Sentences with phrase «talks more sense»

He talks more sense than most of those who are and was excellent on Question Time 2 weeks ago.

FFS stick George Graham in as caretaker, even he talks more sense than Wenger!

Champange charlie you talk more sense then most mate, completely agree!

What is Camerloon saying about this - even IDS who was a candidate in Bradford West in 1987 talked more sense that DC.

Not exact matches

Talking to Annie more and more, it made perfect sense why someone who was so interested in health would go into cosmetics immediately following an amazing exit.

More from Straight Talk: Here's why a Roth IRA makes sense for millennials Roth conversion in high - taxed states is a very bad idea So the Fed raised rates.

More from the South China Morning Post: Kim Jong - un wife's fashion sense a hit with China's public China's secrecy over Kim Jong - un's visit was part of a long - standing tradition US and China in talks to shield soybeans and other farm products from trade war tariffs

In my book with Travis Wright, Digital Sense, we wrote at length about how any business can easily architect their software solutions to more effectively deliver on customer experience and growth — and talked about it at CES earlier this month:

Sometimes, when I'm telling a young entrepreneur that slowing down makes a lot more sense than hurrying along what will most likely turn out to be the wrong road, I get the sense that I could just as well be talking to the radio.

But if you're being interviewed by another person or are appearing on live television, it makes more sense to go in with a basic outline of what you want to talk about rather than a word - for - word script.

«There are certainly things that are illegal content, so that is more of an area where talking about regulations could make sense, but so much of what comes up in general discussion about this is out of reach of government action from the get - go.»

(Ritholtz is no stranger to social media — TED Talks credits his Big Picture blog as one of «100 websites you should know and use,» while Matt Miller of Bloomberg says Ritholtz «consistently makes more sense than anyone else in media» and Randall Forsyth of Barron's calls The Big Picture «a must - read blog.»)

But, then they drift off to talking about more generic quantitative approaches and less about common sense.

Because talking snakes, men made from mud, women made from ribs, and incest without genetic defects makes more sense, right?

Our Pete Spiliakos gives you a policy - talk version of the same basic idea, where it makes more obvious sense to me than it does with pop culture.

There is often a great deal of talk about opposing a sense of victimhood and entitlement — which most people in my neighborhood would probably agree with — but we must recognize that people are still being victimized by police brutality and other forms of trauma; they are entitled to both the basic necessities of life as well as opportunities to provide those and more for themselves.

The idea that a being would create the entire thing — with 400,000,000,000 galaxies, EACH with 100, 000,000,000 starts and even more planets, then sit back and wait 13,720,000,000 years for human beings to evolve on one planet so he could «love them» and send his son to Earth to talk to a nomadic group of Jews about sheep and goats in Iron Age Palestine (while ignoring the rest of the 200 million people then alive) makes no sense to us.

The term salvation is more appropriately used in this sense because we are talking about a finality: the decision whether one will attain eternal life.

The more you talk to him, the more you get the sense he'd personally rather not get the glory for its success.

As they talked of St Thomas More or Edmund Campion and the dangers they faced, one could almost feel the sense of peril and difficulty of discretion, as if such laws were around today.

hey i know its like a year later and you have probably had this question answered but if you read Romans (i would just read the whole thing in one sitting it makes much more sense if you do) He does indeed give them a chance romans 11:23 ″ And they also, if they do not continue in unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again» this verse is specifically talking about Israel.

It wasn't, in any official sense, his real name, but in South Africa we used it to convey respect, warmth and affection when talking... More

When immediacy is assumed to have self - reflection, despair is somewhat modified; there is somewhat more consciousness of the self, and therewith in turn of what despair is, and of the fact that one's condition is despair; there is some sense in it when such a man talks of being in despair: but the despair is essentially that of weakness, a passive experience; its form is, in despair at not wanting to be oneself.

But I sense an even more heartening cause for rejoicing as I hear some of the young theologians talk here in the Southwest who recognize a significant thrust toward a new focus of theological thinking in what their colleague, Schubert Ogden, has done.

