Are you looking for a specific size of stone slate? Finding the size that you need can sometimes be difficult. Often times we will get requests for a certain size of slate tile. Of course, once you find the size of slate tile you want, you also need to find the right kind of design to match the size of stone slate tile. There are many different designs of stone as well - of course.
Some of the stone slate tile sizes we carry include the following:
12x24 Stone Slate Tile
24x24 Stone Slate Tile
24x36 Stone Slate Tile
In terms of stone slate tile designs, we also have a variety of these as well. These include red slate, white wood, mocha creme, black slate tile, and more. These of course are only a few of the many different designs and finishes that we carry. Be sure to check back often as we add new stone slate all the time.
Hi Lizzy,I just added your site to my favorites:) I have been a diteiabc for 21 years . I am totally on insulin now. I actually feel that the insulin doesnt work as good as it should or maybe it could be that no one really trained me how to find the carb insulin ratio . I am sooo fustrated. My sugars have been out of control for a while now because of the infections that endometriosis has caused me. They tried to put me on cycloset but I did not want to take anything that affects the chemicals in the brain. Now they want me to give myself a second injection at every meal. It is called Symlin. It is supposed to slow down the digestion so I would eat less and need less insulin. Have you heard of this shot? I was tested for gastroparesis years ago and now they want to put me into it. I dont get these doctors!!!! by Celia posted on Sunday, December 01, 2013
Hi Nadine,I have spo
Hi Nadine,I have spoken to peolpe who use Symlin and they really like it. It might be worth a try.One suggestion that I have is buy a copy of the book : Think Like a Pancreas . It's an excellent book that teaches you all about insulin use, it's very easy to read and follow. I highly recommend it.Lizzy by Evgenya posted on Sunday, December 01, 2013
Congratulations :)Re
Congratulations :)Reading your evolution comic was insiretteng as I remembered the things I learnt in school some weeks before about the subject and also how the arguments against evolution were refuted. Very good explanation of the theory. Hope to buy the book someday. by Deysy posted on Sunday, December 01, 2013
I love this blog, th
I love this blog, the looks are inspirational and your drive and aeesitthc sensibilities are admirable. However one of my New Years resolutions is to give up blogs like this that often bring out the green eyed monster in me. I enjoy reading blogs by people I admire but it always makes me feel like my life could just isn't glamorous enough or that I am not successful in my job/life/career. So goodbye Love Aesthetics, all the best in 2013. by Diana posted on Sunday, December 01, 2013
I have exactly what
I have exactly what info I want. Check, please. Wait, it's free? Awomese! by Natsuki posted on Monday, December 02, 2013
, we can still engag
, we can still engage his parlicutar points:1) He says that because of the winner-take-all distribution of electoral college votes in nearly all of the states, we have mathematically clearer counts of the winner in an election than would be the case in a national popular vote. I would respond: true, but irrelevant. Any accepted count of votes, electoral or popular, is clear exactly to the extent to which people accept the math supporting said count. Would a national popular vote result in less acceptance, more demands for recounts and litigation? Probably for the first election cycle, at least. But would it continue? Or would judges be forced to establish precedents for counting votes, states be forced to upgrade their voting technology and training, parties be forced to adjust their campaign strategies to minimize such close and legally costly outcomes? I think the latter is far more likely, and thus a new understanding of what makes for certainty of outcome would emerge relatively quickly.2) He says the electoral college forces successful presidential candidates to have transregional appeal. The two-fold flaw with this claim is a) it depends upon a rather limited and historically exclusive definition of what consists of regional (does the fact that Obama won the large urban areas on both the East and West coasts make him transregional ? does the fact that Romney won the South but lost Florida, or won the Intermountain West but lost Colorado, meaning that he didn't actually have regional appeal?), and b) it runs against the bedrock (and Supreme Court articulated) standard for a representative democracy that what needs to be counted are the votes of citizens ( one person, one vote ), not where those citizens come from.3) He argues that because the math of the electoral college forces candidates to spend a lot of time in certain swing states to try to win their votes, the result is that citizens in those states which are likely to decide the election receive enough attention and information from the candidates that they become highly informed voters, and we want the decision for the presidency to rest in the hands of highly informed people. But this tautological. One could just as easily say that, with a national popular vote, the candidates would spend a lot of time and money trying to communicate with people in major media markets, with the result that the people in those media markets would be highly informed, and that's a good thing, because major media markets serve large population centers, and of course we want the election to be in the hands of those population centers where there are lots of highly informed voters. His claim proves nothing. 4) His weakest claim is that the electoral college fixes some of the undemocratic consequences of the Senate by forcing presidential candidates to often spend lots of time in big states, giving them a level of electoral consequence which better fits the number of citizens who live within them. Well, yes, all that is true but it would be even more true if you simply had a national popular vote, and allowed the millions of voters in those large states to make their votes matter directly (as is presently not the case with the millions of Republican voters in California or New York, or the millions of Democratic voters in Texas).5) His final claim is that, since the electoral college makes clear majorities very likely, it eliminates the need for run-off elections. But the bug in this claim of his is actually a feature: why not have run-off elections for our chief executive? He needs to make an argument for that position besides how it would make our system even more complicated (which, by the way, I sincerely doubt).As a final note, he claims that the electoral college doesn't discourage voters from express[ing their] political preference. I'm not sure what study he makes use of to support this claim; the simple fact that many people turn out to vote for losing candidates in safe states doesn't mean that there aren't any voters who would like to believe that their single vote may decide an election. Ultimately, people vote (as I well know!) for all sorts of different reasons, strategic and expressive alike. A national popular vote would allow all of those motivations to have their place, rather than being marginalized or magnified simply depending on where one lives. by Sharon posted on Monday, December 02, 2013
