Kitchen Skipping

Sep. 20th, 2017 03:42 pm

Laptime

Sep. 19th, 2017 03:41 pm

Tia

Sep. 18th, 2017 03:40 pm

Rosh Hashanah 5778 prep

Sep. 20th, 2017 11:00 am
chanaleh: (leaves)
[personal profile] chanaleh
Overall I've been too crazed to journal, but today is weirdly slow* at work so I am taking a few minutes.
*(Edited to add: I suspected it was too good to be true. Of course the shit hit the fan on about 3 different projects as soon as I finished posting this, so, we'll hope I get out on time.)

Cards: mostly sent; I ordered 50, and carefully winnowed down my list to that number, but they actually sent me extras so I still have a dozen or so I can send (probably next week; gmar chatimah tovah!).

Honey cake: baked last night.

Challah: 4 small loaves (2 raisin, 2 plain) currently on second rise to bake later today. This year, I used the King Arthur recipe that I printed out last year but decided against for some reason. I made a double batch since it claims to make 1 9-inch round, let the dough rise overnight, and it looked beautiful this morning. Aria was super interested in the dough as I was rolling it into strands for coiling. "Cookie! Pizza! I hold it? I hold it?" I told her she'll be big enough to help me next year.

12lb. brisket in fridge, waiting to prep for Thurs afternoon. Sorry, [livejournal.com profile] ablock, I fear my brisket-recipe allegiance is permanently switched! even though the simmered-in-wine version will forever smell like the essence of Rosh Hashanah to me.

Matzah ball soup: also tomorrow (using stock from freezer)

Vegetables:
- brisket potatoes & carrots
- tzimmes (I actually found frozen diced butternut squash at Not-Our-Usual-Supermarket)
- salad

Guests: 1 (maybe 2?) Thursday night, 1 Friday night

Shul: by myself tonight (6:30pm) and tomorrow morning (9am); with Aria on Friday. She saw me put on a skirt this morning (since I'm going straight from work) and said "Mama you go shul today! I go shul!"

Still to review: Shacharit davening for first day (ack) and Haftarah. I went over the davening with the rabbi during Sunday school the last two weeks and it was OK - Yom Kippur is more direly in need of practice, but first things first.

Kittel: try on tonight, bring tomorrow morning.

Shanah tovah u'metukah!

Groups vs systems

Sep. 20th, 2017 10:13 am
dpolicar: (Default)
[personal profile] dpolicar
I am so very tired of the narrative of "We shouldn't condemn a whole group because of some bad individuals. There are good people and bad people in that group."

Here's the thing: there's a difference between a group of people and a system of people. The difference is that a system of people comprises not only the individuals, but also the social constructs that guide the behavior of those individuals... in other words, the system itself.

For example, a company isn't just a bunch of people who coincidentally happen to work on the same projects in distributed ways. A school system isn't a bunch of teachers and administrators who independently happen to work the same way. A police precinct isn't a bunch of officers who just happen to follow the same rules.

In each of these cases there are policies and guidelines and hierarchies and informal structures and so forth that shape behavior. There's a system.

And when we praise or condemn the public school system, or the police, or Microsoft, or etc. we mostly aren't praising or condemning a whole group because of some good or bad individuals. I mean, sure, those individuals exist, but they aren't the reason. We are praising/condemning a whole group because of the system that organizes it. And the larger the system we're talking about, the more true that is: when we say that democracies are more just than totalitarian states, or that capitalism is more efficient than communism, or that communism is more humane than capitalism, or various other claims along those lines, we're basically not saying anything at all about any individual.

Or at least, that's how it should be. I mean, sure, sometimes we praise or condemn a group of people just because we're applying aggregate-level stereotypes to all the individuals in that group. And in those cases the "We shouldn't condemn a whole group because of some bad individuals. There are good people and bad people in that group." narrative makes sense: we really shouldn't! Or at least, we're overwhelmingly likely to be mistaken when we do; we can draw our own ethical conclusions from there.

(I am reminded now of a friendship I broke some time back by expressing both the idea that condemning individuals because of their group affiliations is bad, and the idea that analyzing the common behaviors of individuals is the only way we can identify pathological systems, in ways that struck them as infuriatingly and relationship-endingly hypocritical.)

And sure, sometimes we make analysis errors in this space. Sometimes there's a system operating we're unaware of. Sometimes we infer the presence of systems that don't actually operate, or aren't relevant to what we're talking about. It's easy to talk about the behavior of people while ignoring the systems that shape us, and it's easy to handwave about notional systems without actually making any concrete or testable claims about whether they exist.

