*squawk squawk squawk

That's pretty much all I could make out

Not sure how to replace the embedded for unblocked but here it is for someone else to do:

Interesting, I wasn't revolted.

>> ^budzos:

You almost understood the video you submitted, congratulations. Did you watch it before writing that headline? People who've never heard a sound don't generally speak in perfectly clear voices with distinct accents.


I'm not sure you had to be quite so short with the sifter to make your point.

Tags for this video are hilarious.

Fuck the HOA, we had to fight them tooth and nail to paint our house a slightly different shade of brown. This goes waaaayyy beyond something petty like paint color choice.

OMG... I understood your post choggie.

>> ^choggie:
something about health care according to the tags....but he's a politician, so he's not saying anything important or true-
Health care in the U.S. involves a simple 3-step process.
Step 1. Outlaw fast-food advertising of all kinds.
Step 2. Legalize ALL drugs, scheduled, home-made, or otherwise.
Step 3. Teach the next 2 generations of children how not to eat poison disguised as, or impersonating food.
Then doctors can go about the business of mending broken bones, stitching skin, and not ass-raping the nation along with the pharmy and insurance gangsters.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
Gee - a poll written by the Daily Kos. I wonder how it will turn out...? (eyeroll)
Pure bunk. I've done survey design for over 13 years and the instrument is total garbage designed to elicit results oriented towards sensationalism. Results are worthless when you use such a worthless instrument. Well - worthless in the sense of actually being a realistic measurement of a population. I suppose Kos got what they wanted though - a bunch of bogus crap to fax to breathlessly waiting media puppets.
Oh - and equally stupid internet surfers.


You're quite silly.

>> ^JAPR:
I just feel that the line needs to be clearly defined, and as hilarious as this is, it's pretty clearly part of a pornographic film. If we say that this one can stay, where do we draw the line on what's porn and what's not?


I think that you're right about it obviously being part of a porn video but what I think you're wrong about is the perspective you're viewing the video from. First of all we've had parts of pornos on the sift -- you guys remember the snake video? Allow me to refresh your memory: http://www.videosift.com/video/Best-porn-intro-ever While there is actually no nudity in the video it is part of a porn. I'm sure there's more porns on the sift just because of comedic value, but the point is that the intention of the video changes once it's submitted to the sift. This is much like the concept of found art -- just because a certain object had a certain purpose at one point in its life doesn't mean that it cant be changed.

The second more obvious point is this: -people keep bringing up the fact that this might set up a new standard for whats allowed on the sift.- Really? this isn't the supreme court and we're not passing new legislation. This is video sift and we're a fairly small tight nit community- if in the future a video comes along that follows relatively the same guides as this one but it deemed more offensive we'll fucking ban it, that simple. Just because we find this one acceptable doesn't mean we lose our ability in determining if future similar videos are.

For the record, I didn't vote for the video because I didn't find it funny, not because I found it offensive.

Evolution of the MJ glove -- From glove to shammy.

Really? He's just a kid, this is ridiculous...

Screen Shot or it didn't happen.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
Both of them have a point. Thune is right. The TAXES on the health care bill being discussed in the Senate do kick in almost immediately - and there are many of ascpects of the plan that do NOT kick in for years (very curiously, not until right after the elections... Hmmmm...). So if voters think they are going to get 'free' or 'public' insurance any time soon then they are very much mistaken and that needs to be brought up. Franken has a point because some benefits do start up soon, and to talk like nothing happens for 4 years except the taxes is not accurate either. From my perspective, they're both doing the exact same thing by - ahem - choosing thier own facts. I give Franken no points here. He's got no moral high ground, and worse he is a far greater rhetorical hypocrite.
56% of the public doesn't want this crappy bill. The bill is against the spirit and letter of the prescribed powers of government. There are far better and cheaper solutions that are entirely private in nature. This bill deserves to die a flaming death for many substantive reasons. I whole-heartedly support any argument or initiative that buries this stinkburger forever by whatever means possible. The bill is not about providing health care. It is a top-down, government run wealth redistribution scheme. Boo - hiss.

This is almost too ironic.

Ryjkyj said:

"Well, we can't eat coral or use it as fuel, so I fail to see the problem."

.

Tim Allen... lol