To truly have every
To truly have everyone's prsdieent all votes, no matter where they come from need to count. During this last election, as both sides had already given Texas to the Republicans, we never saw either candidate campaign here. Their only time here was a quick stop for a fund-raising appearance. As a result, we never were offered a real choice as neither candidate had interest in trying to sway a vote. (though it was very nice not having non-stop campaign commercials here.) Sure Romney wasn't gaining anything here, but Obama didn't try to take those votes either. And in a place like Texas many people I know, on both sides of the coin, didn't vote knowing that their vote did not count. (So just think how a voter in North Dakota feels not does their vote not matter, but the state's electoral votes have little value as well.) A better solution is to do away with winner takes all and apportion electoral votes by percentage of the votes received. This would also help minimize the ability to game the system concentrating on a handful of counties in a smattering of states. This would help us from repeating 2000 when the candidate with the greatest popular vote is not seated as prsdieent. (if this had happened in another country, how fast would the US be to scream about the results and the need to protect democracy ?) I have no illusions that things will ever change since it also assures that no third party can ever gain enough ground to make a national noise. by Wahyu posted on Tuesday, December 03, 2013
I honestly don't kno
I honestly don't know how much of an efcfet getting rid of the Electoral College would have on our two-party system. The facts remain that we don't have a proportional election system in this country; we have a single-district plurality or first-past-the-post system: in other words, in any given election, whichever one person gets the most votes, wins. Which brings Duvurger's Law into efcfet that voters and parties alike would be motivated to never throw their vote away on a likely loser. To really have more than two dominant parties, you have to have some other electoral system (like instant-run-off voting or proportional representation), or some other party-to-government basis (like in a parliamentary democracy). And really, you need the former, or both; you can look at Canada or the UK, which have the latter, and yes, there are competitive third (and fourth!) parties there but still, it's basically always Conservative-Liberal, or Conservative-Labor, going back and forth. So no, maybe getting rid of the Electoral College would open a small window for third-party candidates, but I don't see how it would have much lasting efcfet down-ticket. by Bahar posted on Tuesday, December 03, 2013
Okay. If you are si
Okay. If you are sick of yellow, I vote choctlaoe brown. You seem to have a wall of windows in the room so it shouldn't make the room too dark. It's too bad brown makes your picture disappear. I am also partial to forest green, but that probably doesn't go with anything but your cat. How do these colors make you feel? I would probably say forget the furniture but find a happy or relaxing color. (I have picked paint for different things around here, and I nearly always end up hating it.) My husband's office was supposed to be more of a neutral, but it came out looking like light-medium pumpkin (the outside of the building). It was so ugly. All I can say for the color is it gets better and better as it fades. by Jose posted on Saturday, September 26, 2015
Keep Great Records :
Keep Great Records : Maintaining correct info is clemletpoy required if you want to avoid Tax Problems . Almost all Business Tax concerns result from filing quarterly taxes late. Make efforts to talk with an CPA, bookkeeper, and / or a tax preparation expert when the time is right. by Bikram posted on Saturday, September 26, 2015
I am thinking that i
I am thinking that it would give third pairtes a lot more leverage to play spoiler. In a close election, a far-left or far-right party, or, perhaps even more significantly, a regionalist party, that could pull away 5-10% of the vote nationally could end up throwing an election to the other side. Think, say, of a Texbecoise.This would be much less likely to happen in the electoral system unless the entire election came down to one hotly contested state, and that state came down to a few hundred votes, and a third-party candidate managed to siphon off votes primarily from one of the candidates. And, really, how likely is it that THAT would ever happen. by Karolin posted on Saturday, September 26, 2015
all of that, I would
all of that, I would still back almost any mresuae to get rid of the Electoral College, which I think is, if not a bad idea, at least an idea that has outlived its purpose. And, with or without my backing, I don't see any way that such a proposal could succeed in the current political environment. by Daniel posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2015
Excellent post. I wa
Excellent post. I was checking cotntasnly this weblog and I'm impressed! Extremely useful information particularly the remaining phase I deal with such info a lot. I was looking for this certain info for a very lengthy time. Thanks and best of luck. by Elbeulah posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2015
Recently, I did not
Recently, I did not give whole lot thought to coimnntmeg on weblog articles and have left feedback even less. Viewing your useful piece of writing, might inspire me to do this again. by Theeb posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2015
We played arnoud wit
We played arnoud with adding colors for a bit. The dark brown was nice, but our painting and furniture disappeared against it. These are messy, but here is an idea where we are leaning:Then we tried these out too:I think the light is too light. It doesn't look good with our stuff or our floor. I like the medium and the dark, though. We're worried if we do anything too red that it will clash with our possessions or look like a nursery school with yellow, blue, and red. Maybe a burnt sienna would look good, if it was a lighter shade. Hrm by Jayro posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2015
Hi Lizzy,I just adde
Hi Nadine,I have spo
I love this blog, th
, we can still engag
I am thinking that i