I'm not saying I expect us to be perfectly accurate when we describe groups and systems. But I want us to be better about acknowledging that they are two different things.

When someone condemns racism as a systemic attribute of a society, for example, there are folks who reply that no, racism is a property of individuals, end-of-story.

And in principle that can be a legitimate disagreement; if someone wants to argue that there really aren't any social systems underlying/guiding/constraining/coordinating the racist behavior of individuals, for example, that's a totally relevant argument. (Mind you, I think it's obviously false, but that's another matter.)

But usually they aren't arguing that; rather, they are simply insisting that we can only talk about individuals, because when we say that racism is also demonstrated through the systems that essentially all white people in this country participate in, we're talking about a whole group, and (all together now) "we shouldn't condemn a whole group because of some bad individuals. There are good people and bad people in that group."

And I don't know how to say all of this, or any of it, in ways that are at all useful within the conversation itself. And I watch other people trying to do it, and not getting very far either.

And I understand that often that's because other people just don't want to hear it, and in general I don't believe that there's a way to say everything that will be accepted by the person I'm talking to and that it's my job to find it. But still, I try to express myself clearly and compellingly.

So, anyway. I am so very tired of the narrative of "We shouldn't condemn a whole group because of some bad individuals. There are good people and bad people in that group."

*snif* *snif*

Sep. 20th, 2017 04:28 pm
gale_storm: (Default)
[personal profile] gale_storm
AH-CHOO!

I sneezed, which brought The Cat in here, where she watched me closely for about 5 minutes before lashing out at me.

I'm currently ignoring her.



Dreams 09/20/2017

Sep. 20th, 2017 06:46 am
kalibex: (Default)
[personal profile] kalibex
Seemed to be in the kitchen of my childhood home; some guy patted my parent's siamese cat, but in that ruffle the fur way, too hard...and upset, she jumped off the kitchen counter, then jumped way up onto a little ledge or shelf in the bathroom next to the kitchen (that didn't exist in Real Life)...whereupon I kind of scolded him for patting her too hard.

*   *   *

I was outside, moving around a landscape reminiscent of my hometown's downtown area, where there was snow and icy slush - except I didn't seem to have the right winter shoes on.  But I was carefully moving around in it.  I was giving some large truck (tractor trailer?) a wide berth, then realized there was a cop car coming slowly behind me, so got out of its way after indicating that I was going over *this* way...

Marriage Equality vote

Sep. 20th, 2017 06:15 pm
dreamer_easy: (*gender)
[personal profile] dreamer_easy
Everyone should have their forms for Australia's vote on Marriage Equality by Monday 25 September. If yours doesn't arrive, then you can ring the ABS on 1800 572 113 or by visiting their Website to get a replacement. (If anyone has pinched yours, then your replacement vote will cancel theirs.)

If you post a photo of your survey form online, make sure its unique barcode is not visible!

Do same-sex couples really have the same rights as married couples? (SBS, 14 September 2017). SPOILER: No, they don't, in some very important ways.

If most people who mail back their vote, vote "yes", then the government says it will vote on marriage equality; if "no", it won't. Frankly, I hope that LGBQTI+ voters and their friends vote these spineless bastards out at the next Federal election. (Labour says it will make marriage equal within 100 days of its being elected).

Speaking of spinelessness, the "debate" over the poll is having exactly the effect the government knew very well that it would: severe stress on LGBTQI+ Australians, especially on young people, who were already at risk. Expert in youth mental health Patrick McGorry responded to Senator Matt Canavan's victim-blaming by suggesting that LGBTQI+ young people have more of a spine than he does. (The rage I feel about this renders me inarticulate, it really does. I keep typing things and having to delete them.) The Australian Medical Association, citing the harm caused by inequality to LGBTQI+ people's health, is campaigning for the YES vote.

The Women's Electoral Lobby page on the survey has a list of helplines, which I'm sure they won't mind if I reproduce here:
Switchboard (Qlife) 1800 184 527
queerspace, drummond street services 03 9663 6733
Victorian AIDS Council (03) 9865 6700
Mind Equality Centre 1300 054 284
headspace (03) 9027 0100
Rainbow Network (03) 9479 8870
Kids Helpline 1800 55 1800
Black Rainbow (08) 9228 0354
Lifeline 13 11 14
Black Dog Institute (02) 9382 2991
Suicide Call Back Service 1300 659 467

(There are also a few links in my last posting.)

