I'm getting it from the fact that whether he actually says it out right, he has great admiration for Trump, has done AMA's on the Donald Trump sub reddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/4eglxx/) and routinely praises him to the point of endorsement.

In that AMA, he says:

"I don't want to be tarred with whatever ridiculousness gets spray-painted onto Trump's reputation. So it was a good way to document some distance. "

and

"In my view, Trump is not currently qualified to be president because he scares too many of my fellow citizens. (He doesn't scare me.) But I do think he can change that situation. That's why I predict he will win in a landslide."

His only reason for not outwardly supporting him is because its socially toxic, not that he doesn't actually support him.

To quote Rashida, it is important to become more sensitive before being less sensitive.

I agree that being a Humanist is more inclusive. However, that umbrella word covers the valid word "feminist."

Trying to erase the word "feminist," scolding women and men for labeling themselves feminist, ignoring their particular need for that label as equality is struggled for is anti-Humanist, @newtboy.

Just sayin'.

And I'm the first person to speak up for how hard it is to be a man. Men are HORRIBLE to each other, for starters. In fact, I said it just last night, more than once, during a convo on the patriarchy after watching the 2007 movie made in Turkey called Bliss." There was some serious oppression of women in that movie -- very hard to watch. And it is important that the pressures that men are under are seen as just that -- human struggles and repressed pain that is masked by some really shitty outward behavior.

No need to tear down anyone else who is trying to improve their life and society in general. It is called being a Humanist.

They have without doubt some of the most quality engineered laptops on the planet. I have a Macbook and my wife has an Asus Macbook clone (straight down to the silver-polish finish). And yes, hers cost less and has a dedicated GPU so she could play games on it (if she had any interest in games) but the Macbook is lighter, keeps the battery charged longer, has a much more beautiful display (Retina vs Full Hd), is much more comfortable to type with, and the touchpad is just freaking heaven to use. I now hate having to use touchpads on any Windows laptop, even my bootcamped Mac!

And you hit the nail on the head about using the right tool for the right job--I work with video as part of my job sometimes and I don't think I can ever go back to video editing on a Windows machine. I can do it easier and faster on an OSX device.

I think also the initial outward simplicity of Mac operating systems makes them ideal for people who don't want to or don't have time to become "computer people" and worry about dealing with downloading the latest drivers or all of the other BS that you need to constantly deal with on a Windows machine. I especially wish my dad, who is constant calling me and my brother for help with his PC, would just switch over to a Mac as it would solve probably 95% of the issues he calls us about.

I think I can see where he's coming from with this, and the more open forms of racism there is an honesty that does seem less insidious. Open racism, like a fire in your house is not something you want, but at least you can see the problem right away and begin to address it (get the fuck out of the house!). But that more subtle form of racism is more like radon gas, can't see it, can't smell it, but it's slowly killing your ass (I feel terrible, I think I'll lie down and take a nap).

In America I think we've been living under the delusion that racism is a thing of the past, especially after electing a black President, but then we see how most of the racism has simply gone underground. And so, all that outwardly PC behavior is just for show, you can change how people act on the outside, but they're still the same on the inside and quietly act on those impulses, the rot is still there.

His examples of dirty jokes weren't even really genuine racism, amongst certain groups (guys in particular) razzing, busting your balls and such is usually a sign of acceptance and sometimes it takes on racial or ethnic tones, but with no real malice.

The decision not to show Carmen at the Sydney Opera House sounds like a classic case of PC overreach, how does not showing Carmen actually serve the anti-smoking cause? Let's ask how many kids started smoking because they saw that scene in Carmen? It's an absolutely useless and pointless gesture.

No, not saying that.

Religion is just the visible aspect.

Actually, it is a waste of time to talk about it with anyone who won't receive it.

So, when the person is looking, they will find it. But the truth is not to be found in the outward manifestation.

To quote the great Wittgenstein "meaning is use". Language and meaning are nuanced and complicated, but most of all, subjective and instrumental (by which I mean something we make up). This is why we frequently use otherwise restrictive and oversimplified analogies to illustrate specific points, and sometimes arbitrary (and always artificial) terms to sum up otherwise much more expansive phenomena.

In this case @Babymech used one to quite neatly surmise the different ways we interpret accidental puns and double meanings. Crude vs Prude was just a succinct way of labelling the two predominant archetypical responses to a potential double entendre.

