That's funny.

Just out of curiosity, did you click on the link in the description after realizing there was no audio in the embed? Or did you read the description, click the link and got what I intended to deliver via youtubedoubler? I don't want people to miss the compounded effect of having the video with the audio. >> ^hpqp:

I think this is actually a video of JWs jerking the Holy Spirit off.

And if you liked that, read about this 4 foot sea worm that digests fish hooks and is covered with nerve-murdering barbs!

Maybe he didn't use this shot in them? Been a

Damnit, now I have to go watch 2001, the Shining, Clockwork Orange and Full Metal Jacket again (not a big fan of Eyes Wide Shut or Barry Lyndon).

>> ^shuac:

Whither Strangelove and Lolita?

Oh okay, no fact-checking required. All I have to do is watch videos on the internet and I'll "see the rage in the faces of the MAJORITY of cops" (my emphasis). So by your logic if I saw one internet video last week of police brutality and then I see two videos this week of police brutality that means that incidences of brutality have doubled, right?

Try reading Barry Glassner's "The Culture of Fear", it talks about how the media and people in general like to see trends where there may not necessarily be any. And of course some drama-llama will misinterpret what I'm saying and assume I'm all for a "police state" and I deny the existence of police brutality or I condone it, yak yak yak. The usual Internet Debate Club horseshit.

So when the original poster makes reference to the INCREDIBLE rise of police brutality I say cite me some sources other than viral videos and protest sign slogans.

Also next time include a link to police misconduct stats that look like they were done by someone that went to a university, not USA Today.
>> ^chingalera:

@ulysses1904
http://www.copblock.org/2841/police-brutality-statistics/
Sorry there criminal justice professor, no need to site anything but internet sources, you have eyes and everyone has cell phones to record, you can see the rage in the faces of the majority of cops. They pump the shit into homes 24/7, 365 to let us all know that crime is on the rise and more cops with better weapons are needed.

Did Barry Gibb devour Dom DeLuise? I guess I have no class.
Pinkies out, Bitches!

>> ^Ryjkyj:

On the "Alien" release in 1979:
"Critical reaction to the film was initially mixed. Some critics who were not usually favorable towards science fiction, such as Barry Norman of the BBC's Film series, were positive about the film's merits. Others, however, were not: Reviews by Variety, Sight and Sound, Vincent Canby and Leonard Maltin were mixed or negative. A review by Time Out said the film was an "empty bag of tricks whose production values and expensive trickery cannot disguise imaginative poverty"."
-Wikipedia


Well they were wrong. Though I don't see why those criticisms should not be directed at this effort. Having just seen it I'm disappointed that my low expectations were met.

For a guy who claims to base his films in logic, Scott has a lot of illogical things going on. No tension, poor characters, dodgy dialogue at times and an overall plot that simply explains a few things in the lead up to the first film.

Also for a two hour film it's paced very quickly and for the first time in my life I am tempted to conclude this is purposely geared to the attention span of the Facebook generation.

My name is Ray. I was born in Vancouver, BC (not the little one in Washington). I've lived in Vancouver, Victoria, Abbotsford, Calgary, Barrie, Angus, Wasaga Beach, Borden, Annapolis Royal, and Halifax. Oops, I forgot Denver. I currently live in Fort Langley, BC. I'm not nearly as interesting as everyone else on the sift. The most interesting things I've done are to get arrested a couple of times and I once threw a piece of copper wire across the trolley lines at Fourth and Trimble and shorted out all the buses from Main Street to UBC. And I think I may be the oldest person on here but I'm not saying how old.

Oh and my avatar, clearly inspired by "The Big Lebowski". I chose it one night after, on a whim, I became an ordained minister of The Church of the Latter Day Dude

On the "Alien" release in 1979:

"Critical reaction to the film was initially mixed. Some critics who were not usually favorable towards science fiction, such as Barry Norman of the BBC's Film series, were positive about the film's merits. Others, however, were not: Reviews by Variety, Sight and Sound, Vincent Canby and Leonard Maltin were mixed or negative. A review by Time Out said the film was an "empty bag of tricks whose production values and expensive trickery cannot disguise imaginative poverty"."