Finally, just because I found it interesting, here's a report on the complexities of the debate in Asian Australian communities (chiefly Chinese, Vietnamese, and Filipino.)
dreamer_easy: (refugees)
[personal profile] dreamer_easy
First group of refugees on Manus and Nauru to be resettled in US (GA, 20 September 2017). One of the detainees, Abdul Aziz Adam (of The Messenger podcast), has posted on Facebook that some of the detainees have already been told they will be moved within a week. (I haven't posted much about the refugee swap with the US because of my scepticism. Never been happier to be wrong!)

Victoria steps in to help 100 asylum seekers cut off by Coalition (GA, 9 September 2017) More states could help asylum seekers denied welfare by Coalition (GA, 11 September 2017). Only NSW ruled it out.

Manus Island: judge approves $70m compensation for detainees (GA, 6 September 2017). "Lawyers hope to have sum paid before offshore detention centre closes next month in what is Australia’s largest human rights class action settlement." Most of the refugees have signed up for the compensation, though some may have done so in the belief that they have no other options, and some have lodged objections and want a trial instead.

Nauru President indicates $8,000 visa fee for journalists will be waived next year (ABC, September 2017)

Australia's refugee capital 'shows what the country can do' (GA, 23 June 2017). "Fairfield in Sydney’s west has resettled roughly half of all humanitarian migrants to arrive in the past 10 years. ‘We’ll always open our arms,’ its mayor says."

Dreams 09/19/2017

Sep. 19th, 2017 07:08 am
kalibex: (Default)
[personal profile] kalibex
Two periods of dreaming, with a slight biphasic period of having trouble getting right back to sleep in between.

Recall has faded for the one sequence, but the other one included being in a interior, and getting the impression it was a restaurant, as there seemed to be a 'host/hostess' station, from whence one person would lead people who had arrived to eat, to their table.  Bizarrely, though, it also seemed to have a hand-drying station built into the lower front.  I had used the bathroom, then went to dry my hands here...

Drop Off

Sep. 12th, 2017 01:44 pm
dpolicar: (Default)
[personal profile] dpolicar
(A comment from another discussion)

I acknowledge, of course, that we are all imperfect humans, and what an individual officer does in a specfic situation is always the result of a million variables that are impossible to predict and often impossible to determine after the fact.

That's why I tend to focus more on training and evaluation protocols than on specific events. It's unjust to expect officers to do X in a sitution if they've been trained to do Y, but it's perfectly reasonable to expect officers to be trained to do X if we prefer that they do X in a situation.

I would prefer that police be trained and evaluated as peacekeepers rather than killers. So I would prefer, for example, they be trained and expected to identify situations that don't require a death, and to act so as to not create a death where none is required.

That said, how police are trained and evaluated is a collective decision, and if we collectively prefer police to choose deaths that aren't required -- for example, if we prefer to train and equip police as military officers who happen to deploy among civilian populations -- then that's how we should train and evaluate them, regardless of my preferences. That's part of the price I pay for living in a collective.

If police _are_ trained to choose unnecessary deaths, we should (individually and collectively) treat calling the police, permitting them into our homes, and otherwise making use of their services as a use of deadly force. Consequently, if we don't individually endorse the use of deadly force in those situations, we should not call the police, any more than we would fire a gun.

Those are individual decisions, not collective ones, and it's perfectly reasonable to hold one another as individuals accountable for them.

I acknowledge that this means that individuals who eschew deadly force in a situation may find themselves in conflict with any police who may arrive. I don't like this, and I don't endorse it, but I acknowledge it.

It's funny...

Sep. 18th, 2017 10:25 pm
dreamer_easy: (*feminism)
[personal profile] dreamer_easy
... where you can find comfort. I'd entertained the gloomy thought that bullying would be literally universal. Self-awareness, I figured, accompanies sophisticated social behaviour; you need to know what other people know, what they're thinking, and you need to be able to compare that with what you know. Sentience depends on theory of mind depends on social behaviour, which leads to social aggression - policing the boundaries of your group.

At least that's what I thought, but as it turns out, octopuses are not just famously intelligent, but (with exceptions) they're not at all social. They need theory of mind for a different reason: they're carnivores, and they're prey, interacting with many different species. They don't need to know what each other is thinking (although I'll bet they could make a good guess): they need to know what's on the mind of a predator or a potential meal.

