Lieutenant Bragg’s actions suggest a dismissive and condescending attitude toward the colonists. His willingness to use force and assert authority indicates a belief in British superiority and a lack of respect for the colonists' rights and grievances. This behavior reflects the broader tension between colonial aspirations for autonomy and British imperial control during that period. Overall, Bragg’s actions highlight the growing rift and animosity between the British officers and the colonial populace.
Yes, it did. The government needed money to cover war expenses so began to look to the colonies as a source for income. This resulted in a change in attitude.
If you mean "attitude," it means that you come back with whitty remarks. Some say it's like back talking. Basically it means in general your being rude.
Behavior is a term for What you do. Attitude is a term for the way you feel about something.
the attitude must be professional and polite or yoeu will be fired
Colonists were a people separate from Britain. For Apex.
Most colonists wanted the same rights and privileges enjoyed by British citizens living in England.
it is natural,positive,and move forward
colonists were opposed to the writs because they granted british officials unprecedented powers
colonists were a people seperate from britain--apexColonists were a people seperate from Britaincolonists were a people seperate from britian
outlook - future prospects suggested by present events, it a attitude of mind, a way in which things are considered
The British now controlled territories in the Ohio River Valley and they forbade the colonists to expand into these lands. The French and Indian War had been costly, and this changed the attitude of King George and Parliament about the colonists. They now believed it was time for the colonists to pay for their protection, and to enrich English coffers.
The glaring difference is that Diotrephes 'loved to have the preeminence', (3John 9), but Paul was the opposite in all his writings - "I die daily" (1 Corinthians 15.31), even though the Lord God chose and anointed him an apostle, as he proclaims at the beginning of most of his letters.
In the 1920s, the attitude of the wealthy towards the poor was often characterized by a lack of empathy and understanding. Many wealthy individuals believed in the idea of social Darwinism, which suggested that the poor were responsible for their own situations and that helping them would impede personal progress. This attitude contributed to a lack of support for social welfare programs and exacerbated the challenges faced by the poor during that time.
Yes, it did. The government needed money to cover war expenses so began to look to the colonies as a source for income. This resulted in a change in attitude.
The passage from Song of Myself by Walt Whitman suggests an accepting and reverent attitude toward the cycle of life. Whitman celebrates the interconnectedness of all living beings, embracing both the beauty of life and the inevitability of death as part of a larger cosmic continuum.
What attitude? or I don't have an attitude