Having fun with those ties that bind?
- This reads like a defense of why one side of the divide's more interested in that one-party wannabe behavior. (Remind me what happened to that particular fictional idealist?) If I sound repetitive with this one-party wannabe thing, consider for a moment how many headlines there have been on the topic for months at this point.
With the information I've got, if asked the question of whether or not I see innovation or novelty in the actions taken, or virtue in the portrayals made, I would answer that what I see is a mask repainted. I see who's decided to fracture people into hashtags, and which publications "ditch" and "blow up" and "go without" and "get done without" and "move forward without" (I don't read much, if any, partisanship in the fifth publication in general, but that article in particular observes that existing condition); also, for all the flaws in this sixth publication, I agree with the use of "sham bipartisanship" in its article as well as the article's take on education. (While I'm thinking of it, for a guy who's so interested in math, 比尔盖茨, it seems that what you're saying here just doesn't (2) add (+ II) up (= 鱼).
- This is what an audience whose choices in this attention economy have collectively, consciously given to mere entertainers: through the entertainment the audience buys into, these entertainers have the pull for steamers like this. (I've also heard an apology was made for at least one situation in that article - doesn't change the environment that caused the need for it.)
For such people as these, who'd forgo balance in favor of emulating their one-party 金融家, I'd say the rest of last weekend's entertainment shows ratings that reflect priorities beyond cash cow cinema; and despite the incredible choreography, I'm glad to see those priorities reflected. (Take a moment to consider whether or not the use of the term 'incredible' is a compliment here. Snap.)
- Silly of me to say "calm down and back off" was the prevailing phrase in the area - apparently, such a thing is only used by those who have forgotten what their job entails. The same 色狼 from this issue barks more 狗屁 on this one - 外交家 is entirely the wrong term, while 伪君子 is more appropriate.
- Last information I remember on this issue showed the blades being buried instead of reused. This article addresses the recycling of that material.
- Another instance of not to diminish the article above, but this issue's more pressing. Credit isn't mine to take for these (news) links (rating) here (USD), and doing so is entirely beside the point.