d_rawk

A point that only seems sensible if Gurr was of the belief that the Liberals would be more accepting, which is an opinion that he doesn't seem to hold, unless I am misreading The general position makes a lot of sense if you are of the persuasion that Liberal better than NDP better than Conservative. To bring it full circle back to the 'arrogance' of the title, not everyone is of that persuasion. I get that Hux is, so I understand entirely why the article resonates with him. For me, it is all discord. I don't want to continually rehash old debates, but the groundwork for creating a political arena in which ideas and intentions could co-exist co-operatively was lobbed into the Liberal court many times and they ate the fucking ball. To bitch and moan about the fact that the result of that isn't working in their favour now that they have lost their God-given right to govern as the "Natural Governing Party" exceeds, IMO, whatever hypocrisy and arrogance Layton may possess (and that's saying a lot, because I do agree in general that he has both characteristics). Let them eat cake.

Call me silly, but isn't that his job? The premise feels wonky - Layton is a member of the NDP because he feels that the 'NDP position' *is* for the best of country (we may freely disagree with whether it is or is not, but that's his view). So isn't he, contrary to Gurr's assertions, actually acting in 'the best interest of the country' to the best of his capacity to work with whichever other party (or parties) are most 'flexible' in 'accepting the NDP position'? What I hear is: waah, the NDP aren't acting like big-L Liberals.

via videosift.com

I love the suggestion for umeboshi vinegar .. yum. I usually do them pretty straight up - boiled or steamed and slathered in butter, salt and pepper. The best part of the beet is the beet greens, IMO. Double yum.

You are exactly as I remember you, but very sunny for a September. Never change.

Bigtime thanks, Tungsten.

I haven't a clue what you are on about, but I will vouch for this nonetheless. I trust any man who quotes himself in his signature to be telling the truth about all things.

Hmmm. Hard to decide. Also gold? I kind of liked the chicken nuggets bit, but the rest of it was just bat-shit crazy. Welcome back Kung. (And yeah, Dima is as likely as not Jewish. Oh my God the horror!)

Gold.

YT - I spent a little while considering this. In a certain way I think it is about all experiences being relative, and communication not being communication if it isn't received + understood + effective. Moving on sometimes necessitates taking others by the hand and leading them gently into where you have moved to. Worth pausing here to consider that nobody willingly moves into a place that doesn't feel safe. When in doubt, I defer to empathy. If I was that person, where they are, with their experiences to date, how might I interpret this [shout out the window, bucket of water, whatever]? If it seems like what I am trying to communicate, it is a go. If not .. it's not. Often I find that what (me) I meant is not what (shifting my identity into the other) I understood from the action. (on that note, remind me sometime to tell you the story of d_rawk vs. the carpet cleaners .. a perfect example of forgetting to understand people where they are) At the risk of sounding flaky or vapid - choice is a function of awareness and the latter, then in turn the former, is equally happy to use as its fuel either the recognition of the validity of the experience of the other or the denial of it. Both take the same amount of effort, really, which isn't much effort at all. Being bigger than a problem entails containing the problem within that bigness. It is important to access those places where it exists if you are going to do any meaningful work on it. You don't get to just dismiss it - if you doubt that, consider the very existence of this thread. The problem is tracking you. Hurt demands resolution. Other people *are* stuck here because it is their everyday experience. As compassionate people, I think we ought to diffuse that, even if that means the inconvenience of doing a mental audit about how our words or actions may feed into (or out of) that experience. Not because we should but because we can. What terrifying power we have to shape all of this. This is where you say "That's what I am doing - acting past it, those words mean nothing" and you would be right .. if it was you talking to you, or if the world was composed of yous (<-- that is my unfortunate attempt at making 'you' plural). The sticky bit [pun again] is that you aren't, and it isn't, and instead you are bumping up against all sorts of people coming from all sorts of frames of reference. And that won't change. (As another aside, I have decided that this is a world safe and comfortable for homosexuals. It will be so. And when it is, I will tease them about their faggyness )

The only real conspiracy is that the universe conspires to bring me many nice things. I learned a valuable lesson through Timmy's that year, too. I'd waited too long to redeem my prize and was absolutely convinced that they would gleefully use the cut-off date as an excuse to not pay out. Convinced by others to just give it a shot, I submitted my claim. And, to their credit, they gave me the goods. Lesson: Just try. You are over-thinking this. What have you got to lose? Pretty much any point of any day, I can stop myself and ask "Are you over-thinking this? What might happen if you just tried?"