Wow — your post really moved me because I can sense that there is something brewing within you and that is exciting.You are the second person this Lenten season to talk about feeling unsettled as if there is something else / more / different you should be doing.

Writes Dark, «It is only when we're blessed by a feeling of finitude that we can begin to perceive the holy, that sense of a whole before which our limited understanding is dwarfed... Only a twisted, unimaginative mind - set resists awe in favor of self - satisfied certainty... More humility might characterize our talk of God if we believe that the whole truth can never be entirely ours and that our attempts to nail God down are always well - intentioned human constructs at best and idols at worst.»

Sometimes it's more like a debate than an interview, but I get the sense that he enjoys talking through theological issues that once mattered to him with someone for whom they still matter.

Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib - woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree... Makes much more sense than Mormonism.

The idea that a being would create the entire thing — with 400,000,000,000 galaxies, EACH with 100, 000,000,000 starts and even more planets, then sit back and wait 13,720,000,000 years for human beings to evolve on one planet so he could «love them» and send his son to Earth to talk to a nomadic group of Jews about sheep and goats in Greco - Roman Palestine (while ignoring the rest of the 200 million people then alive) makes no sense to us.

The more Angela talked, however, the more I came to understand her sense of loss and dislocation.

When we understand this, what Paul is talking about makes a whole lot more sense, doesn't it?

The idea that a being would create the entire thing — with 400,000,000,000 galaxies, EACH with 100, 000,000,000 stars and even more planets, then sit back and wait 13,720,000,000 years for human beings to evolve on one planet so he could «love them» and send his son to Earth to talk to a nomadic group of Jews about sheep and goats in Iron Age Palestine (while ignoring the rest of the 200 million people then alive) makes no sense to us.»

In such an instance we may find it harder to say whether we are still talking about the duties of everyday life, or whether a sense of vocation is here associated with something more heroic and extraordinary.

But He has been waiting for you, talking and communicating to you through more means than you have senses.

DE: If you are talking about sense - awareness, as he does far more in The Concept of Nature than in The Principles of Natural Knowledge, which is more abstract, then you are talking in terms of durations, where you have points from which you are aware.

I don't think it's so much about the levites being paid for their service it's about us doing what's right toward Pastors that must feed and tend to the flock of GOD if GOD has called them.JESUS even said in luke 10:7 that the laborers are worthy of their wages.In luke 8 1 - 4 it's says even JESUS HIMSELF recieved financial support from the women who ministered to him with their possessions.Now most people today would say he should have been ashamed of taking money from those poor women but JESUS accepted their support and they was blessed for sowing onto the LORD»S work.1 Corinthains 9:1 - 15 says dint muzzle the ox while it tread out the grain was GOD talking about oxes no he was talking about those who labor in the ministry.Who goes to war at their own expense.Or who goes to war but pay for their clothes, guns, etc.No one because the goverment if that country provide these things because of the soilders service.Who plants a vineyard and don't eat from it.Who tends a flock and don't drink the milk of it.I think it's just spiritual sense to support a pastor that's teaching you the word, casting out devils, laying hands and healing is manifesting in people lived, going to hospitails, prisons, and house calls to pray for the sick and shut in, going to graduations and funnerals, praying and fasting for himself and the flock.I think a person who think a pastor shouldn't be paid for their service either don't know they need to be paid and need to be taught or they are demonic in their thinking and either hate GOD, PASTORS, AND GOD»S PEOPLE.Why do nt you hear people saying anything against the dope dealers, strip clubs, dope houses, liquor stores, etc.It's only when people give into the LORD»S work that evil minded or misinformed people have a problem with it.No sir we don't have to use the old testament to show that we should support out pastors.You don't use the law, love tells me to support the pastor.Under the new testament LOVE is the greatest of all.Love for GOD and man.If GOD asked for 10 percent under the law to support the levites who didn't have all the responsibilities of Pastor today.Church rent, gas for vans of thd church, insurance fir the church and church vehicles, feeding and clothing the poor, light, gas, and water bill, mantience on the church or vehicles, not to mention the Pastor own house, cars, children, insurance, etc.If would be foolish for one to think that a pastor should take care if his house and GODS HOUSE without people supporting the work of the KINGDOM OF GOD.If we love GOD we are going to support HIS KINGDOM and HIS PASTOR.If under the law GOD asked for 10 percent how much should we give under the LOVE COVENANT?Example I love my wife and if I had 300 dollars I would surley give her more that 10 percent which would be 30 dollars because I love her.The law says you must give LOVE says I chose to give because I love GOD and man.Again we don't have to use the law just love and spiritual sense because hate and a carnal senses will not understand.Now I have given you scriptures please do the same when you respond not your opinion.Please respond right away I await your answer.GOD BLESS.