This is not to say that octopuses have the same amount or kind of consciousness or intelligence as humans; but the fact that there's at least one other pathway to sentience gives me hope.

Dreams 09/18/2017

Sep. 18th, 2017 07:01 am
kalibex: (Default)
[personal profile] kalibex
Was at some place - some kind of business, apparently.  I had some repair issue, and I think I stopped in to inquire about it. (Something similar to this going on in real life.) I spoke to one woman, whose English was good, then was handed off to another, whose English and ability to communicate completely effectively was NOT as good.  The 2nd person tried two times to conclude the interaction correctly, but I realized she'd failed.  She initiated situations, including sending an object (that was NOT mine) out for repair, which made me realize that my repair issue had to been addressed correctly.  Each time, I made it clear that what she'd done was not what I needed, she indicated she could not halt or reverse the process.  At that point, I asked to speak to a manager.  I tried to tell her I wasn't doing this to get her in trouble, because she had, overall, been trying her best to be helpful.  But I needed this resolved; wasn't going to just accept the new situation (incorrect actions initiated, no way to know i I'd get what I needed out of it).  She was not happy, but went off. The initial woman (good English) showed up again (not sure if she was that 'Manager', or if she just dropped by to see how I was getting on).  I proceeded to explain what had happened, that the other woman gad tried, but had set things up incorrectly.  As I did so, the alarm woke me up.

Flesh, Strange

Sep. 18th, 2017 12:46 pm
dreamer_easy: (*writing hard yakka)
[personal profile] dreamer_easy
Back to working on the novel. Looking good until chapters four and five, which are a messy patchwork of bits from different drafts which don't fit together - people do things for reasons that no longer exist, that sort of thing. What a mess. I've already rewritten a chunk of exposition; I'm going to have to do the same with the actual action, writing out an outline, making it make sense and then rewriting from scratch. Gee it would have been nice if I'd done that IN THE FIRST PLACE. Oy

Dreams 09/17/2017

Sep. 17th, 2017 01:44 pm
kalibex: (Default)
[personal profile] kalibex
Spent some time at some vent similar to a convention, in that as it was apparently winding down, certain barrier-like objects were being removed, as if the event was now starting to be broken down. So, was some interior setting with people coming and going.   
mem_winterhill: (Default)
[personal profile] mem_winterhill posting in [community profile] davis_square
Friends just pointed me to this nerd comedy event coming up at the Armory. I am a fan of new ways to reach out on science topics in fun ways, and this sounds good to me. 

Saturday, September 30 at 8:00 PM - 10:00 PM EDT. Ticketing info over at facebook. 

https://www.facebook.com/events/116424495686654/

Come hang out with Boston Skeptics and enjoy a night of comedy between science friends.

"You know how Larry the Cable Guy's act pretty much consists of him yelling "Git 'er done!" every five minutes or so? Scientist-turned-comic Tim Lee's material is the diametric opposite. Lee, who got his PhD before realizing where his true talents lay, blends science talk (complete with PowerPoint presentations) with comedy. The hilarious result is like what would happen if you crossed your high-school chem teacher with George Carlin"
- The Boston Phoenix

Anniversary Dinner at O Ya

Sep. 16th, 2017 09:19 pm
lillibet: (Default)
[personal profile] lillibet
Today was the twentieth anniversary of our first date and our seventeenth wedding anniversary, so Jason booked us an early dinner at O Ya. We've been there twice before. The first time we had the omakase (chef's whim) of seventeen courses, just to see what they were about. The second time we sort of wanted to order a la carte, but their menu is extensive and the portions are small and trying to figure out a dozen or more courses on the fly seemed overwhelming. So this time I sat down with their online menu several days in advance and made notes on what we wanted, not really a solid plan, but enough so that we were able to come up with an order on the fly. Here's what we ended up with:

KUMAMOTO OYSTER watermelon pearls, cucumber mignonette

ORA KING SALMON Vietnamese dashi caramel, spicy rau ram salsa

BLUEFIN MAGURO Republic of Georgia herb sauce

SANTA BARBARA UNI TOAST "NIGIRI" smoked trout roe, truffle honey

HAMACHI TARTARE ginger verjus sauce, spiced chile oil

WARM EEL Thai basil, kabayaki, fresh kyoto sansh

BLUEFIN TORO TARTARE ginger kimchee jus

LOCAL SHRIMP TEMPURA bacon truffle emulsion, scallion ginger oil

MARTHA'S VINEYARD SMOKED BLUEFISH rainbow trout roe, wasabi vinaigrette, micro celery

AVOCADO TEMPURA kabayaki, truffle salt, yuzu zest

CHICKEN BROTH foie gras shumai, Tokyo leek, shitake

WAGYU TSUKUNE 2 oz., confit egg yolk, green onion, dried mushroom

CRISPY PORK BELLY Akashi glaze, celery root purée

We declined to order dessert, but they decided that our anniversary merited something sweet, so they gave us coconut tapioca with lime granita and yuzu sesame dice and moshi donuts with jasmine caramel dipping sauce.

