Lesson learned A beautiful thing.

I'm so grateful, for so many "lesson learned" that cost me so little.

I've never needed to think about this before, but it makes me grateful I don't live in a country where the wildlife can put you in a headlock and choke you out.

Thanks mom ... grateful I am

I expect more nuanced explanations and information from this guy, so maybe I was just not expecting his little switcheroo on the initial story.

It's not that I'm doubting the reality of this in the least, but I'd really like to hear about the experiments where they tested and confirmed this phenomenon. I guess I expect science to be supported by facts.

I get sick of the "We found this principle out. Isn't that neat? Just take our word for it." It wasn't that long ago where we said "Today we understand that Dinosaurs are giant, scaly ancestors of reptiles".
We're never approaching things with "All the evidence we've discovered suggests this to be the case about 'X'", which is absolutely the way we need to address all knowledge, because we're constantly proving old findings wrong and that's a good thing for improving our understanding of the universe. This tone is present throughout today's science as well, and grates on me every time I hear it. History has shown us enough that we will eventually prove it wrong, so I wish we presented findings that way to begin with.
/Marginally related tangent!

I bet the door is what's wrong. Doesn't seem to match the interior layout. The heater grate on the floor should never be in a walking area, and wouldn't be if the door opened to the left.

How you deliver information is kind of a big deal. At lest to me. And it has nothing to do with how i feel about what's being delivered. Also delivery grates on people differently. I love how Chomsky delivers info where others are absolutely annoyed by it, and why i won't listen to Bill Maher and TNT most of the time(although i agree with much of what they say). Delivery IS a big deal. I doubt anyone here talking about this woman's delivery is discounting the info shes putting out there. At least i assume that. Also delivering in a comedic way is very hard to do well.

But you have zero proof. You're stating that you have enough proof, but yet you really don't have any proof. You have circumstantial evidence.

I have zero doubts that DWS once in that position helped because she and Clinton are friends and political allies. But that's not quid pro quo. If Clinton hires her to help in her campaign, it isn't quid pro quo if Clinton hired her because of DWS's skills in the area. You have zero proof that's why DWS was hired. You have zero proof DWS did "whatever Clinton asked her to do". You have zero proof Clinton asked her to do anything that broke the rules in the first place. None.

You are inferring every single accusation you made against Clinton. There's absolutely no evidence of any of them at all.

Clinton has zero insights about what the public thinks? You're kidding, right? The woman who was the front runner for the Democratic nomination, who has been in the public spotlight at the national stage for almost 25 years doesn't have any insight about what the public thinks?

Come on, man.

Also, DWS's job wasn't solely to ensure the nominating process was fair. She had a ton of responsibilities, and many of them she did well. That was my point. All you're seeing is the part where she screwed up because it hurt your preferred candidate. Her job was also to protect the Democratic party, and help Democrats win elections, too.

Perhaps a few might say DWS wasn't the reason Sanders lost? A few? You mean like.... ohhhhh, I dunno... Bernie Sanders? How about Bernie Sanders' staff members? But what the hell do they know, AMIRITE?

Dude, Sanders got crushed with minorities. You know where that can allow you to win the nomination? The GOP. Unfortunately for Sanders, he was running for the nomination where minorities are a significant part of the voting bloc. Absolutely CRUSHED. Clinton won 76% of the African-American vote. Before the primaries really began, Clinton was polling at 73% among Hispanics. You honestly think that was because of DWS? Let me put that to rest for you. Hillary Clinton did well among Hispanics against Barack Obama. Was that DWS's doing, too?

That's the thing. I have clear cut FACTS about why Sanders lost. I have the words from Bernie Sanders and his campaign staff. You have speculation about whatever small impact DWS's had on primary votes.

Valarie Plame? No, Bush never named her. It ended up being Karl Rove.

How did I shove Hillary Clinton down your throat? Explain that one to me. I didn't vote for Hillary Clinton in the primaries. In VA, I chose to vote in the GOP primary to do whatever I could to stop Trump, which was vote for Marco Rubio, as he was polling second in VA. I didn't do a damn thing to stop Sanders or help Clinton win the nomination.

Why didn't I vote for Sanders? Because of his lack of foreign policy experience, and he wasn't putting forth enough practical policies that I think would work. I like the guy fine. I'd vote for him as a Senator if he was in Virginia. I like having voices like his in Congress. But Commander In Chief is a big part of the job, and I want someone with foreign policy experience. He doesn't have that.

I also value flexibility in a candidate. The world isn't black and white. I like Sanders' values. It would be nice if everyone could go to college if they had the motivation. I very much think the rich are not taxed nearly enough. But I also think ideologies and ideals help to create ideas for solutions, but the solutions need to be practical, and I don't find his practical unfortunately. Sometimes they're not politically practical. Sometimes they just fall apart on the mechanics of them.

Gary Johnson has more experience? Uhhhhh, no. He was governor of New Mexico for 8 years. That compares well to Sarah Palin. Do you think Palin is more experienced than Clinton, too? Johnson has zero foreign policy experience. Hillary Clinton was an active first lady who proposed Health Care Reform, got children's health care reform passed. She was a US Senator for the short time of 8 years, which is way less than Johnson's 8 years as governor of New Mexico (wait, what?!), was on the foreign relations committee during that time. Then she was Secretary of State.

Sanders is the only one who I'd put in the ballpark, but he's had legislative branch experience only, and he doesn't have much foreign policy experience at all. Interestingly enough, you said he was the most experienced candidate, overlooking his complete lack of executive experience, which you favored when it came to Gary Johnson. Huh?

Clinton can't win? You know, I wouldn't even say Trump *can't* win. Once normalized from the convention bounce, she'll be the favorite to win. Sure, she could still lose, but I wouldn't bet against her.