Christine, that is a really powerful way to convey that relationship, and one that portrays my relationship not to the bible, but more to the «feeling / knowing / hearing» god... Even at my most believing, I never had the experience of God talking directly to me and telling me what to do, but so many people I knew seemed to have this... I always had my doubts and confusions; the times where I truly felt god or heard god, it was at a deep sensing level... not anyting spoken or any kind of instruction.

Wasn't talking in the Lego sense or even more far out sense than Wenger has of himself being solely responsible for building our club.

What do you mean you do nt expect him to be good as De Gea.Why do you know anyone's future.If I was to be very honest with you even if we keep Ospina and sell Szczesny i do nt see him also becoming an all time great.To me he should go to Roma where i believe he can become an all time great.He is better than Ospina in terms of skill in goalkeeping but what makes Ospina better than him is that he acts more matured.You guys keep bringing up stats but we can all bring up stats for even a player who might not be better than another player but stats will make him look much better.Even hits stats show he is legendary but in actual sense he is not legendary.If u think am lying or talking too much lets Keep Ospina and sell Szcz and lets see.

i despise Keane with a passion, likewise all these ex pros turned armchair pundit, always ready to have a go at Wenger and the club at every given opportunity but am also realistic enough to know that more often than not they talk a lot of sense, even if it hurts a lot....

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

between guardiola and Bayern are class act I have been following comments of guardiola and players of Bayern it gives me a sense of pride that how they are respecting us even diver robben talked so highly of us and our style these things make me think that only winning trophies do nt matter what matters more is how u win it how u set your image as a club.

I've being watching Gunner22 for a while and I can now come to conclusion that he knows nothing, even PIRES talks sense more than him.

only people who never played the game of soccer talk about some one creating chance you created chance for yourself by your positioning ozil actually miss more easy goals scoring opportunity more than anyone else what i understand is when people takes a certain position their sense of Reasoning go right to the door

In a sense, Wenger is right when he says that the pundits focus their discussion more on their pre-conceived notion of the players and the managers rather than talk about the on - pitch action.

That's why it makes sense to talk less and listen more, at least until your relationship reaches the next level.

If you sense that his back - to - school anxiety may be rooted in something more serious, such as an anxiety disorder or a problem with a bully, talk with your child, your child's teacher, and the school counselor.

Their perspectives on fatherhood * Nearly 50 % of the conceptions were described as a complete surprise, and only three were planned * Nearly two - fifths (37 %) of the prospective fathers had had previous children; most still had some contact with the children but only two were still living with them and were engaged as actively involved fathers * Two - thirds (65 %) described themselves as having a low or medium sense of reality about their impending fatherhood * Three - quarters were expecting the baby to have a noticeable impact on their way of life * Three - quarters were motivated to learn more about pregnancy and fatherhood, with partners, family and friends seen as the most important source of information * Very few thought about health professionals as a potential source of support and advice, and some would have liked to have talked to one but felt awkward about it.

If you are concerned about this issue, it makes more sense to talk to the school principal.

And I think I've talked about this in a recent Preggie Pals episode, is that, when I am nursing my son, I feel a sense of calmness, you know, I am able to reconnect and things make more sense and I realize all the little things that I'm doing in my day - to - day life, aren't nearly as important as just re-focusing on my family and it's a sense of peace and calmness that I can't get from taking a bubble bath....