We decided that the next time we go--in another few years--we will concentrate more on the nigiri portion of the menu, because those were our favorites, but everything was delicious and fascinating and special.
bettyw: (Default)
[personal profile] bettyw posting in [community profile] davis_square
 There will be fireworks at Spy Pond at dusk (around 8pm) for Town Night/Day.

Cake or Death?

Sep. 15th, 2017 03:58 am
earthling177: (Glasses)
[personal profile] earthling177
Garry Kasparov / The Resistance said:

"The American democratic awakening spurred by resistance to Trump will be short-lived and ineffective if more people don't vote.

Nearly 100 million Americans didn't vote for president in 2016. Trump won with just 26% of the eligible vote. That is a crisis level.

Apathy is self-censorship and it concedes power. Treat your democratic rights like duties. They will weaken and be lost if you do not."

Ailsa Cunningham Ek said:

"Problem is, we need greater citizen input into the primaries first. Closed primaries are undemocratic. Superdelegates are super undemocratic. The election shouldn't be a choice between two incredibly unpalatable individuals selected by someone else, or if they want to be able to pick them for us, we need a "None of the above" option.

Come downtown to stand in line for hours to choose between being kicked in the balls or shot in the head. Bugger that, I'm not going to *ask* to be kicked in the balls. If so few people volunteer to be kicked in the balls that we all end up shot in the head instead, among other things it says something about people's desire to be kicked in the balls, and maybe, just maybe, if we had listened to everyone's opinions on the matter, we might have had different options."

To which David Policar responded:

"Given a choice between being shot in the head and not shot in the head, I choose not being shot in the head.

Sure, I'd rather choose not being shot in the head and eating cherry pie than not being shot in the head and being kicked in the balls. Absolutely. No question.

But either way I choose not being shot in the head."

Well, I guess the ones who know me probably can predict what's coming, but for the benefit of folks who do not know me very well, here it goes...

I would like not only to agree with David Policar, but add to it: the results of the last election basically convinced me that for now, the *best* thing we can do is to close the primaries: if you want to vote in the primary, register for the party you want to win; I think that many people did in this election what they've done in many many many previous elections -- they wanted party A to win, so they gave up voting in their own primary and went across the isle to vote in party B's primary for a candidate so unpopular that they thought *no one* would vote for them and then stay home.

What they forgot is that Liberals fall in love, and if their favorite candidate did not win the primary, they do everything (fail to vote, vote 3rd party, write-in their favorite etc) but vote for the one who won the primary. Meanwhile, Conservatives fall in line, they hem and haw about how awful so-and-so is, but you will notice they vote for so-and-so *anyway*.

That's how we got Bush I, Bush II and now Trump.

Do you remember when a candidate could lose just for flip-flopping? Or for lying about something? Or refused to serve in times or war? Or for being perceived as nasty to women, or having an affair, or for even showing sympathies for Russia?

Can you honestly show me *one*, just one wrong thing from the immense list of "candidates that did this do not win" that Trump has not checked? I am under the impression that he personally went and "checked" every single box in the "this is not a good candidate if..." list and he *won* *anyway*, because for decades now, there are about 30% of registered Republicans, and they *all* vote, so they win even if there are over 50% registered democrats.

Please tell us honestly: if this were any kind of game (D&D, videogame, *any* game), do you think Republicans with such bad candidates would have won so very often if it depended on random chance? Worse yet, if over 50% of the players were D and barely 30% of the players were R, wouldn't you expect D to win almost all the time if it depended on simple voting?

People say they didn't vote this time because the Clinton wasn't leftist enough, or progressive enough, or because they wanted to "teach the Democratic Party to select better candidates". Among other things.