-Wikipedia

Wait, I am confused... Obama is black, and usually presumed guilty before innocent as a black man first. We agree on that 100% I assume...but the proper way to word your argument would have been, "when a black man is shot and killed by a Hispanic, you are here insisting the Hispanic guy is innocent until proven guilty."

If we say Zimmerman is for the most part white, then Obama is white too, and that's just retarded... We know society goes by racial clumping and that shit is not going to change any time soon. In fact, this is the first time I have ever heard "White Hispanic" in my life--when the Media wants to stir up shit for dollar's sake.

If it had been Zimmerman shot by a KKK member, who thinks the fucking paper would label it a white-on-white crime? Who on the sift would label it as such?

>> ^bcglorf:

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
coming from one of the most politically biased individuals to ever puke up worthless polarized talking points on the sift
I understand your fear and anger. When leftists encounter a conservative that puts forth simple, logical arguements that conflict with liberal ideology, your response is the default. Lash out. Attack. Insult. That's all the left has really got. We see it in the blogosphere right now with the Obamacare SCOTUS case. Liberals are literally gobsmacked at how Barry-boy's law has been so utterly and easily turned into swiss cheese - even though the arguments have been there for decades. Not having any intelligent, logical response to the simple, common-sense arguments, what do they do? Visit the leftist blog of your choice to see netizens stomping and bellowing like elephants - much like yourself. You suffer from the same malady, but on a smaller scale when you encounter me here on the Sift. I understand, and you have my pity.
But of course the truth is that I've never done any of the things you accuse me of. Like far too many on the left, you appear to confuse your hatred and anger towards an intellectual idea that contrasts your own with the persons present them. There is so much bologna flying around the internet about this Trevon case in particular that I have refused to take any stance whatsoever. I am not the guy tweeting the address of retirees to lynch mobs. I am not the guy putting out 'dead or alive' bounties. I'm not the guy making wild accusations based on 3rd hand internet stories, facebook comments, and media talking points which are based on rumors, innuendo, and theory. I'm just a guy saying, "chillax".
What I find loathsome is the tone of the discussion. It reminds me very much of the Duke Lacrosse case where the media latched on to a sensational story and ran with it, kicked out a narrative they liked, and pretended it was true. The whole nation tried, convicted, and demanded the execution of the Lacrosse team. The "evidence" was equally conclusive. How could a bunch of rich white boys NOT be guilty? Aaaaand then when the actual investigation happened the whole thing fell apart. I'm not saying that's the case here. I'm saying it is too early to say anything at all, and that there's a ton of agenda-based, race-inspired hype rush to jugement that is causing a lot of people on the indeological left to forget the first rule in US jurisprudence...
Innocent until proven guilty.
But you've all tried Zimmerman, convicted him, and are demanding his head on a platter based on jack-squat except a bunch of what can only be described as OPINION PIECES. The media doesn't know anything, and there are a ton of race-baiters down there in Florida that are very desperately churning up everything they can in order to advance the agenda that this was a hate crime. Frankly, I'm not buying it. I'll wait for the actual investigation. All this stuff flying around right now is obviously designed to establish a narrative before the trial - and I'm not listening to a word of it.
Why? Adam Corrola of all people nails it in his podcast...
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/03/29/Adam-Carolla-Media% 20Bias
The entire story about that "poor persecuted gay student driven to suicide by his bigoted roommate"? Yeah - it was all bullcrap. So was the Duke Lacrosse case. Again - I'm not saying that's the case here. I'm saying let's wait for some REAL data as opposed to all this clearly agenda-driven bullcrap that is designed to establish a narrative. You all think you're smart, right? Prove it for a change and stop being parrots. There's a ton of people down there throwing gas bombs so you'll react the way they want. Stop being thier tools. Shut off the news. Ignore everyone who is shouting for your attention - because they're probably a charlatan or demagogue. Just go about your business and wait for the courts to take care of this.