IIRC, you are in town on Wednesdays. You are welcome to come by and use mine. It just sits there looking cool and collecting dust. It would probably be happy for the attention. I'd offer to loan it out to you, but I'm cautious of the gas tubes breaking if moved around too much.

Just skimming this now .. what a pickle Tim Horton's must have found itself in, given their large consumer base back in Canada. I think Canned Beats is wanting to be able to say 'faggot' to those mythical drunk people beneath his window in the way he might want to say 'bitch' to drunk loud women beneath his window or 'assholes' to drunk whomever beneath his window. I kinda get it. He doesn't actually have a problem with gay people, so it is an off-the-cuff expression of anger that is personalized but would be personalized a different way if it were a different group of people. ie., in that situation he's not mad that they're queer, he's just mad, and wants to drive the point home. The sticky bit [pun] is that most people aren't up to YT's speed. This is why "fuck you nigger" from a black man to a black man isn't the same as "fuck you nigger" from a white man to a black man. Ideally it would be, particularly when all the power had been sapped from those words. And it can be really tempting to recognize that you don't have racial/gender/orientation hatred towards the other person so the word is harmless and just like any other expression of dissatisfaction until you consider that *if* that is the case, you are in the small minority and the recipient of the slur has no way of knowing just how 'enlightened' you are. And even if you are really pissed off at someone for being noisy and drunk, it's worth taking that sort of thing into consideration. The problem with yelling 'shut up you stupid faggots' and dumping water on them (despite the fact that there is probably a problem with dumping water on anybody, because it is violence) is that for a persecuted group it is as likely as not to be understood to them that your act of violence is occuring because of their faggotness rather than because of their behaviour. Perfect world, there would be no place for such misunderstanding. Not a perfect world where that group is exposed to all sorts of heinous discrimination and brutality because of their faggotness - your being above all that does not get communicated through the bucket of water. And even if you are really, really mad at them, there's no point stretching out all of that. Best thing: scream "Shut the fuck up, some people have to work in the morning" and leave it at that. Give it a few more years and maybe there will be less latent ever-present hatred generally for them to interpret through your words specifically (and from there out into your actions). Remember: you want them to understand that you are angry because of their discourtesy, not because of who they are as people.

This thread is already well hijacked - Bouche did a good thing by warning people about the recall of PC brand sick meat. It could have ended right there, but it also conveniently made some space for discussion about heath-compromising food in general. To bring it back around: Maple Leaf, PC, and the next one and the next one and the next one. This won't stop anytime soon. How could it? Rotten processes demand rotten results. To maintain the hijack: tofu is just as bad, it will just damage you more slowly than a stomach full of virulent mutant E. Coli. I'm freakin' glad you got so on top of this! I guess most people don't really have to worry about it until they have crisis, so they don't worry about it until after the fact. And I can relate - I mean, I still smoke cigarettes, which I know cognitively are really freaking terrible for me. But hey, I'm just trying to get through the day and the consequences are off there somewhere in the ethereal future. For most people, food must be like that. The consequences are off there somewhere in some remote place. For you and I, the consequences are right here right now.

Do you mean visually? Could it be about the theme? If you look at the bottom of Blane's site there is actually a link to the theme that he uses if you actually wanted "exactly" what he has going on. Or just google 'wordpress themes' It's just like skinning a cat. Wait, no, that can't be right. It's just like dressing up dolls. Oh shit, I'm so getting beat up at recess.

I humbly withdraw my objections about the 'creative bullshit that guys come up with'. That is fantastic.

Three girls standing behind me and chatting. One of them comes up and says "We were discussing it, and we all decided that you have a great ass." An obvious lie, because I have a very skinny non-existant ass. I've always wondered if the same line would work if I turned it around on a girl. You like my face, not my butt. Let's be honest with each other. Most of the time I find girls just say "come dance with me", which is cool and totally better than the creative bullshit that guys try to come up with. There's something magic about dancing. RE: "I'd like to rape you in the dark". Umm. Shit. Whoa. I'd probably bail, but I guess it would depend on how many drinks I'd had.