One is to tend to overlook or ignore it (Prude)
One is to recognise and even call attention to it (Crude)

There were no value judgements implicit in the way @Babymech did this. You brought those yourself, projected them outwards and rather rudely set about insulting Babymech for the perceived slight/prejudicial remark.

The fact you got a rude response back was not validation, it was retaliation. You called him/her a dick basically without provocation!

"In some countries / regions, saying someone is crude is quite the insult."

A term charged with historical prejudicial hatred indeed! Absolutely no room for interpretation or innocent intention there. (And God forbid anyone anywhere ever be offended by something because they might have different associations with a words meanings and associations)

But let's just assume @Babymech was making a value judgement anyway. "Prude" and "Crude" create wildly varying emotional responses. From pride to shame. Who takes prescient? Who's right to not be offended counts most?

Much like considerably more sensitive words (like ones beginning with N and F for instance), context is absolutely everything. Words have no meaning outside of their context, they are entirely relativistic things. Even the cold hard definition in a dictionary is a contextual arrangement (in this case the dictionary & the linguistic paradigm which is documents).

If there was hatred in Babymech's heart when he/she made their comment I certainly did not recognise it. The same point made in a different way might have raised my ire too, but here I can only see a slight you brought to the table yourself so to speak.

I've done it myself before, but then I've also apologised for starting shit that wasn't really there before too

You would be correct if you detected a slightly snotty attitude in my reply, it pops up mostly when people start throwing around unsolicited abuse (or say unspeakably dumb things but I'm certainly not accusing you of that here, just a needless conflict). You'd be amazed how fast it can disappear though!

Much love.

Rex Curry is the nation's leading authority on the Pledge of Allegiance. You're right to post the video. The video is completely accurate. The salute used by the Nazis was NOT derived from the socialist Mussolini. And the gesture was not based on the so-called "ancient Roman salute" because the "ancient Roman salute" is a complete fictional, as stated above.

Jacques-Louis David's painting "The Oath of the Horatii" did not associate the salute with classical Rome, and David never said such a thing, and the painting does not show the gesture, it shows three people reaching for weapons, including the use of the left hand. The Horatii lie is a very modern lie, fabricated circa 2006(?) on wakipedia in order to cover-up the Pledge of Allegiance's putrid past.

The socialist Mussolini did NOT adopt what he thought was the Roman salute.

No one should stand for nor chant the Pledge of Allegiance because it was the origin of the Nazi salute and Nazi behavior (see the discoveries of the historian Dr. Rex Curry). The early pledge began with a military salute that was then extended outward to point at the flag (thus the stiff-arm gesture came from the pledge and from the military salute). The pledge was written in 1892 for kindergartners to be forced to recite under the flag at government schools (socialist schools). The pledge was written by an American socialist who influenced other socialists worldwide, including German socialists, who used the gesture under their flag's notorious symbol (their symbol was used to represent crossed "S" letters for their "socialist" dogma -another of Dr. Curry's discoveries). The pledge continues to be the origin of similar behavior even though the gesture was changed to hide the pledge's putrid past. The pledge is central to the US's police state and its continued growth.

Dutch journalist Jeroen Akkermans keeps uploading scores of pictures taken at the MH17 crash site to his Flickr account. No corpses, just debris -- no warning neccessary.

A few interesting pictures, if you don't mind amateur forensics:
- left wing, top side: damaged by debris coming from the fuselage at an outward trajectory
- window panel, aft-most cockpit window, port side: shredded by shrapnel, downward trajectory?
- second door from the front, port side: no damage from shrapnel or debris
- port-side hatch of the forward landing gear: no damage

So, explosion in the foward-left quadrant, above the cockpit?

I know, I know -- wild speculation, utterly without a point. But it's infinitly less depressing than looking at the latest pictures from Gaza. Bad days to be a news junkie...

Edit: rear door, starboard side -- no damage

And for what purpose? Are they making really strong socks?
That's an awfully wide/hollow braid.
And from the design of the machine, they couldn't make it very long as that bar is pulling outwards, it couldn't go out forever, a meter or two at the most. (Not to mention the small spools.)

