Tickle My Pickle For A Nickel Song

[Kipa Crawn]

DillPickle RapEpisode"The Brain"Season6Length0:30Sung byCheckout clerkSinging voiceMaxwell CazierGenreRap"Dill Pickle Rap" is a song from "The Brain." It is sung by a checkout clerk when Nicole tries to buy a jar of pickles.

OK, so I had a few people ask what "cut the pickle tickle tickle" is, so here it is and I encourage all of you to do it to all the little ones who you love!!! Ok, so you take your two index fingers and put them together (like your pointing, only do with both fingers pointing at each other and have them touch in the middle) Tell the child to "cut the pickle" and they take their hand and "cut" your two fingers apart. When they do, tickle the living heck out of them!!! Have them do it to if they want and then they can tickle you when you break their "pickle". With the little little kids you'll have to pretend their actually tickling you but its hilarious how much they laugh at that too. It can last forever, kids just love to be tickled!!!

Here's a twist for everyone. In Mexico, two index fingers, from opposite sex- this being girlfriend and boyfriend. Same as the pickle thing. But in Mexico, someone will end the relationship by breaking the bond between the 2 index fingers.By cutting inbetween the fingers with a karate chop. This indicates an end to the relationship.

In her conversation with Bill Moyers on the JOURNAL this week, media expert Kathleen Hall Jamieson suggested that politicians' campaign ads and other media appearances are akin to puzzle pieces that together form a larger, albeit ambiguous, narrative of the candidates' lives, characters, and campaigns:

"We elect a person, not a set of issues... The strength of an underlying biographical narrative is extraordinarily important. You can't underestimate its importance when you're attacked, as every candidate will be, with a counter story... One of the things that advertising is able to do is to make some things more important in your decision about who should be president. And so ads are always a contest about what is important as an issue and what is important as an attribute about the candidate... There's an element of emotion in all of this... And we shouldn't lose track of the fact that advertising doesn't exist in isolation. People are drawing material from news, from what they are talking with their friends about, from the front pages into advertising to create a composite message"

Do you agree that Americans vote for candidates as people rather than for their "set of issues?"

Can sound bites and 30-second ads sufficiently inform citizens about the issues, the candidates, and/or the policy differences between them? If so, has this happened so far in the race to November?

How would you like to see candidates and issue groups use the media to elevate political discourse?

Politics in America, do we choose our candidates on the issues or on their personalities as we perceive them in 30 sec. ads and sound bites? Well, the problem, I believe, is the fear of offending anyone. Our politicians have been conditioned by attack campaigns to be as oblique as they can. Don't get into specifics because some interest group will pay to tear your POV apart. There's the rub, we are being held ransom by money for access politics in America. 'He who has the money makes the rules', is not just a clever quip, it is our political system. In any other country on Earth they would recognize it as corruption writ large!

Unfortunately Lauren, actions speak louder than words.

1.The last two Presidential elections were probably rigged.

2.The false flag conspiracy of 9/11 led us into holy war.

3.Our imploding economy was no accident, but inevitable considering the hollowing out of self-sufficiency and infrastructure in our "Homeland."

4.New Orleans is a preview and a test of what is in store for everyday people without the connections to print their own ticket.

5.All this in conjunction with erosion of Constitutional rights and protections means the next President will be a spokesmodel (and not the usual game show host to which we've become accustomed)>

If our long shot resistance is successful, as in 1789 France, we must implement safeguards to prevent an elite from ever undermining the people again. So quit your phenomenological blubbering Lauren, and find concrete means of resistance. Obama ain't yo'

mama, McCain means pain, and Hillary leads debtors to the pillory.

The Republicans are extremely manipulative with their tactics - that is why the first gulf war was called "Operation Desert Storm," why the Iraq War was called "Operation Iraqi Freedom," - those don't sound like all the ugliness of war, do they? Other examples: "Shock and Awe," when you are bombing people, or "The Healthy Forests Initiative," when you are cutting down forests primarily for profit only. No... but they do the opposite to their opponents. Republicans strategists tend to attribute themselves excessive positives and their opponents excessive negatives - demonize them - "The Axis of Evil," "The Clintons will do anything to win."