And yet when it comes to Obama he's guilty until proven innocent.
Your ignoring the biggest accusation leveled against you. When a black man is shot and killed by a white guy, you are here insisting the white guy is innocent until proven guilty, which is fine and nobody is even really arguing against it. The trouble is at the exact same time you go around insisting that a black man who has been accepted as president forged his birth records and was in fact born in Kenya, guilty until proven innocent, and not even a certified birth certificate accepted by the highest authority in the state is in your mind enough evidence to prove his innocence.
That contradiction of positions that paints you in a horrific light and you might want to address it rather than ignoring it.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

coming from one of the most politically biased individuals to ever puke up worthless polarized talking points on the sift
I understand your fear and anger. When leftists encounter a conservative that puts forth simple, logical arguements that conflict with liberal ideology, your response is the default. Lash out. Attack. Insult. That's all the left has really got. We see it in the blogosphere right now with the Obamacare SCOTUS case. Liberals are literally gobsmacked at how Barry-boy's law has been so utterly and easily turned into swiss cheese - even though the arguments have been there for decades. Not having any intelligent, logical response to the simple, common-sense arguments, what do they do? Visit the leftist blog of your choice to see netizens stomping and bellowing like elephants - much like yourself. You suffer from the same malady, but on a smaller scale when you encounter me here on the Sift. I understand, and you have my pity.
But of course the truth is that I've never done any of the things you accuse me of. Like far too many on the left, you appear to confuse your hatred and anger towards an intellectual idea that contrasts your own with the persons present them. There is so much bologna flying around the internet about this Trevon case in particular that I have refused to take any stance whatsoever. I am not the guy tweeting the address of retirees to lynch mobs. I am not the guy putting out 'dead or alive' bounties. I'm not the guy making wild accusations based on 3rd hand internet stories, facebook comments, and media talking points which are based on rumors, innuendo, and theory. I'm just a guy saying, "chillax".
What I find loathsome is the tone of the discussion. It reminds me very much of the Duke Lacrosse case where the media latched on to a sensational story and ran with it, kicked out a narrative they liked, and pretended it was true. The whole nation tried, convicted, and demanded the execution of the Lacrosse team. The "evidence" was equally conclusive. How could a bunch of rich white boys NOT be guilty? Aaaaand then when the actual investigation happened the whole thing fell apart. I'm not saying that's the case here. I'm saying it is too early to say anything at all, and that there's a ton of agenda-based, race-inspired hype rush to jugement that is causing a lot of people on the indeological left to forget the first rule in US jurisprudence...
Innocent until proven guilty.
But you've all tried Zimmerman, convicted him, and are demanding his head on a platter based on jack-squat except a bunch of what can only be described as OPINION PIECES. The media doesn't know anything, and there are a ton of race-baiters down there in Florida that are very desperately churning up everything they can in order to advance the agenda that this was a hate crime. Frankly, I'm not buying it. I'll wait for the actual investigation. All this stuff flying around right now is obviously designed to establish a narrative before the trial - and I'm not listening to a word of it.
Why? Adam Corrola of all people nails it in his podcast...
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/03/29/Adam-Carolla-Media%
20Bias
The entire story about that "poor persecuted gay student driven to suicide by his bigoted roommate"? Yeah - it was all bullcrap. So was the Duke Lacrosse case. Again - I'm not saying that's the case here. I'm saying let's wait for some REAL data as opposed to all this clearly agenda-driven bullcrap that is designed to establish a narrative. You all think you're smart, right? Prove it for a change and stop being parrots. There's a ton of people down there throwing gas bombs so you'll react the way they want. Stop being thier tools. Shut off the news. Ignore everyone who is shouting for your attention - because they're probably a charlatan or demagogue. Just go about your business and wait for the courts to take care of this.


And yet when it comes to Obama he's guilty until proven innocent.

Your ignoring the biggest accusation leveled against you. When a black man is shot and killed by a white guy, you are here insisting the white guy is innocent until proven guilty, which is fine and nobody is even really arguing against it. The trouble is at the exact same time you go around insisting that a black man who has been accepted as president forged his birth records and was in fact born in Kenya, guilty until proven innocent, and not even a certified birth certificate accepted by the highest authority in the state is in your mind enough evidence to prove his innocence.