Yes it does, thats excactly what it does mean. Try standing on the floor spinning around, if you spin fast enough, you'll feel that your arms starts tending towards a jesus-like pose, if you were somehow artificially accellerated to spin around some point in your torso to say a million spins a second, your arms and legs would be pulled outward, and your body would be squeezed more and more and stretched more and more from the center. now You wouldnt actually become a disc, because there wouldnt be anything to stop the centrifugal force from ripping you apart, but in space that center is also the center of mass and gravity, so stuff gets pulled towards the center while the whole thing is spinning, the spinning stuff gets pulled outward from the center of the spinning direction by the spinning, but also kept in orbit because of gravity.

It makes complete sense if you sit down and think about it, there really is nowhere else to go but a disc.

Keep in mind that the movements in the blob at the beginning can be completely random, its just that by chance, there is one way, when all the vectors are added up, that the blob spins more than any other. and that eventually becomes the direction of the planets., because all the other movements cancel out.

Wouldn't it actually be easier if he maintained exactly 8.65mph (ideally) in the run-up? If he's going any faster, then he'd just be fighting his own linear momentum as soon as the incline started, being that he's not a rolling wheel or ball and instead relies on stationary foot placement and pushing to move. On the other hand, once the direction starts changing you'd have to pump really hard to maintain speed.

I would also imagine he needs to engage his core muscles to keep from folding forward; my understanding is that there would be a significant "outward" force generated, which in this case keeps him on the track, but does so by pushing him against it.

Look MilkmanDan, it was not the intention to offend you in particular, we merely leapt like a robot at an opportunity to snub a nose at rules-of-engagement relative to rules in-general and some of the more didactic pet-peeves some but not all have with regards to what we personally regard as insignificant, but that some folks seem to get bent-sideways about and begin these tiresome pedantic, didactic dull-ass comment threads.

Who cares if it's tagged incorrectly, who cares if it's marked long when it's really short? Who cares obviously some folks do and it bothers the shit outta them. There is no 'why', simply the questions of how what, when and who had a part in creating these inconsequential concerns in some people that it matters at all?

That you wanted to down-vote a comment suggests perhaps someone thought someone else was crude, mean, rude, or too direct or forward in their protest. We can live with that, as well as the supercilious reasoning for your not voting this video up, in our LTHO.

At the end of the day, you got yer cute kitty dragging someone's be-bootied -with-shoe-cover foot being dragged up close-in to a mischievous, playful cat's clawing with head-banging glee, and it's AS cute, as that slammin' chick's back-side in the screen-shot, unless you are from some other planet where rippin' asses don't stir your loins a bit, be you male or female, gay, straight or otherwise.

Glad you dug the misdirection as much as myself an we thank you for your sincere feedback.

Personally, I vote shit up based on the fact that the original submitter enjoyed the video enough to embed it, and at the end of the day it makes folks happy about contributing to the site and therefore the entire sift community benefits.

What really IS an affirmative vote anyway, but a gesture of goodwill and kindness directed outward from the wealth of consideration one has for oneself?

Do unto others, then run away as fast as you can...to paraphrase the rule.

Oh and the ass-wiping analogy was meant for all the OCD retentive types, the kind of people where everything has to be just-so or their fucking heads will explode....perhaps I should check a mirror??

Personally, I don't like where this is going. It's bad enough Google and similar companies are making millions off tracking your surfing habits; just wait till these become popular. How long did he/she look at that cereal box or car or whatever? And at what part of it? Better get that info off to marketing to increase the font size and change the color. Meanwhile, let's bombard the user with up-to-date advertisements in real time.

Not to mention invasion of privacy (outward facing camera), increasing our already short attention spans and isolation from one another, draconian EULA's -- don't resell 'em, don't lend 'em out, otherwise our data gathering will be shit. What's next? Don't take them off?

Yes, I can see the thousands of beneficial uses these could provide too. Don't mean to go all Kaczynski/Orwell here but it seems an awful lot of trade just to be able to watch cat videos instantly.

all hair on my body shoots directly outward of chaotically spaced holes like this: http://www.dollyhair.com/reroottool/9.jpg

I take this bus to work three times a week. This driver, who always seem perturbed, was never outwardly mean to me. Usually, I like to sit in one of the back two-seaters near the side exit. The three-seater the guy was pummeled on can be flipped to make room for the handicapped and elderly, so I tend to avoid that section. According to the article, he was dropped off just before 88 and O Street, which is a stone's throw from my school. I'm surprised nobody else is on the bus, especially since it's raining.