I think John McCain himself has more integrity, and is of a different ilk than some of the others - the worst ones especially - perhaps even because of his own torture experiences. But for the greater good - Democrats need to see these highly manipulative strategies and tactics for what they are now - because too much harm has been done.

I have heard Republican strategists say that they are not afraid to be "mean," "that's why we're Republicans." I have heard them say they will "eviscerate" (= disembowel) the Democratic nominee no matter who it is. Well, they have been trying to eviscerate the Clintons for years and some damage has been done(that is partly why Hillary is not thought of more positively.) But what is going on now?

The truth is that Hillary and Barack will not be able to hurt each other more than the Republicans would try to - the Republicans do reach into the "dark side" of manipulation and tactics to use whatever means necessary to try and win. Look at what much of Bush's administration did - the so called "compassionate conservative" brought us a brazen, reckless war, Guantanamo, torture techniques. They went to the "dark side" until it unfolded on them with such massive destruction that they could not hide nor control it anymore.

You see it is a strategy the Republicans like to use against the Clintons: "The Clintons will do anything to win." When it's actually the Republicans who will do anything to win, and this is just a strategy against the Clintons that seeks to deceive and cloak the actual reality, and work against the opponent (in this case the Clintons) at the same time. It's like the Republican campaign strategy version of 'weapons of mass destruction.' You say that your 'opponent' 'has them' - they say the 'Clintons' 'have them.' But the Obama campaign co-opted this purposefully from the beginning saying Hillary "will say anything" to win. Same overall strategy/tactic - same phrasing - slightly different action verb.

"Obviously, she's trying to change the subject. She's behind in the math. She's trying to tell the American people what they want to hear. Everyone knows she'll say anything to win... And she's not even above bringing Easter into the equation... that's how low the Clintons will go..." So that Hillary saying "Happy Easter," would take on a diabolical strategy position. Sound too familiar? That's because it is - it's quite ridiculous. It's like you frame your opponent with blame.

Are we as a nation on the verge of a radical new political transformation that could nullify distinctions of race and gender in the political arena in what some have called a post-racial America? Or is Obama mania an aberration, a black swan?

Could there be another several thousand votes for Obama in the 15th Congressional District and in other under-counted districts, where the official vote has not been publicly reported? The primary results in New York City are only official when certified by the State and County Board of Elections and thus far there has been no disclosure of the official tabulation from some districts. Such delays do not bode well in the interest of free and democratic elections. The public has a right to transparency and to know how New Yorkers voted in the primary. To ensure urgent full disclosure of the vote count, our elected officials ought to be leading the charge demanding that the Board of Election conduct a recount in the interest of free and fair and elections.

The suggestion here is that most people get decision making information from pop culture sources centered in television. Many Moyer's viewers also read books and long, involved articles. That is the best advocacy Bill Moyers does,"Read this informed person's research presentation and decide for yourself." Books can be expensive and time consuming though.

We have a diversity of informed and capable people here on the blog who could carefully compose book reports or critiques with informative summaries in word processing and then import them to the blog for informational purposes. This would serve a similar purpose to links but is more rational, scholarly and thoughtful. I'd like to see competing reviews for all relevant works mentioned for the President's reading from this special community.

I believe it would serve a much higher purpose than rehashing TV. Producers and Moderators: Please provide a heading for this purpose with guidelines. I have 3 reviews ready to submit for audience critique. Let's uplift not plow under.

The issues serve as the "elimination round" or first screen, though. Once you have candidates whom you support based on their stance on your issues, then, yes, it becomes a more personal matter. You listen and watch: character, whom do you trust more? Which candidate's perspective or vision feels more authentic, more capable? And how's the candidate conducting her or his campaign? Is a candidate using negative ads? Reading a report that a candidate's campaign is staying in only the most expensive hotels, a recent example, is a negative with me.

3a8082e126