No sir, I don't need to rationalize my tendency to turn on the asshole when its turned lose on me and I am not selling anything-AGAIN-Perception-My delivery reflects a frustration, true, but what is the one law of love as you see it? Is it based on ones ability to or willingness to suffer a particular subject or dialog until it satisfies a personal fancy?
I don't need to watch a video when I understand the mechanics of the delivery and the reasons why some chose to express a mundane and simplified world view by letting some talking head they identify with through years of detrimental and unhealthy programming do it for them. The constant posting of news clips and editorials that tend to all say the same goddamn thing, is a redundant, unrealistic, uninspiring, and uncreative way of expressing one's point.
I DON'T NEED TO BE CONSTANTLY HIT OVER THE HEAD WITH A POINT TO GET THE GYST! This describes the loop that some are in. A loop is a rut, a loop is a broken record, a loop takes you back to the same place over and over, and its a form of exhibitionism I detest. You see nothing but the "ravings of a retarded douchebag, because that is HOW YOU CHOSE TO REACT. I respond to bullshit as I see it with a similar methodology. My story does not change. Like a pitcher who has a particular set of strengths and styles of delivery, he rolls with what is handed him. Some batters are very predictable and can't adapt. I am lazy when it comes to trying to teach someone who is unresponsive sometimes, but I never tire in reminding the same over and over, with a view to finding some mutual understanding.

Don't waste your brainpower on anything that does not suit your desire-RM represents in her livelihood for
me, someone who has sold her soul to the machine I despise. I could give a rat's as about her preferences, her sexuality, or her politics. She's a goddamn diversion, a puppet in the hands of a cancerous distraction for a nation of weak-willed, automatons. Again, MW, I don't need to be beat over the head with why FOX is a piece of shit news organization, and the same goes for MSNBC over any other. Major media, news, politics, are a broken, twisted mound of garbage, that shows no sign of doing anything but turning slaves into prisoners, into chum.

You don't like the user???.. I can live with that. Lazy would be to run and hide behind acerbic one-liners directed at a user and not the content of a user's posts. Admittedly, I have been guilty of the same, and probably will slip again. Ignore is the same beast as denial or self-indulgent public masturbation for me.

Douchbag? Check a mirror when letting fly with convenient labels.
In reply to this comment by MaxWilder:
I don't buy that bullshit for a second. You are simply rationalizing you assholery. If you were really trying to follow the "one law of love" you would be trying to share the truth of the world as you see it, and you can't do that with curses and unintelligible gobbledegook. You would have watched the video, and made clearly related points about why Rachel is no more newsworthy than the filth that Fox News spews. I might agree or disagree, but that conversation would be one motivated by respect for the humanity of your fellow sifters. As it stands, I see nothing but the ravings of a retarded douchebag, and that's sad because obviously that's not who you really are. It's just what we see when you are being lazy. And I don't want to waste my brainpower on it.


In reply to this comment by choggie:
I offer a rebuttal in the form of a response to your allegations and observations on this post. I am through with trying to enlighten folks through the limitations of the written word.
Those who have figured me out on this site are allies, those who refuse to try to understand continue to, to their detriment and frustration. The same people who would see me gone forever are the same who find it most comfortable in a room full of people who process and dispense information in a similar manner.

I could use charts and graphs and examples but why bother? What will it profit me to change anyone's mind about a particular issue....My issue is about PROCESS and the filters otherwise reasonable people use because of the way they have been programmed.
You may believe me, that in the real world, I am an incredible humanitarian and lover of diversity. I love "humans", just hate the way most are "being"....the majority are incredibly gullible, controlled, meat robots with no stake in or say over their environment or their livelihoods, evidenced here on VS, by save but a very few. The few that won't write, well, I appreciate them all the more when they do.

I thank you for the constructive critique, and you are right. I do tend to overstate my opinion in way too many or too few course words. My opinion on the matter of Rachel Maddow regardless of the particular spew she is engaged in??? She represents a most reprehensible outlet for information/diversion/control. I pity the masses for settling for such bullshit cloaked as valuable information. I pity her for selling out to the Machina Babylonica.

There is only one law that mankind need follow. That of Love. Love under will. The others are there to keep monkeys` from throwing shit out of trees.

In reply to this comment by MaxWilder:
Ya know, choggie, if you bothered to take two seconds to state your opinion in a clear and concise manner, people might be enlightened. But no, you wander through these virtual rooms, wild-haired and smelling of shite, mumbling and rambling incoherent obscenities. We see in the post above that you can write meaningful sentences if you choose to, which makes the other garbage all the more despicable.

If you are not here to share your opinions with people, (and your opinion about the usefulness of non-news distractions is completely valid) then why the fuck are you here? Are you just venting? Or are the rest of us supposed to wade through your typewritten spew in search of your true meaning?