Well, guess what, you can't teach an organization to select a "better candidate" unless *you* vote for the better candidate, otherwise, the only data that the Democratic Party will add to their already large amounts of data is that "the American public likes extreme-right candidates, in the future, if we want to win, we need to offer someone more like Trump than more like Sanders, Clinton or Warren". *That's* what they learn, and that's why over the last 50 years the politics in America has moved so far to the right that Clinton and Obama are considered "centrists" and Sanders is consider "left wing" -- I want you to appreciate that by all we know, Sanders is a right wing guy compared to Nixon, who, despite being the extreme right of his time, would appear to be completely pinko-communist today; if you are not aware, Nixon tried to have this country pass laws for affordable college, universal health care *and* Universal Basic Income. In fact, Nixon tried for Universal Basic Income *twice* and it nearly passed, but Republicans and Democrats couldn't agree on the yearly *salary*.

Meanwhile, I'd describe the situation that you described as "shot in the head or kicked in the balls" a bit differently.

I'd say Bernie's and Hillary's platforms/agendas were so *close* that we couldn't insert a vacuum cleaner crevice attachment in between them. I remember many years ago, I got my rental car in the airport in Omaha NE, this was before simple people like me could have GPS, and I made one wrong turn and ended up across the river in Iowa, luckily all I had to do was turn around and I was where I needed to be again.

So anyway, I felt like we were in Chicago and Bernie offered us to go to Iowa and Hillary offered us to go to Nebraska, or vice-versa. But, they both said, "eventually our goal is to end up in San Francisco". Instead, people kept bitching about how the destination couldn't possibly be Nebraska or Iowa, even if just for 4 years, because the *only* good places are on the West Coast, and "if they can't pick California, we won't go, just to teach them a lesson!"

Well, now we are lost halfway in the Atlantic Ocean, because, despite the fact it was *obvious* that Sander's and Clinton's platform were a millimeter apart and their platforms were 10 miles to the left of Trump's, people thought they "could walk back" the 10 miles after 4 years. To teach the Democrats a lesson. Now you are, with the rest of us, over 1,000 miles *off* course, because the idiotic president currently there doesn't even know how to serve food at the soup kitchens he visited for hurricane relief.

And no, I am not blaming you personally. I'm super pissed off at my own people who think they'd keep their souls pure and their hands clean if they didn't vote for Clinton.

Well, if you ask the rest of the world, they do not make this differentiation -- they think *all* Americans are to blame for Trump. Any crap that he starts internationally *will* be a stain on our personal and collective souls.

With all that in mind, I humbly ask you to please stop repeating Soviet Russia Propaganda designed to divide the progressives. About 2 centuries ago there were not even "primaries" -- the parties put out their candidates and you voted in the general election. *All* coalition building currently happens at the primaries in US and, if you want to influence the candidates for the general, vote in the primary. All this "closed primaries are not democratic" and "super delegates are not democratic" are *all* propaganda straight from Putin's hands. The Republicans *wished* they had super delegates, they could have gotten rid of Trump no problem that way. Notice that the Republican Party per se could have just voted for completely new rules and just said "we don't like Trump, the second winner is the candidate *this* time around", which is even less democratic than well, the Democratic super delegates.

My point, and I do have one, is that *anyone* and *anything* the Democrats could have offered this time was better than Trump and we *knew* it: Bernie, Clinton, a prairie dog or a baked potato. It doesn't take a genius IQ to get to that conclusion, but we, collectively, decided it was better to bet the country on the guy who got us lost in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean and about to start a nuclear war, because we didn't want to be the ones to be blamed for a brief stop over in Iowa or Nebraska on our way to California.

If we can't recognize that we were not being invited to sleep with Clinton or Bernie or even just have dinner with them, we did not have to *like* them at all, they are just the president that was going to be *much* better than Trump even if not ideal, do we even deserve a chance to get better as a country?

If we can't recognize that Clinton was *right* about all that she warned us about Trump, and that he's been doing everything she told us about -- if we can't recognize that she *knew* more than we did -- do we really deserve to get better and do we really have a leg to stand on asking other countries not to laugh at us?

I hope most agree with me those are much more serious things to think about than "shot in the head" vs "kick in the balls".

Also, despite some thinking that Clinton was unpalatable, I say I've heard that lots of dishes are an acquired taste. But Trump is a metric ton of manure, and I've never heard anyone claim they like or even tolerate eating manure.

Peace,
   -- Paulo.

Profile

bex77: (Default)
bex77

September 2017

S M T W T F S
     12
345678 9
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 21st, 2017 07:21 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios