@Stormsinger
beat me to it.
freud was a cunt.
his nephew was a cunt.
mass marketing=propaganda systems anyone?


see? a family of elitist privileged cunts.
and for anybody working in mass marketing?
kill yourselves.
you are satans little helpers and you need to end yourself.

Why it's a helper snake of course. Just on the way to the fridge to grab another beer.

Trying to do that while expecting not to get hurt is just naive. How was the last attempt the helpers fault?

Tags for this video have been changed from 'scrubs, nbc, zach braff, opera, helper' to 'scrubs, nbc, zach braff, opera, helper, dana gould' - edited by brycewi19

This isn't really a bug, but if any other users are running "lockdown-mode" Firefox like me (AdBlock Plus, Element Hiding Helper, NoScript, Cookie Monster, *and* RequestPolicy) and you don't see the comments section on any video pages, try allowing googleapis.com in both NoScript and RequestPolicy.

Old version of the page would load comments just fine with googleapis.com blocked in RequestPolicy, but it disappeared for me after the update until I made that change.

That combination of plugins for Firefox is a great way to have a whole lot of control over how much extra cruft a page can serve up to you, but I must admit it makes any first visit to a new site or domain a real bitch. Sometimes I just give up and fire up Chrome.

In reply to this comment by MilkmanDan:
Adblock Plus Element Hiding Helper

You have changed my life for the better.

Hmm, occasionally I am concerned that using Adblock Plus Element Hiding Helper to eliminate the entire YouTube comments area might prevent me from seeing some gems. But now I know that perhaps those top .0001%'ers will appear in more videos like this -- problem solved!

@Sagemind

A quibble or two aside, just about everything you said, I think, is spot on, but I don't agree with your conclusion that this isn't a useful project, or that video games aren't going to change. What you're missing is that just about every female that we're presented with across all media is from a narrow band of disempowering clichés. It's the "disempowering" part that's key. Yes, there are relatively few male archetypes in video games, but they're almost always valued for their strength, leadership, intelligence, wit, athleticism, skill, sense of humour, bravery, accomplishments, etc. -- in other words, all positive attributes, things most of us would openly encourage in our sons. Women, on the other hand, are almost always portrayed as eye candy, fuck toys, rewards to a man for saving the day, helpless victims, evil bitch nemeses (the only time a woman may commonly achieve self-determination without showing cleavage), selfless helpers of men, and so on, none of which are positive or even neutral models for our daughters.

Awareness of the types of characters we're presenting to children to identify with is important. To a lesser degree, it's also important for adults in terms of not reinforcing those stereotypes. I already consume video games with this kind of critical eye. I'd noticed how cool it was that the Portal games had a main character who's a woman, who's awesome, but who's never sexed up at all. I thought that showed some real balls (ahem) on the part of the developers. Skyrim too seems decent. It has a lot of female characters, and most of them are just whoever they are. None are sexy window dressing, a couple are flirty, and only one that I've come across is overly sexed-up, and then, only in the 1-900-voice-acting department, not her character or appearance.

That two major recent titles avoid female stereotypes is a huge thing, and I think a very positive thing. The more awareness there is of this, the better, IMO.

I think it's pronounced unobtainium.>> ^probie:

That's the first time I've ever seen a rig used as a "booster" or helper. What the hell are they hauling? UFO parts made of ununoctium?

That's the first time I've ever seen a rig used as a "booster" or helper. What the hell are they hauling? UFO parts made of ununoctium?

7 years ago, Bush was in the White House, and Republicans had the majority in the Senate and the House.

True, but not relevant to the Student loan thing. Sigh. I must - once again - step in and provide the actual facts for this issue.

The year is 2007. The Democrats control both the House of Representatives, and the Senate. This Democrat congress passed a law which implemented a phased decrease in student loan rates. Every year the percentage dropped from its ORIGINAL rate of 6.8%. So in reality, the 3.4% current rate has not even been "the rate" for a year. The law that the Democrat congress passed was written so that the rates would return to normal in 2012. For the record, Barak Obama was a Senator at the time of the vote, but did not attend the session to actually cast his vote because he was campaigning. The law as it is written was designed and passed by Democrats. Not the GOP. Also for the record, the CURRENT congress (GOP) passed a resolution to keep the 3.4% rate but the Democrats are threatening to veto it. Guess the 3.4% rate isn't THAT important to them...

As far as Obama on Fallon goes? Cool? Thrb. Only if you're a trained seal that has no intellectual capacity except to clap for your kippers. I watched the bit and the whole thing was awkward, stilted, and made all the participants look desperate rather than 'cool'. 'Cool' doesn't go out and try that hard to be cool. Cool is cool without having to slow jam. And Obama isn't cool. He's cold. If he wants to put on a clown nose, go on Fallon and do stupid human tricks in a desperate attempt to shore up his plummeting poll numbers in the youth vote then go ahead. He'd have done better to be less of a disaster for 3.5 years so he wouldn't have to play damage control today.

Parenthetically, this "College Bubble" has been coming for a long time. The value of a 4-year degree has been plummeting, while college costs have been going through the roof. Rather than redesign thier business model, colleges have - like the Post Office - desperately been trying to peddle student loans as a means of maintaining the status quo. Like the Housing Bubble, the Education Bubble cannot be sustained and is on the verge of popping. Let it blow now. Let the loan rates go back to where they were in the first place. Students should not be taking about loans to go to school anyway. I worked my way through undergrad school on part time jobs and living on Hamburger Helper for 5 years. I biked everywhere I went, and my only possessions were thrift store junk I picked up when I could afford it. When it wwas all over I graduated, got a job, and slowly worked my way up with hard work, diligence, and frugal living. That's how you get an education - and not just a 'college' education but a LIFE education. Who ever established the STUPID practice of telling students to borrow thier way through college? Yup. Democrats and Liberals.

No, no, this "non-Samaritan" attitude goes back centuries. It has nothing to do with modern notions of liability.

The Chinese culture is very different from Western culture. "Saving face" isn't a light topic there. Suicide to save the family's honor has been part of their culture, hasn't it? I'm not that well versed in the differences of the various Asian cultures.

Hari kiri is the Japanese equivalent, yeah? The most honorable way to die is to disembowel yourself with no assistance. Most chose to have a trusted relative or friend behead them so they died quickly -- after stabbing themselves in the gut. I learned all this from Hollywood movies and novels -- so maybe it is all a load of crap.

So I"m sticking with my plausible interpretation that it is POSSIBLE that this was orchestrated by the government. Maybe it was just the government taking advantage of a true kind impulse on the part of the taxi driver -- but they do control the media still, yeah?

Cynical. That's me!




In reply to this comment by longde:
damn, you are cynical!!! It's sad that some of the bad infrastructure in china make this story perfectly plausible.

I think this attitude has to do with the ease of liability being assigned to the helper. In this case, there is no way any reasonable person would think the cab driver was responsible for the girl's injury. As opposed to a driver stopping for an injured pedestrian.>> ^bareboards2:

Here's another topic missed by this video --
Remember when that little girl got ran over by a truck and everyone walked by? The only person who went to help was a very poor woman?
Apparently there is a culture in China of NOT helping others. What I read at the time was if you help someone, then you become responsible for them. Which is why only the very poor woman went to help -- she had nothing to lose.
The Chinese government has been attempting to change that culture, in part by changing laws (I think. Didn't I read that somewhere?)
Here is how calloused I have become -- I thought for a moment (and I still sort of do) that this was a set up by the Government. A visual campaign to educate the public. They made the guy a hero, showed how the government has the services to help. The hole in the pavement was too weird, as noted here, people crowded around the hole with zero concern that more would give way. They didn't interview the girl at all, didn't show her face.
It's not a bad thing, to attempt to create a Good Samaritan culture in the face of thousands of years without one. I am just cynical about the feel-goodness of this clip.
Calloused. I am calloused.

damn, you are cynical!!! It's sad that some of the bad infrastructure in china make this story perfectly plausible.

I think this attitude has to do with the ease of liability being assigned to the helper. In this case, there is no way any reasonable person would think the cab driver was responsible for the girl's injury. As opposed to a driver stopping for an injured pedestrian.>> ^bareboards2:

Here's another topic missed by this video --
Remember when that little girl got ran over by a truck and everyone walked by? The only person who went to help was a very poor woman?
Apparently there is a culture in China of NOT helping others. What I read at the time was if you help someone, then you become responsible for them. Which is why only the very poor woman went to help -- she had nothing to lose.
The Chinese government has been attempting to change that culture, in part by changing laws (I think. Didn't I read that somewhere?)
Here is how calloused I have become -- I thought for a moment (and I still sort of do) that this was a set up by the Government. A visual campaign to educate the public. They made the guy a hero, showed how the government has the services to help. The hole in the pavement was too weird, as noted here, people crowded around the hole with zero concern that more would give way. They didn't interview the girl at all, didn't show her face.
It's not a bad thing, to attempt to create a Good Samaritan culture in the face of thousands of years without one. I am just cynical about the feel-goodness of this clip.
Calloused. I am calloused.

Uhoh ... woulda been time for an insulin shot if not for the cranky helper

@messenger

I don't have much time so I'll just start with his beginning scripture and come to the rest at another point. Also, to let you know, I'm still intending to reply to you in the other thread..again it is just a time issue. I'll address his first argument:

Genesis 2:18

The LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.”

Matthew states that because gays only find same sex partners suitable, traditional interpretation is saying it is good for them to be alone, thus it violates the principle of this scripture.

Yet traditional interpretation is not saying they should be alone, it is saying they should repent of their sins, which means to turn away from them. If they did that they wouldn't have to be alone. Also, to note, Paul states it is better to be single.

What he presumes (with no justification as of yet) is that homosexuality is natural and it would be unnatural to turn away from it. The truth is exactly the opposite, according to Gods word. Homosexuality is an unnatural condition of the fall, and it is natural to turn away from it, back to what God originally intended, with the help and power of the Holy Spirit. Here is an example of that:



Matthew isn't making any theological arguments at this point. He is simply presuming his position is correct apriori and then interpreting scripture on that basis. That is not how legitimate exegesis is done. You need to justify your position first before you attempt to reinterpret scripture around it. Perhaps later he will have something that justifies his presuppositions. I will look through it later.

As far as homosexuality doing no harm, I beg to differ. People who practice it have a higher rate of disease, as well as alcohol and drug abuse, depression, suicide and domestic violence. You might say that is because of discrimination, but you would be wrong. In a place like the Netherlands, where gay marriage is legalized and broadly accepted, the rates are actually worse. That's really just scratching the surface. We haven't gotten to the impact that the breakdown of traditional values and the family has on the country as a whole.