Clinton supporters have blinders on only. Seriously? Dude, EVERY candidate has supporters with blinders on. Every single candidate. Most voters are ignorant, regardless of candidate. Don't give me that holier than thou stuff. You've got blinders on for why Sanders lost.

There are candidates who are threats if elected. There are incompetent candidates. There are competent candidates. There are great candidates. Sorry, but there aren't great candidates every election. I've voted in enough presidential elections to know you should be grateful to have at least one competent candidate who has a shot of winning. Sometimes there aren't any. Sometimes there are a few.

In your mind, I'm a Hillary supporter with blinders on. I'm not beholden to any party. I'm not beholden to any candidate. It's just not in my nature. This is the first presidential candidate from a major party in my lifetime that I felt was truly an existential threat to the US and the world in Trump. I'm a level headed person. Hillary Clinton has an astounding lack of charisma for a politician who won a major party's nomination. I don't find her particularly inspiring. I think it's a legitimate criticism to say she sometimes bends to the political winds too much. She sometimes doesn't handle things like the email thing like she should, as she flees to secrecy from a paranoia from the press and the other party, which is often a mistake, but you have to understand at some level why. She's a part of a major political party, which has a lot of "this is how the sausage is made" in every party out there, and she operates within that system.

If she were a meal, she'd be an unseasoned microwaved chicken breast, with broccoli, with too much salt on it to pander to people some to get them to want to eat it. And you wouldn't want to see how the chicken was killed. But you need to eat. Sure, there's too much salt. Sure, it's not drawing you to the table, but it's nutritious mostly, and you need to eat. It's a meal made of real food.

Let's go along with you thinking Sanders is SOOOOOOOOOOO much better. He was a perfectly prepared steak dinner, but it's lean steak, and lots of organic veggies, perfectly seasoned, and low salt. It's a masterpiece meal that the restaurant no longer offers, and you gotta eat.

Donald Trump is a plate of deep fried oreos. While a surprising number of people find that tasty, it also turns out the cream filling was contaminated with salmonella.

Gary Johnson looks like a better meal than the chicken, but you're told immediately if you order it, you're gonna get contaminated deep fried oreos or the chicken, and you have absolutely no say which it will be.

You can bitch and complain all you want about Clinton. But Sanders is out.

As Bill Maher would say, eat the chicken.

I'm not voting for Clinton solely because I hate Trump. She's a competent candidate. At least we have one to choose from who can actually win.

And I'm sorry, but I don't understand your comparison of Trump to Clinton. One of them has far more governmental experience. One of them isn't unhinged. One of them is clearly not racist or sexist. You would at least agree with that, right? Clinton, for all her warts, is not racist, sexist, bigoted, and actually knows how government works. To equate them is insane to me. I'm sorry.

And this is coming from someone who voted for Nader in 2000. I totally get voting for a third party candidate in some situations. This isn't the time.

Edit: You know who else is considering voting for Clinton? Penn Jillette, one of the most vocal Clinton haters out there, and outspoken libertarian. Even he is saying if the election is close enough, he'll have to vote for her.

"“My friend Christopher Hitchens wrote a book called No One Left to Lie To about the Clintons,” Jillette says. “I have written and spoken and joked with friends the meanest, cruelest, most hateful things that could ever been said by me, have been said about the Clintons. I loathe them. I disagree with Hillary Clinton on just about everything there is to disagree with a person about. If it comes down to Trump and Hillary, I will put a Hillary Clinton sticker on my fucking car.”

But he says he hopes the race will turn out well enough that he feels safe casting his vote for Gary Johnson, who is running on the libertarian ticket, and who he believes is the best choice."
http://www.newsweek.com/penn-jillette-terrified-president-trump-431837

@Asmo

Did you read the link to Patton Oswalt?

He talks about what he learned about "rape jokes" by educating himself on the rape culture in our society, and the place of the "victim" in humor.

I have laughed at plenty of rape jokes that made fun directly of rapists. I see how Jim tried to do that here. I don't think he succeeded. Certainly, it was improved by his narrative frame of including the woman who complained about his "rape jokes." That helped.

I removed myself (or thought I was going to) because I have been insulted and attacked in the past on the Sift on this subject. That isn't happening this time around, for which I am deeply grateful.

This time around, it is just a difference of opinion. I got no problems with a difference of opinion.

Let's fill up the court, indeed!

As Queen, I do hereby officially offer Princesshood to the great and glorious (and actually living pretty near me) @PlayhousePals. Wanna be crowned, Play?

We need a Merlin. A Wise One. One with benevolence and love and an all-seeing eye to look out for us all.

He knows who he is for me. He already looks out for us, for which I am grateful.

No need for any Knights in Armor, shining or otherwise. Mine is a peaceful queendom. (Well, striving for peace. Your Queen has some stuff to work on still.)

And my King? Paul Newman, please. Since this is fantasy, I can resurrect the dead and turn back time.

I'm not religious, and I have a lot of religious relatives. I hear "we were blessed", "what a blessing", etc, a LOT.

I picked it up as a way of showing gratitude to my circumstances. However, it grated at me, the more I said it.

Now I say -- "I'm lucky."

I'm lucky.

And some people aren't.

So it finally happened...

ten. whole. years... a decade...

i can't believe how quickly the years have passed, but i'm grateful for every single day i've had the pleasure of spending here with you, siftbot, my love. you changed my life.

One grating mistake: nogal (pl nogales) means "walnut tree", not walnut. Nuez (pl nueces) means walnut, although it has been applied to pecans in the new world.

ok, so pancake art is a thing now?

Cool. I am totally on board with that.

I feel like this would never have happened without the internet. Let us all be grateful that we do not live in such a world.

Thanks 'mom' ... grateful I am