I cannot fall asleep for the night unless I am lying on my stomach. But I can nap on the couch on my side or on my back, usually with journal article nearby.
I haven't noticed a dream difference.
I've never noticed any difference either.
I notice the first comment to the linked post consists of the author of this post telling -gg-d that nobody else shares the peculiarity he's writing about.
And apparently, given the chorus of people with similar experiences, talking out of her ass.
Well, clearly -gg-d and all those other people were just playing an elaborate prank.
Wait for it...
A possible reason for different impressions is whether we readily remember dreams. I usually don't; I think I need to be awakened or disturbed to do so.
I had a dream last night that I went to some event on Liberty Island (except the Statue of Liberty was gone) and it started to flood and the eight of us who were there only had one kitchen sink between us to use as a boat and the only way to power it was a fan but (obviously because of the flooding) there was nowhere to plug it in and we kept waiving at people to come and save us but they didn't understand why we needed saving because they saw ships around us but those were only optical illusions and then I woke up.
I was on my right side at the time.
(I just now remembered this.)
Hey ennybuddy read Be||e W4r/ng's dream on her blog (the one that has her name in its title)? It is a memorable one. B-Wo and I have contributed to its interpretation.
Maybe they were confused because you were waiving at them.
Cheap shots are encouraged here, aren't they?
Oh my god, I just remembered that I had a dream a couple of nights ago about having sex with some hideous right-wing blogger I've never met. Oh, and I just remembered who it was. Oh ick.
(trying to picture the progeny of such a union)
this is one of those "wow, i'm not alone!" moments.
i fall asleep more easily on my right side than left, my stomach sometimes, rarely on my back. but when i fall asleep on my back, i often have much more vivid dreams. maybe there's a larium leak in my ceiling.
also, when i fall asleep on my stomach, i almost always wake up w/ my arms having fallen asleep. that sucks.
Weird, I had a dream last night that I met ogged and baa, and they gave me a ride home. From, like, my high school.
I do not recall on which side I was sleeping.
I met ogged and baa
I'm not sure how you knew it was the two of us, and not one of us and a twin, since we're nearly indistinguishable in real life.
A possible reason for different impressions is whether we readily remember dreams.
I usually need to be extremely well-rested before I can remember my dreams, unless they're nightmares.
14: Don't worry about it. We all have fantasies about baa. See #10.
BTW as regards the 3x4m/n3d L/f3 post I reference in 8 -- has anyone here heard this piece of folk wisdom: "If a woman feeds her husband roasted owl, he will become subservient to her every wish." It's all over the interwebs but with no source information.
16 -- you will leave me to my own twisted imaginings, then.
I was sleeping on my back the other night and had a dream that was the entire plot to a fantasy novel and I woke up convinced that it was the next H4rry P0tt3r phenomenon- I actually bothered to write down every thing I could remember (it did steal one plot device from that series.) It was a kind of murder mystery, but unfortunately I couldn't remember the twist that allowed the mystery to be solved.
sex with some hideous right-wing blogger I've never met
I don't care who it is because these people are just names to me, but for this dream you must have an idea of what he looks like. Is this from a picture or — more interesting to me — did you imagine what he looks like?
Seriously, Jackmormon, who has bigger breasts, you or Hugh Hewitt?
Weird, I had a dream last night that I met ogged and baa, and they gave me a ride home.
I thought Ogged drew the line at double penetration.
Reckon JM would not be SdB's type; and probably a little old for D3rbysh/r3...
I also find that what I ate for dinner has a much larger effect than how I'm sleeping.
13- I've had extreme cases of arms falling asleep, not just "tingly" but to the point where I have to pick up my arm and move it like a piece of wood- it feels like I'm moving some else's arm. I could stick a pin into my hand and totally not feel it.
How can you tell what position you're in? THat's the part I find weird.
23--How could I win against a disembodied huge tit?
I very rarely remember dreams, but have exactly Cala's positional tendencies in comment #1.
15: Well, one of you was wearing a sombrero.
31 -- are you sure it wasn't Chopper?
I only sleep on my stomach (facing right first but turning left before I fall asleep). Unless I'm sharing a bed, in which case I only fall asleep on my back, if I sleep at all.
You can't sleep if another person is next to you?
You can't sleep if another person is next to you?
Cala, you poor innocent, he means that Saiselgy pokes him all night.
I refer you to Standpipe's joke-explaining blog.
Ah, the good old days, when Ogged was at the height of his comedic powers:
Surely I'm not the only one who's like this.
Butcha are, Blanche, butcha are.
Don't worry, Cala, you'll understand when you get to college.
And 12.
Yes, I am trying to picture the progeny of such a union myself.
They would have their father's haircut and their mother's hair, which would result in a lot of awesomely shaped afros.
I'm glad to know I'm not the only person who has an unusual experience when laying on my stomach and facing left. Once I woke up in the middle of the night and I was facing left. (It was the Sunday after Thanksgiving, 2001 -- it was a memorable night.) I felt an evil presence on top of me. So I tried telling it to get out. That didn't work because I was so scared I couldn't talk. I tried thinking happy thoughts. That hardly made a dent in the evil. Then I prayed pretty hard. Whatever that experience was, it finally ended (or left). I slept with the light on for a few nights after that. Now I can't fall asleep facing left. I get freaked out.
I felt an evil presence on top of me. So I tried telling it to get out.
Who wants to field this one?
