Where is a line that is the

only thing that can be used qualitatively: The house costs something

like forty thousand dollars?

What would mean

a house costing about forty thousand dollars.

When we use the word this we mean that what follows may not be exact. My patient went into a

rant and went something like this: Why don’t you give me medication? I wish I died suddenly. I want it now!

By using “something like this” I’m admitting that I may not be giving an exact quote or that I might not be impersonating her mannerisms or voice with 100% accuracy.

A craving like this comes

up on my mind when I “eat tacos”. ”

I would interpret that to mean that the craving is more of a feeling than actual words, but the person is trying to put that feeling into words. I think the person has never heard words in his craving, and when has he explained it by saying something like this. He said, “Halloween at length”.

I often have this

desire to eat tacos, but my stomach always tells me that its “I want to eat a taco.” You

would use the phrase when you wish you could say something more exact than you’re able to do. Why is it often used with music, as most of us can’t carry specific tune. We can’t.

Where is a line that is the

only thing that can be used qualitatively: The house costs something

like forty thousand dollars?

What would mean

a house costing about forty thousand dollars.

When we use the word this we mean that what follows may not be exact. My patient went into a

rant and went something like this: Why don’t you give me medication? I wish I died suddenly. I want it now!

By using “something like this” I’m admitting that I may not be giving an exact quote or that I might not be impersonating her mannerisms or voice with 100% accuracy.

A craving like this comes

up on my mind when I “eat tacos”. ”

I would interpret that to mean that the craving is more of a feeling than actual words, but the person is trying to put that feeling into words. I think the person has never heard words in his craving, and when has he explained it by saying something like this. He said, “Halloween at length”.

I often have this

desire to eat tacos, but my stomach always tells me that its “I want to eat a taco.” You

would use the phrase when you wish you could say something more exact than you’re able to do. Why is it often used with music, as most of us can’t carry specific tune. We can’t.

What is the result of an adjective being removed from the question?

In some cases the meaning of the writing was little- but the writing was a lot more colorless; not there just

as bad as the hungry girl devoured the piping hot food.

Can

a girl find out she devoured her food?

Other times, the lack of an adjective will introduce ambiguity.

The tall policeman put a ticket on the red car across the street.

You

know the police dog put a ticket on your car in the street.

I would love to take an police officer (one tall and one short) and a large car (one red, one silver) and explain all the circumstances. It would be a pity if all of the car parts were on display but not really useful.

To conduct a bankruptcies in the

United States and to issue a currency note and to regulate the currency; to regulate the value of the currency and to issue in foreign countries issuing currency. And to provide

for a system of punishment for counterfeiting the securities and

current coin; Notice how often the phrase “the United States” appears in Section 8.

Why is the document addressing federal laws, such as national defense, national debt, punishments for counterfeiting, etc.? What do you mean by commerce clause (which the Constitution mentions most clearly at rs135)? The Constitution mentions commerce between local states, not just between countries. The United States is a state, and hence all the states are states.

Does the word “some” need to be removed to make it less meaningful? I believe so, particularly if the preposition “between” was used instead of “among”. After all, the document is merely enumerating three possible areas of commerce regulation, and declaring that Congress has the authority to regulate all three: commerce

• between the United States and some other country (e.g. Canada), which comes from China, Vietnam and some other country) Commerce among states themselves
• (e.g. the U.S. and France) Commerce between the U.S., and one of
• the Indian Tribes Could that still be inferred and understood,

after the word “several” was removed? I

think the word “several” helps convey the full meaning and intent of the clause but I don’t feel it’s a necessary word.

What is the result of an adjective being removed from the question?

In some cases the meaning of the writing was little- but the writing was a lot more colorless; not there just

as bad as the hungry girl devoured the piping hot food.

Can

a girl find out she devoured her food?

Other times, the lack of an adjective will introduce ambiguity.

The tall policeman put a ticket on the red car across the street.

You

know the police dog put a ticket on your car in the street.

I would love to take an police officer (one tall and one short) and a large car (one red, one silver) and explain all the circumstances. It would be a pity if all of the car parts were on display but not really useful.

To conduct a bankruptcies in the

United States and to issue a currency note and to regulate the currency; to regulate the value of the currency and to issue in foreign countries issuing currency. And to provide

for a system of punishment for counterfeiting the securities and

current coin; Notice how often the phrase “the United States” appears in Section 8.

Why is the document addressing federal laws, such as national defense, national debt, punishments for counterfeiting, etc.? What do you mean by commerce clause (which the Constitution mentions most clearly at rs135)? The Constitution mentions commerce between local states, not just between countries. The United States is a state, and hence all the states are states.

Does the word “some” need to be removed to make it less meaningful? I believe so, particularly if the preposition “between” was used instead of “among”. After all, the document is merely enumerating three possible areas of commerce regulation, and declaring that Congress has the authority to regulate all three: commerce

• between the United States and some other country (e.g. Canada), which comes from China, Vietnam and some other country) Commerce among states themselves
• (e.g. the U.S. and France) Commerce between the U.S., and one of
• the Indian Tribes Could that still be inferred and understood,

after the word “several” was removed? I

think the word “several” helps convey the full meaning and intent of the clause but I don’t feel it’s a necessary word.