That contradiction of positions that paints you in a horrific light and you might want to address it rather than ignoring it.

coming from one of the most politically biased individuals to ever puke up worthless polarized talking points on the sift

I understand your fear and anger. When leftists encounter a conservative that puts forth simple, logical arguements that conflict with liberal ideology, your response is the default. Lash out. Attack. Insult. That's all the left has really got. We see it in the blogosphere right now with the Obamacare SCOTUS case. Liberals are literally gobsmacked at how Barry-boy's law has been so utterly and easily turned into swiss cheese - even though the arguments have been there for decades. Not having any intelligent, logical response to the simple, common-sense arguments, what do they do? Visit the leftist blog of your choice to see netizens stomping and bellowing like elephants - much like yourself. You suffer from the same malady, but on a smaller scale when you encounter me here on the Sift. I understand, and you have my pity.

But of course the truth is that I've never done any of the things you accuse me of. Like far too many on the left, you appear to confuse your hatred and anger towards an intellectual idea that contrasts your own with the persons present them. There is so much bologna flying around the internet about this Trevon case in particular that I have refused to take any stance whatsoever. I am not the guy tweeting the address of retirees to lynch mobs. I am not the guy putting out 'dead or alive' bounties. I'm not the guy making wild accusations based on 3rd hand internet stories, facebook comments, and media talking points which are based on rumors, innuendo, and theory. I'm just a guy saying, "chillax".

What I find loathsome is the tone of the discussion. It reminds me very much of the Duke Lacrosse case where the media latched on to a sensational story and ran with it, kicked out a narrative they liked, and pretended it was true. The whole nation tried, convicted, and demanded the execution of the Lacrosse team. The "evidence" was equally conclusive. How could a bunch of rich white boys NOT be guilty? Aaaaand then when the actual investigation happened the whole thing fell apart. I'm not saying that's the case here. I'm saying it is too early to say anything at all, and that there's a ton of agenda-based, race-inspired hype rush to jugement that is causing a lot of people on the indeological left to forget the first rule in US jurisprudence...

Innocent until proven guilty.

But you've all tried Zimmerman, convicted him, and are demanding his head on a platter based on jack-squat except a bunch of what can only be described as OPINION PIECES. The media doesn't know anything, and there are a ton of race-baiters down there in Florida that are very desperately churning up everything they can in order to advance the agenda that this was a hate crime. Frankly, I'm not buying it. I'll wait for the actual investigation. All this stuff flying around right now is obviously designed to establish a narrative before the trial - and I'm not listening to a word of it.

Why? Adam Corrola of all people nails it in his podcast...

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/03/29/Adam-Carolla-Media%20Bias

The entire story about that "poor persecuted gay student driven to suicide by his bigoted roommate"? Yeah - it was all bullcrap. So was the Duke Lacrosse case. Again - I'm not saying that's the case here. I'm saying let's wait for some REAL data as opposed to all this clearly agenda-driven bullcrap that is designed to establish a narrative. You all think you're smart, right? Prove it for a change and stop being parrots. There's a ton of people down there throwing gas bombs so you'll react the way they want. Stop being thier tools. Shut off the news. Ignore everyone who is shouting for your attention - because they're probably a charlatan or demagogue. Just go about your business and wait for the courts to take care of this.

wikipedia:

The word pompatus has, because of its peculiarity and seemingly nonsensical usage, become a minor pop trivia icon. Wolfman Jack frequently referenced the phrase and there is a soundclip of him using the line within the song "Clap for the Wolfman" by The Guess Who. A 1996 movie titled The Pompatus of Love starring Jon Cryer featured four guys discussing a number of assorted topics, including attempts to determine the meaning of the phrase.[2] The line has been mentioned in various television show gags, including The Simpsons and South Park.[citation needed] It was the subject of the October 9, 2011 Over the Hedge comic strip.

Humor columnist Dave Barry frequently refers to the song line as a source of comedic value, particularly in his 1997 book, Dave Barry's Book of Bad Songs. Pompatus is used by Michael Ondaatje in his 2001 book, Anil's Ghost. Stephen King uses the word in his 2006 novel Lisey's Story. Tim Dorsey uses the word in his 2010 novel, Gator a-Go-Go.

"Pompatus of love" was mentioned by Dan in Hellcats (episode 11) when he was talking to Marti.

You tell 'em Barry !

>> ^Payback:
Needs Barry White.


Really? I burst out laughing at the lyrics for the music used in the video

Needs Barry White.