@eric3579, I agree with you. Hillary's reputation took a big hit after the DNC Leaks broke during the convention.

@newtboy, here's how I think of the campaign. (Please pardon me for this silly fable. I just kinda got writing and my creative side just sorta took over, and I just kinda had fun with it.)

.. ..

As the primary campaign advanced it was clear that Scissors was the front runner in the Rep's side. Unless something changed drastically, he would be become the nominee.

On the Dem’s side, the race was not yet decided. Rock was behind, but not by much. He was quickly closing in on Paper’s lead. Rock was hoping that his strategy of being consistent over time would prevail and win him votes. In the beginning Paper had taken off an airplane. Laughing at how slow Rock was to gain speed. But now Paper’s once comfortable head start was being called into question. Could Rock’s momentum grow fast enough to overtake her?

Paper had gone through extensive planning (on paper) long before the election. Paper wanted to keep news of Rock from reaching the voters. The idea as was to keep Rock "covered over" to the point that many of voters just didn't know about him. They just saw the old familiar name of "Paper" on the ballot and went with that. They had little or no exposure to Rock.

Rock was on a roll, and it was clear that it was gathering no moss.

Since so many voters relied on “traditional” media for information, it wasn’t too difficult to keep pro-Paper ads on the radio, and television, and in newspapers. It was expensive, but Paper seemed to have an unlimited supply of money to fund the campaign. It was almost like Paper had bought the press...

Though Rock started to break through into the areas that Paper had been dominant, the Strategy worked. Rocks downhill momentum wasn’t able to fully catch Paper’s airplane—head-start.

Paper would win the primary and go on to face Scissors in the general.

But at the Democratic Candidate Coronation Ceremony, something terrible happened!

It turns out that someone was keeping a paper-trail on Paper’s dealings. Paper had written many correspondences, and many of those letters had reached the hands of Wikileaks, which had finally chosen to publish the secrets!

The strategies Paper had used to ensure victory over Rock—the Cover-Up Campaign—were revealed. The fundraising done by The Paper Foundation to keep money flowing around laws were becoming clear.

And each week and new secret seemed to drip onto Paper’s hat…

What happens next? We don’t know. There are so many questions! Could a boat float if made of Panama Papers? How deep will the leaks get? What other secrets will be revealed before the final election? Will Paper win over former Rock supporters now that the reality of the Cover-Up-Campaign had been uncovered? Who will win the final election? Can Paper beat Scissors?

Could Scissors have been secretly helping Paper out behind the scenes out of a fear of facing Rock? Could Paper have been helping Scissors in the early parts of his primary campaign out of a fear of facing Ben Carson?

Tune in again for out next episode of House of Cards I mean Rock-Paper-Scissors to find out!

//

//

Okay, I hope you read that with in the lighthearted voice it was intended. And I’m not hiding my bias. This story was mostly about Paper—who (at first) I thought would be a fine second choice.

(I was rooting for Rock the whole time! I liked they way he rolled!)

Trump was Scissors: Wouldn't hesitate to cut his opponents with his uh.. 'wit.'
Sanders was Rock: Consistent over time. (Not blown around by the wind)
Hillary was like Paper: Thin, like her integrity.

This is a better view of the post 4 hour earlier.

Hillary left the 9/11 ceremony early due to this health event.
clearly she is being held up by the silver poll and her team. while the van comes.

This would probably be the finishing touch that costs her the election.

They should simply murder anyone trying to build it on their land, and insist on using tribal courts in the prosecution of the 'crime'. No tribal jury will convict them....problem solved. Can we please get Palin to attend the ground breaking ceremony?

Also, in regards to age... I'd say ayahuasca is definitely for older people, when I was in ceremony almost everyone was 30+. And it makes sense, it is definitely not just love and good vibes with some slight alterations to your normal perceptions

To add to that - Santo Diame considers taking ayahuasca "THE Work". They take it at church every weekend, including their kids (lol), they are very serious about it as an integral spiritual/religious tool.

DMT(ayahuasca) are not recreational, no matter which way anyone wants to flip it. The Universe in 5 minutes... an eternal life/death scenario. I was taking ayahuasca to mediate upon my father's death 2 months prior, along with a shaman I respected deeply, I also respect the "traditions" (in that I find the anthropological history incredibly rich) but I realize after "figuring out" DMT on my own that I think my way is best (standard psychedelic procedure, alone) and is the most important thing that I can learn from it. That this is my journey into the soul and I don't need anyone else in my way during my experiences; shamans have a way of influencing the experience, but the experience itself and YOU are the real guide, no need for a shaman with smoked DMT Ayahuasca is definitely an incredible experience and plant... I just prefer my way of visiting "that" realm of infinite knowledge. Tell us how it goes

Some things I did not like about Santo Diame were Christian dogma (with a lot of beliefs taken from many religions), they want you to stay with the circle even though you may be compelled to find somewhere that is quiet and away from everyone else, they separate men from women half circle men, half circle women, guide in between, they do not want talking, but the music is incessant and influences the experience (when the lights go out, be prepared to experience hell on fucking Earth), I couldn't stand the "helpers" at the ceremony I went to, they kept urging people to drink more - there were a lot of aspects that I didn't like about it. But, I certainly wouldn't want to take ayahusca alone, either. Instead, I believe the best way, for me at least, would be one on one with the shaman, in an open place, preferably outside and for him to just chant and check in with me every once in a while.