What is the result of an adjective being removed from the question?

In some cases the meaning of the writing was little- but the writing was a lot more colorless; not there just

as bad as the hungry girl devoured the piping hot food.

Can

a girl find out she devoured her food?

Other times, the lack of an adjective will introduce ambiguity.

The tall policeman put a ticket on the red car across the street.

You

know the police dog put a ticket on your car in the street.

I would love to take an police officer (one tall and one short) and a large car (one red, one silver) and explain all the circumstances. It would be a pity if all of the car parts were on display but not really useful.

To conduct a bankruptcies in the

United States and to issue a currency note and to regulate the currency; to regulate the value of the currency and to issue in foreign countries issuing currency. And to provide

for a system of punishment for counterfeiting the securities and

current coin; Notice how often the phrase “the United States” appears in Section 8.

Why is the document addressing federal laws, such as national defense, national debt, punishments for counterfeiting, etc.? What do you mean by commerce clause (which the Constitution mentions most clearly at rs135)? The Constitution mentions commerce between local states, not just between countries. The United States is a state, and hence all the states are states.

Does the word “some” need to be removed to make it less meaningful? I believe so, particularly if the preposition “between” was used instead of “among”. After all, the document is merely enumerating three possible areas of commerce regulation, and declaring that Congress has the authority to regulate all three: commerce

• between the United States and some other country (e.g. Canada), which comes from China, Vietnam and some other country) Commerce among states themselves
• (e.g. the U.S. and France) Commerce between the U.S., and one of
• the Indian Tribes Could that still be inferred and understood,

after the word “several” was removed? I

think the word “several” helps convey the full meaning and intent of the clause but I don’t feel it’s a necessary word.

What is the result of an adjective being removed from the question?

In some cases the meaning of the writing was little- but the writing was a lot more colorless; not there just

as bad as the hungry girl devoured the piping hot food.

Can

a girl find out she devoured her food?

Other times, the lack of an adjective will introduce ambiguity.

The tall policeman put a ticket on the red car across the street.

You

know the police dog put a ticket on your car in the street.

I would love to take an police officer (one tall and one short) and a large car (one red, one silver) and explain all the circumstances. It would be a pity if all of the car parts were on display but not really useful.

To conduct a bankruptcies in the

United States and to issue a currency note and to regulate the currency; to regulate the value of the currency and to issue in foreign countries issuing currency. And to provide

for a system of punishment for counterfeiting the securities and

current coin; Notice how often the phrase “the United States” appears in Section 8.

Why is the document addressing federal laws, such as national defense, national debt, punishments for counterfeiting, etc.? What do you mean by commerce clause (which the Constitution mentions most clearly at rs135)? The Constitution mentions commerce between local states, not just between countries. The United States is a state, and hence all the states are states.

Does the word “some” need to be removed to make it less meaningful? I believe so, particularly if the preposition “between” was used instead of “among”. After all, the document is merely enumerating three possible areas of commerce regulation, and declaring that Congress has the authority to regulate all three: commerce

• between the United States and some other country (e.g. Canada), which comes from China, Vietnam and some other country) Commerce among states themselves
• (e.g. the U.S. and France) Commerce between the U.S., and one of
• the Indian Tribes Could that still be inferred and understood,

after the word “several” was removed? I

think the word “several” helps convey the full meaning and intent of the clause but I don’t feel it’s a necessary word.

What is the result of an adjective being removed from the question?

In some cases the meaning of the writing was little- but the writing was a lot more colorless; not there just

as bad as the hungry girl devoured the piping hot food.

Can

a girl find out she devoured her food?

Other times, the lack of an adjective will introduce ambiguity.

The tall policeman put a ticket on the red car across the street.

You

know the police dog put a ticket on your car in the street.

I would love to take an police officer (one tall and one short) and a large car (one red, one silver) and explain all the circumstances. It would be a pity if all of the car parts were on display but not really useful.

To conduct a bankruptcies in the

United States and to issue a currency note and to regulate the currency; to regulate the value of the currency and to issue in foreign countries issuing currency. And to provide

for a system of punishment for counterfeiting the securities and

current coin; Notice how often the phrase “the United States” appears in Section 8.

Why is the document addressing federal laws, such as national defense, national debt, punishments for counterfeiting, etc.? What do you mean by commerce clause (which the Constitution mentions most clearly at rs135)? The Constitution mentions commerce between local states, not just between countries. The United States is a state, and hence all the states are states.

Does the word “some” need to be removed to make it less meaningful? I believe so, particularly if the preposition “between” was used instead of “among”. After all, the document is merely enumerating three possible areas of commerce regulation, and declaring that Congress has the authority to regulate all three: commerce

• between the United States and some other country (e.g. Canada), which comes from China, Vietnam and some other country) Commerce among states themselves
• (e.g. the U.S. and France) Commerce between the U.S., and one of
• the Indian Tribes Could that still be inferred and understood,

after the word “several” was removed? I

think the word “several” helps convey the full meaning and intent of the clause but I don’t feel it’s a necessary word.

