The answer is "Yes. It is often appropriate to praise the losers of a competition."
Competition is far superior for the loser in my estimation than the champ, given the right attitude. Losing is transitory. Much the same as winning is and simply as is life. With regards to time we can value the fleeting idea of any lose and discover the exercise.
Answer:
The correct answer is C. A judge could throw out the teen's confession unless the officer complies with the ruling in Miranda v. Arizona.
Explanation:
Miranda v. Arizona is a ruling of the United States Supreme Court from 1966. The case established the current practice whereby a suspect is required to read his or her rights (the so-called Miranda rights) without exception, which state the right to before a preliminary investigation of the suspect has begun.
That was the decision in Ernesto Miranda's trial. Miranda was arrested on suspicion of kidnapping and sexual assault of an 18-year-old girl on prima facie evidence. After two hours of questioning, Miranda signed the confession. However, he had never been informed of the possibility of meeting a legal adviser or of being silent, and that his confession could not be used against him. During the trial, Miranda's attorney, Alvin Moore, argued that confession would therefore not apply in court. Moore's objection was rejected and Miranda was sentenced to a lengthy prison sentence. The Arizona Supreme Court also upheld the ruling.
The United States Supreme Court, by a vote of 5 to 4, ruled that, due to the Fifth and Sixth Amendment to the Constitution, no confession would be valid unless the suspect was informed of his rights. The Fifth Amendment states that no one can be compelled to testify against himself and the Sixth Addendum secures access to a lawyer. Ernesto Miranda's judgment was overturned, but he was later sentenced to prison for the same case, based on other evidence.
Inflation is the rise of prices. The one that makes the most sense is the first one.
Fauna, meaning animal life of a region.
Answer:
Cynical
Explanation:
One of the leading cynical philosophers of modern times is Nicolas Machiavelli. In the Prince's chapters examining the virtues that are proper to a prince, Machiavelli reminds us that many, i.e. Plato, Aristotle and their followers, have imagined states and kingdoms that never existed, prescribing to the rulers that they maintain behaviors that would be more appropriate to those living in heaven than to those living on earth. For Machiavelli, most moral standards are not full of hypocrisy and the Prince is not advised to follow them if he wants to retain power. Machiavelli's morality is definitely full of disillusionment with regard to human affairs; he had witnessed first-hand how rulers had been killed or overthrown for lack of a realistic approach to their efforts.
Machiavelli's example can help us, to a great extent, to resolve the controversial aspects of cynicism. Declaring oneself a cynic is often considered a bold statement, almost a challenge to the most basic principles that hold societies together.
However, a cynical attitude can also be non-subversive in its purposes. For example, a person may adopt a cynical attitude as a self-defence mechanism, that is, as a means of dealing with everyday issues without being hurt or adversely affected (from an economic or socio-political point of view, for example). Under this version of the attitude, a cynical person does not need to have a big picture of how a government, or any government, works; nor does he need to have a big picture of how people operate; it seems simply wiser to assume that people act out of self-interest, often overestimating their conditions or ending up being affected by bad luck. It is in this sense that being cynical can be justified, or even sometimes recommended.