Wow. As I watched that I heard a dirge of a wailing electric guitar, the studio set morphed into a post-apocalyptic battle ground, wiener morphed into a muscle-bound cyber viking and the fox people turned into an army of mindless automatons.

Awesome.

Choose slavery? Who would do such a thing?

Once you find out, what you do from there can determine whether or not you are a coward. As enoch said though, a lot of people are in the dark; automatons just living their lives. The things in Iran they see as problems "over there" that don't affect them and that they think they won't ever have to experience. When it happens in America, you can make your call. But I already know of many who are willing and waiting for the chance to fight back just like this brave young girl did.

It's torture. End of discussion how about it?? The subject should have been concluded 823,467 video submissions ago, then perhaps,
"Move the hell on."

Funny how with 21 comment upvotes for the "Hannity" comment one can see aaaaallll the folks who have wasted time listening to the man. He has, thank the gods, still a place on the air-waves to continue to sell ad time with his blubbering. He's a weasel on par with most politicians and its fortunate we still have not gone the way of censorship with am/fm talk radio-Freedom of speech is really no freedom at all now days, however, bondage be evidenced here by the willingness of the common man to grab a torch and head to the castle. Any good regime change needs help from self-righteous, fervent, automatons.

Book burning in the 21st century present day amounts to shutting down any speech that offends anyone in any way. NWO is full of those ready to sacrifice true freedoms. Doesn't take a brain surgeon to read a teleprompter-masses are swayed with reason sacrificed on the altar of emotionalism.

I agree the police are merely bureaucrats, but they're not hapless, ignorant automatons. When you say "it's always at the officer's discretion," wouldn't you agree giving this much determining responsibility to a bureaucrat enables abuse of power? I blame more the legislators and the politicians who create this sort of abuse.

It reminds me of what happened in Peru years back when they wiped out the Shining Path terrorist group. The Shining Path started as a working class movement that evolved into violent terrorism. When Alberto Fujimori became president, he exercised strong, decisive authoritarian military might to go after terrorists, and in a short period of time terrorism was all but completely wiped out. The streets were safer. The economy stabilized.

How did he do it? He gave his death squads the responsibility to determine who was or was not a terrorist, so without trial people would be shot in the streets if suspected of being a terrorist. Many innocent civilians were killed or jailed as a result. But, hey, you can't make a safe world omelet without breaking a few eggs, right?

I agree with farhad: "Americans have been living beyond their means for years now." We will need to go back to a standard of spending from saving instead of credit. This not only relates to us as US Citizens, but also our representative government which should cease its spending from money it doesn't have, and instead spend what meager bits it should be allowed.

"We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt.
We must make our election between economy and liberty
or profusion and servitude. If we run into such debt, as
that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in
our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and
our amusements, for our calling and our creeds...
[we will] have no time to think, no means of calling our
miss-managers to account but be glad to obtain subsistence
by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks
of our fellow-sufferers...
And this is the tendency of all human governments.
A departure from principle in one instance becomes a
precedent for [another ]... till the bulk of society
is reduced to be mere automatons of misery...
And the fore-horse of this frightful team is public debt.
Taxation follows that, and in its train wretchedness and
oppression."
--Thomas Jefferson

Fair enough



In reply to this comment by NetRunner:
Flat earth didn't have a global empire to protect from the idea of a spherical earth, though.

All we really want from people is efficiency, conservation, and a move away from fossil fuels. Global warming is our motivation, but it's a good idea for everyone, regardless.

In reply to this comment by Irishman:
Flat Earth WAS mainstream scientific belief for hundreds of years.


In reply to this comment by NetRunner:
>> ^blankfist:
Warmist sounds a lot like alarmist, doesn't it? We'll most likely see more of those for the next four years. Quality find, Irishman. We need more opposing viewpoints on this issue, because the Gore-following Warmist Automatons think the debate is over about Global Warming, science be damned.


Yes, all people who follow mainstream scientific belief are automatons.

That's what they tell me in my weekly Flat Earth Society meetings. We've got to stop those deadly Sphere-ists from throwing away billions on "satellites" that just sail over the edge of the earth, never to be seen again!

I mean, they're obviously trying to cow people into giving up good money with fear, the word Sphere-ists has phere fear built right into it!

QED

Flat earth didn't have a global empire to protect from the idea of a spherical earth, though.

All we really want from people is efficiency, conservation, and a move away from fossil fuels. Global warming is our motivation, but it's a good idea for everyone, regardless.

In reply to this comment by Irishman:
Flat Earth WAS mainstream scientific belief for hundreds of years.


In reply to this comment by NetRunner:
>> ^blankfist:
Warmist sounds a lot like alarmist, doesn't it? We'll most likely see more of those for the next four years. Quality find, Irishman. We need more opposing viewpoints on this issue, because the Gore-following Warmist Automatons think the debate is over about Global Warming, science be damned.