What is the result of an adjective being removed from the question?

In some cases the meaning of the writing was little- but the writing was a lot more colorless; not there just

as bad as the hungry girl devoured the piping hot food.

Can

a girl find out she devoured her food?

Other times, the lack of an adjective will introduce ambiguity.

The tall policeman put a ticket on the red car across the street.

You

know the police dog put a ticket on your car in the street.

I would love to take an police officer (one tall and one short) and a large car (one red, one silver) and explain all the circumstances. It would be a pity if all of the car parts were on display but not really useful.

To conduct a bankruptcies in the

United States and to issue a currency note and to regulate the currency; to regulate the value of the currency and to issue in foreign countries issuing currency. And to provide

for a system of punishment for counterfeiting the securities and

current coin; Notice how often the phrase “the United States” appears in Section 8.

Why is the document addressing federal laws, such as national defense, national debt, punishments for counterfeiting, etc.? What do you mean by commerce clause (which the Constitution mentions most clearly at rs135)? The Constitution mentions commerce between local states, not just between countries. The United States is a state, and hence all the states are states.

Does the word “some” need to be removed to make it less meaningful? I believe so, particularly if the preposition “between” was used instead of “among”. After all, the document is merely enumerating three possible areas of commerce regulation, and declaring that Congress has the authority to regulate all three: commerce

• between the United States and some other country (e.g. Canada), which comes from China, Vietnam and some other country) Commerce among states themselves
• (e.g. the U.S. and France) Commerce between the U.S., and one of
• the Indian Tribes Could that still be inferred and understood,

after the word “several” was removed? I

think the word “several” helps convey the full meaning and intent of the clause but I don’t feel it’s a necessary word.

What is the result of an adjective being removed from the question?

In some cases the meaning of the writing was little- but the writing was a lot more colorless; not there just

as bad as the hungry girl devoured the piping hot food.

Can

a girl find out she devoured her food?

Other times, the lack of an adjective will introduce ambiguity.

The tall policeman put a ticket on the red car across the street.

You

know the police dog put a ticket on your car in the street.

I would love to take an police officer (one tall and one short) and a large car (one red, one silver) and explain all the circumstances. It would be a pity if all of the car parts were on display but not really useful.

To conduct a bankruptcies in the

United States and to issue a currency note and to regulate the currency; to regulate the value of the currency and to issue in foreign countries issuing currency. And to provide

for a system of punishment for counterfeiting the securities and

current coin; Notice how often the phrase “the United States” appears in Section 8.

Why is the document addressing federal laws, such as national defense, national debt, punishments for counterfeiting, etc.? What do you mean by commerce clause (which the Constitution mentions most clearly at rs135)? The Constitution mentions commerce between local states, not just between countries. The United States is a state, and hence all the states are states.

Does the word “some” need to be removed to make it less meaningful? I believe so, particularly if the preposition “between” was used instead of “among”. After all, the document is merely enumerating three possible areas of commerce regulation, and declaring that Congress has the authority to regulate all three: commerce

• between the United States and some other country (e.g. Canada), which comes from China, Vietnam and some other country) Commerce among states themselves
• (e.g. the U.S. and France) Commerce between the U.S., and one of
• the Indian Tribes Could that still be inferred and understood,

after the word “several” was removed? I

think the word “several” helps convey the full meaning and intent of the clause but I don’t feel it’s a necessary word.

What is the result of an adjective being removed from the question?

In some cases the meaning of the writing was little- but the writing was a lot more colorless; not there just

as bad as the hungry girl devoured the piping hot food.

Can

a girl find out she devoured her food?

Other times, the lack of an adjective will introduce ambiguity.

The tall policeman put a ticket on the red car across the street.

You

know the police dog put a ticket on your car in the street.

I would love to take an police officer (one tall and one short) and a large car (one red, one silver) and explain all the circumstances. It would be a pity if all of the car parts were on display but not really useful.

To conduct a bankruptcies in the

United States and to issue a currency note and to regulate the currency; to regulate the value of the currency and to issue in foreign countries issuing currency. And to provide

for a system of punishment for counterfeiting the securities and

current coin; Notice how often the phrase “the United States” appears in Section 8.

Why is the document addressing federal laws, such as national defense, national debt, punishments for counterfeiting, etc.? What do you mean by commerce clause (which the Constitution mentions most clearly at rs135)? The Constitution mentions commerce between local states, not just between countries. The United States is a state, and hence all the states are states.

Does the word “some” need to be removed to make it less meaningful? I believe so, particularly if the preposition “between” was used instead of “among”. After all, the document is merely enumerating three possible areas of commerce regulation, and declaring that Congress has the authority to regulate all three: commerce

• between the United States and some other country (e.g. Canada), which comes from China, Vietnam and some other country) Commerce among states themselves
• (e.g. the U.S. and France) Commerce between the U.S., and one of
• the Indian Tribes Could that still be inferred and understood,

after the word “several” was removed? I

think the word “several” helps convey the full meaning and intent of the clause but I don’t feel it’s a necessary word.