvious as you might suspect nor are they as indicative of the final act as those aware of romance film predictability would think.

The answer isn't as obvious as it might seem, with Idris Elba playing the escapee.

When teachers always keep kids — and the impact of their decisions on kids — as their focus, the ultimate answers to many problems become more obvious.