https://bodwell.edu/r_smith/PLO%205.3.html
This may help with the women part of the question.
Answer:
The answer is B the terms suggests persisting Russian influence within the region
<span>To divide we the people to weaken us, set us against each other with blame games and propaganda. Party loyalty blinders keep us from watching too closely what our own party representatives are doing against our own interests.
Like professional wrestlers they appear to be bitter rivals in public but are the best of friends behind closed doors. They have led us to think that only someone from their parties can win an election. If we vote for a third party candidate we have "thrown our vote away" on someone who stands no chance of winning and let that "evil other party" candidate win. We feel compelled to vote for the "lesser" of the two evils being offered.
Consider this: Both parties of the Senate said that the TARP bill lacked oversight to protect the taxpayer's money (concerning the original 3 page one passed by the House of Representatives). They claimed they were going to add protection and oversight to it. Then behind closed doors they added 137 pages of earmark spending and NO oversight or protection. Bush signed it and they closed the 110 Session of Congress knowing that they had an automatic pay raise in place. Both parties were involved so no evil other party blame games could be played.
Instead they faked outrage when the AIG bonus news came out and blamed the Management for not following rules which they had failed to put into the TARP bill in the first place. Watch this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6KRXnYgu...</span>
Answer:An accomplice differs from an accessory in that an accomplice is present at the actual crime, and could be prosecuted even if the main criminal (the principal) is not charged or convicted. An accessory is generally not present at the actual crime, and may be subject to lesser penalties than an accomplice or principal.
Explanation:good luck
Answer:a. shows low resistance to extinction; shows high resistance to extinction
Explanation:
According to psychology, extinction occurs when a conditioned response is slowly eliminated or weakned which over time will result to that behavior being extinct. This means a conditioned behavior is completely eliminated
An example is when you whistle to a dog all the time to come and get food and the dog starts to drool all time at the thought of whistling associated with food , if you gradually start to whistle without carrying the food with you the dog will stop salivating or drooling.
In classical conditioning, when a conditioned stimulus is provided without an unconditioned stimulus the conditioned response eventually get extinct.
Jeremy is not resistant towards getting rid of the gambling behaviour because when he start gambling and is no longer getting paid off he immediately stops so when an unconditioned stimulus is taken away , he stops gambling and if this keeps happening gradually his behavior of gambling will be extinct.
Jessica on the other side continues even when the unconditioned stimulus (being paid off )is taken away she still continues to gamble so she is resistance towards stoping her gambling behavior.