Oh man, your Braggs amino acid trick was exactly what my beer trick used to be (you've seen me perform it) before I recognized my gluten-intolerance. Treating the symptoms with the thing that caused it, dealing with it the next day, starting all over again. Haha. I laugh not because I'm insensitive to what you went through, but because it is so familiar it has to be funny or it will sting too much. Also glad that you are already well educated on the evils of unfermented soy.

Oh God man! Knowing what I do about your personal crisis, I hope to fuck you are off the goitrogens. I could eat spinach all day, and I feel pretty good on it. I can get away with a little bit of soy. But if I saw you putting either anywhere even close to your mouth, I'd freaking tackle you. Not dismissing the rest, just still digesting it (ugh, that wasn't an intentional pun)

That was really well put, too. Man, this thread is really bringing out the best of people. Seriously. (Crap, I wrote that before you made your second post about conspiracy theories. I can't even get started on this ..) Sally can definitely come off like that - it's important to know that she is all in favour of eating vegetation. She harps on meat because she is trying to counter a particular nutritional idea that has gained a lot of currency and doesn't get much blowback. She's blowing back, because someone has got to, but it can make it seem like she is suggesting eating meat and nothing but meat. This is far from the truth, and her personal diet is far from meat based alone. Check her out on the subject of vegetables - she is just as opinionated about the need for these and brimming with ideas about how to prepare them for optimal nutrition. She is how I learned to ferment and preserve vegetables. Sandor Katz helped, too. She calls Pollan out on the meat issue because Pollan is talking shit that doesn't add up. Fallon came by her views by the careful study of indigenous populations worldwide, their health, and their diets. Some of those indigenous populations were more vegetal than others, but she doesn't ignore the importance of dietary fats - most of them animal based. Get her rolling though, and she talks about coconuts way more than she talks about animal meat. I totally agree that she could make the point of the importance of plants and vegetation, but to her credit, she has done this extensively elsewhere. In that letter, I think she figured Pollan had already been making that point, but was discounting the rest of reality based on not having really looked into it and just accepting the 'wisdom' handed him. No need to convince someone of something that they are already convinced of, and Pollan is aready well on side about eating plants. As a public letter, yeah, it could use some expansion to make that clear. But it was a letter to Pollan only circumstantially made public. I can't comment on 'vibrational level', but FWIW, I find that I do *terrible* on a diet with no animal flesh, I do not so well on a diet of just animal flesh, I do pretty darn well on a diet of a lot of vegetables, very very little fruit, and a little bit of meat. Other people seem to need other ratios. (And yeah, I'm cognizant of the irony that this is what Pollan recommended: "Eat Food. Not too much. Mostly plants". And I don't doubt at all that such a diet probably works very well for him, too. But it can't empirically be extended to all of humanity based on a sample of two. There are people who thrive as frugivores, eating only fruit. There are people who thrive on only muscle and organ meats and dairy. There are people who thrive on only raw veggies and seeds. There are just as many people who would get very unwell on any of those diets but do quite well on another.) A bun or a slice of bread will make me violently sick for a week, yet meggo and other people I know could happily live off of nothing but toast. Go figure. What a wonderful world.

Well put timouse! Has anyone seen Food Inc. yet? It is coming to the Bytowne in August. Given the buzz, I suspect that movie is going to mobilize a lot of people. I'm a little bit afraid based on the clips I have seen that it is going to be full of Michael Pollan-isms (ie. good intentions without substance - see the standing open letter An Open Letter to Michael Pollan) but it should at least get the conversation out of the jambands.ca type sphere and onto the tables of the world. Just wathched "From Food to Pharm" (nothing to write home about) and am now starting "Fathead" for a written review. I saw from the trailer that it has Mary Enig in it - who I happen to think is the best thing since wrestling and is the woman who sounded the alarm about trans fats back in the day but had to fight and fight and fight for anyone to take it seriously. It seems good in that it at least takes major shots at the fallacies of dietary cholesterol and saturated fats being harmful, but I have reservations about some of the other messaging. I guess I'll probably have more to say after I've seen it a couple of times and had a chance to think it through. The bonus material rules, though. I'll put a clip below from a bonus interview with Sally Fallon of the Weston A. Price Foundation - the woman I wish I could marry.

The easiest would be to go to blogger.com, wordpress.com or any of the other hosted solutions and get started. You can't really go wrong with any of them and they are all geared towards making things easy on ya. It's as easy as posting on jambands. Look forward to reading it!