Yes, all people who follow mainstream scientific belief are automatons.

That's what they tell me in my weekly Flat Earth Society meetings. We've got to stop those deadly Sphere-ists from throwing away billions on "satellites" that just sail over the edge of the earth, never to be seen again!

I mean, they're obviously trying to cow people into giving up good money with fear, the word Sphere-ists has phere fear built right into it!

QED

Flat Earth WAS mainstream scientific belief for hundreds of years.


In reply to this comment by NetRunner:
>> ^blankfist:
Warmist sounds a lot like alarmist, doesn't it? We'll most likely see more of those for the next four years. Quality find, Irishman. We need more opposing viewpoints on this issue, because the Gore-following Warmist Automatons think the debate is over about Global Warming, science be damned.


Yes, all people who follow mainstream scientific belief are automatons.

That's what they tell me in my weekly Flat Earth Society meetings. We've got to stop those deadly Sphere-ists from throwing away billions on "satellites" that just sail over the edge of the earth, never to be seen again!

I mean, they're obviously trying to cow people into giving up good money with fear, the word Sphere-ists has phere fear built right into it!

QED

>> ^blankfist:
Warmist sounds a lot like alarmist, doesn't it? We'll most likely see more of those for the next four years. Quality find, Irishman. We need more opposing viewpoints on this issue, because the Gore-following Warmist Automatons think the debate is over about Global Warming, science be damned.


Yes, all people who follow mainstream scientific belief are automatons.

That's what they tell me in my weekly Flat Earth Society meetings. We've got to stop those deadly Sphere-ists from throwing away billions on "satellites" that just sail over the edge of the earth, never to be seen again!

I mean, they're obviously trying to cow people into giving up good money with fear, the word Sphere-ists has phere fear built right into it!

QED

Warmist sounds a lot like alarmist, doesn't it? We'll most likely see more of those for the next four years. *Quality find, Irishman. We need more opposing viewpoints on this issue, because the Gore-following Warmist Automatons think the debate is over about Global Warming, science be damned.

My favourite:

You should contact me if you are a skinny woman. If your words are a meaningful progression of concepts rather than a series of vocalizations induced by your spinal cord for the purpose of complementing my tone of voice. If you’ve seen the meatbot, the walking automaton, the pod-people, the dense, glazy-eyed substrate through which living organisms such as myself must escape to reach air and sunlight. If you’ve realized that if speech is to be regarded as a cognitive function, technically they aren’t speaking, and you don’t have to listen.

>> ^thepinky:
To say that God offers but does not FORCE would be a more correct statement than suggesting that He offers but does not impose.
Many, many Christians have historically and still do fail to understand this principle. One of the fundamental beliefs of Christianity is free will. Therefore, if they really understood scripture, they would realize that God would never, ever force someone to accept Christianity. He does, however, give commandments. To command and to force are very different things because we each have the choice to obey or disobey. Christians have often committed a very serious error in attempting to remove the God-given free will of people by forcing them into Christianity. I think that the God in which they believe would be extremely displeased with this behavior. Therefore, if Christianity is imposing and forceful, it is the fault and folly of Christians themselves, not Christianity.
I think that the first man was attempting to explain that God does not force (he said "impose" but I don't think that this is what he really meant), and Hitchens responded by talking about the imposing nature of Christians and Christianity, not God himself. Yes, he is right about Christians imposing and forcing Christianity, but he is not right about God doing so. To command and require is not, I believe, to force or impose. We still have the choice.


The threat of eternal torture in HELL is the most gruesome kind of force imaginable. Your entire argument rests upon the tiny consolation that in the biblical myths, God did not make humanity to be perfectly obedient robots.

The meaning of force used by Hitchens is duress, which can only exist relative to the violation of a being's preferences. If a being has no preferences, it cannot be under duress. Perfectly obedient automatons don't have to be forced to obey.

I like how he went into the basic epistemological lackings of pure reason. Saw this before but didn't watch it all the way through...it is worth it though.

Though, his idea of other people existing like him is based in reason (how can you ever show logically that people exist in the same way as you and not as automatons). There is no way to show but using reason that other people indeed "experince" events instead of just react to them, much like the chinese room argument from Sartre.

Anyway, vid is worth a gander.

In reply to this comment by bareboards:
> I went back and responded to your response, not really knowing what the heck this profile thing is all about.
i'll generally do the same thing. reply to the thread, and then 'ping' their homepage if i said anything worth bothering about.

> I still have my Power Point from 5 months ago. Can I give it to you?
nope. here's the skinny on the points, used for certain *invoke options.

> Or is that like bringing coals to Newcastle?
yay for britishisms. me mum's from surrey.

the automaton line in your reply, reminded me of this favorite, from a year ago:
http://www.videosift.com/video/Newt-Gingrich-on-the-US-Presidential-process-Aug-2007

so, thanks again!