Urgent query: Is "If you say so..." a buscuit conditional?
No, isn't the implicit statement "If you say so, I'll (believe you/assume it's true)"? In which case it's a straightforward conditional about belief. But I always get tangled up in these, so don't trust me.
No, it's not a biscuit conditional unless it's presented that the truth of the consequent ('there are biscuits in the kitchen') is dependent on the truth of the antecedent ('if you want some'), but in reality there isn't any dependency between the two.
Or basically, any time you can give a smartass answer like 'And if I don't want any cookies, they'll disappear into thin air?'
Joseph I. Lieberman 64,700 47.9%
Ned Lamont 70,444 52.1%
50% of Precincts Reporting
w00t!
Lamont's lead has been shrinking as results come in, and the big pro-Lieberman distrincts are supposed to be coming in late in the evening. I think we may well be fucked.
Someone tell me a happy story, about cows and robots and sprightly leprechauns.
It was going to be closer than the polls indicated. Hang in there, 26% to go!
But either way I think Lieberman will be running November.
51: Lamont's about three and a half points up with 74 percent reporting. But those precincts you mentioned -- Give me specifics, man! And maybe then I'll give you leprechauns. And unicorns.
54: I don't know enough about CT politics to know why this is believed to be so, but it's assumed that the major urban centers will be the most pro-Lieberman, and they apparently take the longest time to report back.
Still a 3.5 point lead with 80% in.
But either way I think Lieberman will be running November.
Maybe. I think the party might lean on him, hard. They should.
Is that 80% by number of precincts or number of voters?
I'll believe Joe's finished when they stake him in the chest and stuff his head full of garlic.
And shoot him with a silver bullet? He's a garden gnome, not a zombie.
Can we at least unleash the hounds?
In the other big race, it looks like Cynthia McKinney will soon be out of a job.
Goddammit. If she was going to lose, she should have knocked the officer out cold.
A big pro-Joe precinct just came in, Lamont was up 8800, now only 7900. That was just from adding two new precincts.
But 35 more just came in and Lamont is back to +8600- Joe's running out of time, only 46 left.
It looks like Lamont is up at the moment.
Okay, I'm closer to thinking there's a possibility of a chance we won't lose.
*cough*cough*tectonicplates*cough*cough*
73: Lamont's been up the whole time, but his lead has narrowed considerably.
76: Ohmigod! SISMI totally took down the Lieberman site!
I knew it was them! Even when it was the bloggers, I knew it was them.
76: Sandy Berger stuffed it down his socks! Fortunately, apo has the whole Internet in his pocket.
Kos says his site is getting hit with 2000 users per minute.
zidane y va marquer, zidane y va marquer!
My cock has been hit by 2000 users a minute.
Lamont just widened his lead further- 713/748 reporting, Lamont +10270. Unless those last 35 are big precincts and very pro-Lieberman, it might be over. (If precinct tracked with # of votes, it would be mathematically almost certain- there would only be 12000 votes left- but some city precincts are very large.)
Kos says his site is getting hit with 2000 users per minute.
This is laying the foundation for some future troll to say "whenever I go to a liberal blog, I read their August 8 coverage and laugh..."
I'm listening to his ghoulish non-concession concession speech now, and it occurs to me that this is the first time in years I've actually heard Joe Lieberman give a sustained speech, and the only thing I can think of listening to his voice is this man is a complete and utter tool.
apo, that pwned. ('Isn't that a Narnia character?')
Totally worth your time to go through the Red State Update archives. That one was just mediocre. The bird flu episode is one of the greatest things ever.
Don't forget to call you congresspeople and tell them to back Ned Lamont! (If you want to go the extra mile, call Harry Reid and Bill Clinton.)
[This message brought to you the brainwashed Kossian hoards.]
Democrats are still terribly gunshy. Lamont was 3.8% up with 95.5% of the vote counted, and Lieberman would have to have won more than 80% of the remaining votes to win, and even then no one was gloating, or even claiming victory.
Even with only 90% of the votes counted, 3.8% would have been an almost-unbeatable lead, unless the remaining 10% had all been from fanatical Lieberman territory.
Could Lieberman be any more of a tool?
I am disappointed not just because I lost, but because the old politics of partisan polarization won today. For the sake of our state, our country and my party, I cannot and will not let that result stand.
I expect that my opponent will continue to do in the general election what he has done in the primary … partisan polarizing instead of talking about how we can solve people's problems, insults instead of ideas. In other words, more of the same old partisan politics that has assailed Washington today.
This is the language you use against a Republican, not another Democrat. Grr. Shut up, Joe.
The thing is, we want partisan polarization. It's an election year and we're trying to win. If Lieberman ever behaved like a man who was interested in beating his ideological opponents instead of turning the legislative process into a grand tea party with the defenders of torture, he might have ended up in this position.
Is there a way to get the Democrats to say, essentially, "Joe, if you run as an Independent and manage to win, we will not let you caucus with us. You will never chair a commitee?"
Write Reid and demand full support behind Lamont?
You know what I want from a campaign website? I donation form with a space for "This is why I'm giving you this money now. Do this kind of thing more often, and I'll give you more."
Never mind, Reid's pretty much already there. With this kind of statement, this fast, Leiberman can't possibly stay in the race.
Seeing as Holy Joe has no career to return to, we are never going to get rid of that fucker, even if he loses hard. Fox News will hire him as a professional Democratic martyr; he'll get his own show.