Also, you can check out the video I made about my smoked DMT breakthrough experience https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuRbLAqM6Kk

I'm supposed to be attending an Ayahuasca ceremony in a few weeks. I think the 'not quite pleasurable' element is why it's treated more as a ceremonial/religious/disciplinary practice, than a recreational experience, but people continue to use it due to the side-effects being beneficial in that way too (not many recreational drugs can 'reset' your mind to a healthier way of thinking the way Ayahuasca purportedly does).

Ron Paul was not goofy, but he was a (partially) fringe candidate. The gold standard being his biggest kookiness. But as far as just being loved by libertarians, well, that's what the media sold and that's what some poor saps actually believe.

As more a liberal leaning guy I swapped parties to vote for Paul. His honesty was nice but would have been unverifiable. However, his willingness to buck those he could have been bought by and made president from amazed me. He wasn't a populist except insofar as that his message was against those in power.

But what is most funny is this. Paul didn't do bad in the polls for basically being a 3rd party candidate. In that he smashed Nader and most other 3rd party candidates. Even knowing his defeat, those still willing to show their vote to him was astonishing. Now some would argue that he technically wasn't third party since he ceremoniously went under the Republican brand...but that's about stupid logic there.

http://videosift.com/video/9th-BlizzCon-2015-Opening-Ceremony for its opening ceremony recording.

I watched/listened to the entire ceremony & press conference & Google Hangout. This was by far the best answer.

Amazing day.

Awesome cabinet.

I'm pretty liberal minded but things have been going too far in this country recently. Our social benefits and tolerance of other cultures are being abused. Perhaps muslim women should consider respecting the traditions and customs of the country they moved to instead of expecting everyone else to acquiesce to their demands. Our citizenship ceremonies might seem pointless to them but they matter to us a great deal.

Have a little perspective, would muslim culture be tolerant of non-compliance? No, you would be put to death for it. Meanwhile in Canada you can freely debate, engage and have a wide variety of cultural freedoms. All Canadians were asking is to move a piece of cloth for 30 seconds during a very important tradition of ours, one where you join our country and become a citizen of our country.

Stephen Harper was wrong to politicize this issue but muslim women who won't even offer the country they're moving to a modicum of respect and understanding are wrong too. If people are going to become so abrasive over such a non-issue in a country that already bends over backwards for other cultures, where will they be on issues that actually matter?

There's a major difference between accepting religious freedom for ceremonial activities, and for safety practices.

I can understand and agree with them wearing anything they'd like while being in a ceremony as long as it's not disrespectful. What is effectively a scarf covering your face, to me, isn't disrespectful.

However, the argument that eastern religions should be allowed to not wear helmets on motorcycles because they don't want to take off their turbans is ludicrous.

The whole argument was stupid, because the oath is ceremonial. It doesn't mean anything. The amount of paper work that someone has to go through to get citizenship is astounding. They have to be indentified numerous times. Yes, they even have to show their face to match photo ID, but it's done in a special room with other women officials who can confirm the identity. The actual oath they take happens in private most of the time.

The standing in a room with everyone else is just for effect and has no practical sway on the process itself.

The two women who were trying to do it had already shown their faces and gone through the process. You could be wearing a Polkaroo costume at the oath ceremony, and it will still have the same effect.

I personally don't agree with it, but having actual religious freedom means you can't tell anyone what they can or can not wear.

The whole thing was stupid.

And I get that the women mostly want to wear it (questions of cultural pressure and/or indoctrination of children aside).

But I fundamentally disagree that anyone should get special treatment because of your religion. The law should be blind to religion.

If a christian, a jew or an atheist can wear a niqab, then a muslim woman should be able to too. If they can't, then they shouldn't get special treatment.

Is there a requirement to be able to facially identify someone at a citizenship ceremony? If not, no problem. If so, would the muslim woman agree to having another woman identify her? If so, again, no problem.

But she shouldn't expect people to change the law for her.

I get that niqabs are mostly just an implementation of aeons of patriarchy but they're still heavily entrenched in their culture. It's not just that they want to wear a niqab like some costume for some celebratory religious purpose during their citizenship ceremony, like they're putting on a motorcycle helmet just for the shit of it, but they wear a niqab _everywhere_ they go. They keep their bodies covered everywhere they go in public, for all of their lives, forever. Their niqab _is_ who they are. Their niqab _is_ a fundamental part of the citizenship they are declaring.

And as much as we might rail against it as being dehumanizing of a person to basically have their identity stripped in public, it's actually what the women want. And it's actually not up to us to make that decision for that culture. (I think in time things might change, especially if that culture is allowed to live side-by-side with ours.)

I think if it was some new-age religion, like someone is claiming to be 'jedi' and saying they're not allowed to show their face anywhere in public, well, if they actually lived that reality maybe they'd be allowed but I doubt it. But here we're talking about a fellow civilization with an equally storied history that has existed for many millennia alongside ours. And that can't just be thrown away because we think it should be.