le livre d'or

Hello. And Bye.

This web site is really a walk-through for all of the info you wanted about this and didn't know who to ask. Glimpse here, and you'll definitely discover it.

Unknown message

Как поднять себе настроение Настроение – штука переменчивая, причем иногда мы сами не можем понять, почему пять минут назад мы смеялись как оглашенные, а сейчас хочется если и не реветь в голос, то, по крайней мере, срочно найти какую-нибудь луну и повыть на нее. На худой конец сойдет и лампочка. Или свое отражение в зеркале. Или проблемы настолько прессуют нас, что все остальное перестает нас радовать. Почему так происходит – дело десятое. Мы сегодня не будем искать психологические причины перепадов настроения и затянувшейся депрессии, а поговорим о том, как исправить смурное настроение.

albeit with distinctly different styles, and moderator Martha Raddatz of ABC News kept the discussion, and the candidates, on track.Pre-debate expectation management on both sides proved mostly irrelevant. Biden did not make any significant gaffes, and Ryan did not rely on robotic recitations of details, numbers and statistics.Biden, not only a more experienced politician but, more important, a more experienced veteran of TV, made a point of turning directly to the camera at critical points to speak directly to viewers. He was careful not to overuse the strategy but used it to effect, as when he focused directly on the camera to reassure voters that the Obama administration would protect Medicare.A CNN instant poll gave the evening to Ryan by four points, but most of the cable news channel’s panel, including Jack King and David Gergen, agreed both men acquitted themselves well.The two unabashedly partisan news channels stuck to their own scripts. On the “Lean Forward� outlet MSNBC, Chris Matthews read his own scorecard of which man “won� each issue, but gave the night, overall, to Biden because he “won� on the issues perceived to be more important to the voters: the economy.On “Fair and Balanced� Fox News, both Britt Hume and Greta Van Susteren, awarding the night to Ryan, slammed Biden for grinning widely during Ryan’s answers and speaking “derisively� to him.It is true that when Ryan answered, Biden often grinned widely and even laughed: At times, it looked like he was having way too much fun when, in fact, the issues were quite serious. His frequent use of the term “my friend� to refer to Ryan may be decorum on the floor of Congress, but in a debate format, it did come off as demeaning.However, some of Biden’s other techniques were very successful. Not only a more experienced politician, but, more important, a more experienced TV veteran, he made a point of turning directly to the camera at critical points in the 90-minute discussion to speak directly to viewers. He was careful not to overuse the strategy, but, rather, focused directly on the camera to reassure voters, for example, that the Obama administration would protect Medicare.Unlike last week’s presidential debate, we also saw the candidates looking at each other. When Biden answered a question, Ryan watched him with his face fixed in a tight smile. When Ryan answered, though, Biden often grinned widely, a riskier reaction because it looked at times like he was having a bit too much fun in a discussion of serious issues.Ryan used personal stories from time to time to balance his fact-laced responses, which effectively humanized him for the TV cameras. On the a question about his Catholic faith and the powder-keg issue of abortion, he talked about viewing the ultrasound of his unborn daughter and thinking how much she looked like a bean.Biden repeated the story of the death of his first wife, which he used effectively in his debate with Sarah Palin four years ago. It was probably a miscue this time, if only because the earlier use was featured on several pre-date news shows.At times, the two men talked over each other. It may not have been easy to understand who was saying what, but Raddatz, unlike Jim Lehrer last week, seemed to know when to jerk the leash back. Accordingly, viewers got a better sense of each man than if they’d been held strictly to the he-says/he-says format.In many other ways, the credit for how informative the debate was belongs to Raddatz. She was so well informed on every issue — she was ABC’s White House correspondent and, in recent years, its chief foreign affairs correspondent — that she was able to call the candidates on various exaggerations.And when the answers began to stray from the subject matter of her initial questions, she was unafraid to interrupt the candidates and get them back on topic.The American people were winners as well Thursday night: They saw three polished pros who made good and informative use of the television as the debate medium.Not only will Mitt Romney and Barack Obama have a hard act to follow next week, but so will CNN s Candy Crowley, the moderator of the second presidential debate.