if you were a dog, you'd realize that pineapples have a very strong piney odour that could be easily mistaken for another dog. see, it's a weird dog though: spiky hair, stationary. and on the counter. da fuck?

dogs operate almost entirely on smell, and they can pick up things with their noses that you can only contemplate in the abstract. it's not reacting to the way it looks...

but, put your face up against a fresh, unpeeled pineapple the next time you get a chance. you'll only get a fraction of what a dog will get. but it's enough to demonstrate the point. it has a very territorial smell.

i mean, if you have a better idea i'd like to hear it, but just keep in mind that it's going to be smell-related rather than sight-related. i think we all know this, but i think we easily forget it - because we're so vision-centric, ourselves.

you'll notice that when she puts the pineapple down, the dog smells it from a distance and instantly reacts. that's what's going on...

now, it doesn't have to think it's a dog, exactly, to get that kind of confused reaction. i'm sure the chemical reaction happening in the dog's brain is fairly specific in it's "that's a dog" reaction. i don't know if the glandy smells coming off a pineapple are chemically close enough to trick the dog's brain in that respect (and if it's just a few bonds off, that confusion is entirely plausible - it's about the geometry of the molecules sticking together). but, given that pineapples have such a territorial almost urine-like smell, i'm fairly convinced that it's interpreting it as some kind of living thing, and is just unaware as to how it should react.

put another way, i think the idea that this is a territorial reaction is correct. that pineapple's territorial smell is invading it's turf.

stripping that provision out of the bill would not protect taxpayers. rather, they'd lose their savings when the banks collapse again. the problem is much deeper than opposing bailouts, which are unfortunately required to protect taxpayers against irresponsible banks.

fighting the symptom, not the problem. typical democrat...

deathtokoalas
simply breaking them up isn't much of an answer, either. it didn't work then, and it's not going to work now.

there needs to be stronger regulations on what banks are allowed to do, not an increase in the number of ceos in the cartel.

to put it another way, what warren is saying is that the solution to unregulated capitalism is the enforcement of liberal market theory. and this is somehow being understood as "left wing"?

from a class war perspective, this is rather intriguing.

so, years ago people started drawing connections between violent behaviour and violent messaging. so, studies were done and the conclusions come to were largely that the violence in these kinds of games act as an outlet for rage at a system that treats us as worthless commodities. that is, the evidence seems to suggest that video games do more to prevent violence than they do to create it, thereby creating a pliable and subservient population that takes out it's anguish on a screen rather than on the system that produced the anguish. it's kind of marxist, really. video games are a sort of opiate of the masses...

now, if you extrapolate that to something like this, you can construct a kind of sedative out of it.

so, are you done clinging to the one aspect of your humanity that you have left? good. get back to fucking work...