I would be interested to see how quickly the numbers may have changed over the summer, with the more recent deaths, the shooting in Dallas, the riots, etc. A lot has happened for the movement since February when they began collecting data.

Looks like there's a new conference coming up shortly. 5 dead (4 women, 1 man). It seems he ran in, shot, and got out right away before the police arrived. There are reports that he shouted a woman's name as he started firing and was aiming at the women, but pretty much everything in unconfirmed at this point. What a nightmare. :(

Oh, I'm so sorry, I can't imagine what this week must have felt like for you and your family. I'll pray for him (and all of you)!

Washington is Pacific time. It's before 9pm there.

Literally every online quiz I'd taken, along with the old Pottermore Sorting Hat, put me in Ravenclaw. New Pottermore tells me I'm a Hufflepuff. Um... there's nothing wrong with Hufflepuffs (My Dh and middle son are Hufflepuffs to the core and I'm rather partial to them ;) ), but I am very much NOT a Hufflepuff. I feel like I want to create another account and get a Patronus & House redo, lol.

Apparently I'm a shrew. DH laughed a little too hard at that. In my mind, my Patronus is an owl and I'm just gonna stick with that. (Kind of like how I'm sticking with the original Pottermore's Sorting results, lol)

I hope this doesn't come across as confrontational, because I don't mean it that way. I'm curious how you did take it/what you thought he meant if not that? I'm not sure how else to take it. Just checked his twitter account and here's his official statement. What is taking place in my hometown right now breaks my heart. My anguish led me to respond to a reporter’s question in a way that I regret. The answer doesn’t reflect who I am. I was quoting statements made by angry protestors last night on national TV. My intent was to discuss the lack of economic mobility for African-Americans because of failed policies. I apologize to those I offended and hope we can bring peace and calm to Charlotte.

"I mean yes, it is, it is a welfare state. I mean, we have spent trillions of dollars on welfare. We put people in bondage so that they can't be all that they're capable of being. You know, America is a country of freedom and opportunity and liberty, and it didn't become that way because of a great government who provided everything for everyone, no! The destiny of America, the freedom to come to this country, uh, where they're still coming to our shores is because they can take their work ethic and their hard work and put up their capital and their risk and build up their lives." On my initial listening I misheard "their risk" as "to invest"; to my Canadian ears he's got a bit of an accent, lol. Nonetheless, the guy thinks they're upset because welfare is *stopping* them from working hard and "building up their lives".

I love how he gets in to how it's become a welfare state, and that people are frustrated because all those taxes going to pay for welfare for other people have made it impossible for them to invest effectively. Then in his "apology" tweets he says he meant THAT'S why BLM is rioting. Yep. I'm sure the protests and riots are happening because they're so angry about all those people on welfare raising their taxes so they can't invest as much as they'd like. #TotallyWhatThisIsAbout The attempt to spin this and somehow turn it in to a economic talking point about how those on welfare are mooching off others is SICKENING.

Unfortunately, truth be told I do know (at least) two Christians who don't believe that depression is an actual medical condition and instead is actually a symptom of some sin the person is refusing to deal with. Both of those people are men in their 30's-40's. One has a wife who suffers from PPD. One has a Sister-in-law. Both of them have done serious damage with their attitudes.

Frankly, I'm surprised it took this long. They're a couple that hooked up behind his wife's back on a film set. I thought it would be 5 years, max, before one of them was caught up in some tabloid scandal involving cheating with a co-star. As far as Jennifer Aniston not caring... I doubt it, and I don't think that's a bad thing. I mean, how many women on here have been brutally cheated on, made to feel at fault for their husband's affairs, drug through the mud in a messy divorce, etc? If their exes did the exact same thing to "the other woman" a few years down the road and, even if the woman has moved on to a new life with a new love, I would think it odd for them NOT to have some sort of emotional response to it all. I don't think that it would be "petty" or anything else for her to feel a wide range of emotions about this, including pity, relief, justice, sorrow, and pretty much anything a person could imagine. That being said, a quick "well, that doesn't come as a surprise" and a mental note that cheaters rarely change is about all I'd make of this, and I already wish it would drop out of the news.... but I'm sure we're in for MONTHS of listening to the press dissect any detail they can find, which makes me sad for the kids. Divorce is hard enough, and some of the kids are old enough to be exposed to the press on their own.

Ugh, I am so sorry. It is sickening to see people so blinded by an abuser, because you know that if the issue isn't properly dealt with it's just going to happen again. :( I hope the church listens to you!

Why on earth would not providing childcare guarantee that someone with children wouldn't attend? I trust myself to vet childcare for my children more than I trust someone else to do it for me. If I don't have any reliable sitters for my children, or anyone willing to keep them overnight, that's not the fault of the bride and groom. Why would I expect people who are just getting married and probably have no children to have better access to babysitters than me? If I got an invite to an adults-only wedding, it certainly would NOT guarantee I wouldn't attend. Quite the opposite, I'd do a happy dance, book a sitter, and enjoy some time where I didn't have to chase around my kids in an environment where the slightest misbehaviour would case even more trouble than normal. How is it completely unthinkable for someone to find a sitter for their own children, but apparently absolutely no trouble at all for a bride and groom (who are likely not in that stage of life) to find enough sitters to care for EVERYONE ELSE'S children?

You think it's not a huge deal to -find a book both a church and reception venue that has extra facilities large enough to host a large group of children and caregivers -find a number of caregivers you trust, but don't care enough about personally to have already invited to your wedding, to look after children of people you care about - convince a facility that while their normal purpose is hosting events, you're going to use it like a daycare and that if anything goes wrong, their insurance will TOTALLY cover it, of course -convince your caterers to either charge very little for lots of extra kids, or to be okay with a secondary party like a pizza place bringing food to an event to which they have contracted? -convince the parents to be okay with their children being cared for, for hours on end, by people they may never have met. And if a bride and groom DON't do all of that because a parent doesn't want to find their own sitter for the day, the bride and groom are the selfish ones who don't value others? Um, ok.

I genuinely had no idea! I always thought it was specifically a reference to kids sneaking around to have sex. Although I don't recall ever actually hearing someone use it in real life, lol, I'll have to keep that in mind if it comes up again. Back on-topic: do people feel like they saw MORE lawn signs during the primaries? I feel like there wasn't as big of a stigma attached to supporting Rubio or Sanders as to supporting Clinton or Trump.

I think it's the difference between art as escapism and art as reflection. Someone who watches a movie/reads a book/attends a play to get away from the harsh realities of life will want a tale with a happy ending. Someone who watches a movie/reads a book/attends a play and views it as social commentary or an interesting take on life will appreciate darkness and struggle throughout. Of course, how a culture views this sort of art (as an extravagance, as escapism, as a form of social dialogue, etc) will reflect how the public consumes such art, thus creating more demand for what they want, thus feeding whichever thought process got them there in the first place.

In front of DH, ask the littler kids for suggestions. Suddenly, anything you bring up with appear downright reasonable. (Not an actual recommendation.)

Any progress on this? I'll list some ideas but I get the feeling that your husband has literally entered "Danger is my middle name" territory which may mean there'll be no reasoning with him for a while. ;) Also, not weird at all that Lucy was the name of your favourite dog. Sometimes people give their dogs human names. A cute name is a cute name no matter who/what uses it! Suggestions, though many of these have been discussed already I think Ava, Eve, Eva seconding Emmaline (any spelling) shortened to Emmy or Emma if you want Also seconding Eleanor shortened to Ellie or Ella if you want Ruby Lily Grace Hazel Ruth Evelyn Louisa Madeline Lucy Olive Chloe Daisy

This is the reason I never have political signs as well. There are always crazies on either side, no need to paint a target on my home or vehicle for them. Off-topic: does hanky-panky mean something different there? Here it's basically a cutesy (well, that's debatable) way to say s3x. I mean, I would be worried about random acts of vandalism or violence, but I can't picture anyone thinking, "Gosh I HATE that candidate, my SO and I should totally go get it on in that front yard." Now I'm wondering if I've been getting the subtext TOTALLY WRONG on American TV shows for a long time if the term comes up, lol.

We call if the damage is serious. If not, we exchange info and offer to pay/let them pay out of pocket to avoid insurance hikes. (This from an insurance broker, lol.)

This is a favourite in our house, but that's mostly because we have a baby and toddler. The older kids love watching the baby and toddler antics in someone else's family, I think it makes them realize that their own brother & sister are actually kind of normal, lol. The toddler LOVES watching other kids her own age. If your kids like babies or just watching people do fun/silly things, they might enjoy this family. They're generally pretty positive and upbeat. is a pretty representative video of what you can expect.

One doesn't preclude the other, though. Hasn't he raised millions of dollars for charity? He can engage in both silent protest and active advocacy. Aside from which, opening up a national debate about the issue seems, at least in a democracy, to be quite an effective method for creating change. As the people think, so the people vote, as the people vote, so goes the nation. WRT those who say this is convenient timing and just for publicity so he can't be fired, I read somewhere today that he's actually been sitting through the anthem for quite a while. No one even noticed (let alone cared) until recently. he didn't even bring it up himself. An African-American reporter heard through social media about his recent involvement with BLM, paid a little more attention to him and noticed him sitting during the anthem, put 2 and 2 together, and asked Kaepernic about it directly in private. ETA: I found the link to the article I read earlier. It has a very obvious bias, but also has interesting info on how this became a story nonetheless.

I was just upset when this came back up again because it's two years old. TWO. YEARS. It felt like we had this thread last month! Is time speeding up or something?! Holy moly, someone slow this ride down.

I agree with his right to protest or not. I'm unsure how I feel about the issue itself (there's a problem, by to what degree is that the fault of the country?)... which is why I think his small, silent protest is a valuable thing. It's got people talking about an issue that needs to be addressed.

Normal-ish to me. My 5 year olds wouldn't generally have had a tantrum... but at 3 years old they would have, and once the 3 year old started, the 5 year old would have devolved into it as well, because when it comes to kids the lowest common denominator is the place to be! ;) That being said, while my kids at 5 might have been able to handle the "make a choice" part, it would totally have overwhelmed my 3 year olds when they were already upset and made it REALLY difficult to get them out of tantrum mode. I had a lot more success with "We are going to start here and then we'll move to the other playground later!" said in a cheerful voice, offering no options. Being able to explain what you want and make a choice while taking others needs/wants into account is certainly a valuable skill, but asking a tantruming 3 year old to develop it in the heat of the moment is probably setting you BOTH up to get frustrated.