Looks like Claire will definitely have to sit in the backseat.

Claire! There you are! I'm so glad you didn't hurt yourself. Come here honey, we need to go back, ok? (slips on restraints) I know....I know....it's ok... This is going to hurt just for a second but it will make you feel better.... (injection)

I'm sure the majority of liberals aren't running around spray-painting crap in an attempt to frame up conservatives. People doing stuff like that are probably rare cases of brain-addled extremists who have been prodded into repugnant action by a constant stream of hate speech. Who knows? All I know is that such people deserve to be spit out the bottom orifice of society.

But something that I consider to be JUST as reprehensible is the blatant, obvious attempt by Democrat party members to paint the protests with the same 'extremist' brush as our hypothetical misguided kooks. The kooks are just frenzied, hyped-up goofballs who need to be pitied and shunned. But the Democrat party members... Nancy Pelosi, Claire McKaskell, Arlen Spectre, Ben Cardin, Brian Baird, Steny Hoyer, and many others - right up to Barak FREAKING Obama himself have blasted the protesters in terms that are insulting, demeaning, and dismissive. These aren't citizen kooks, random bloggers, or talking heads. These are people who hold political power describing thier own consitituents as if they were the enemy.

What kind of example is that? If they want to defuse the anger, shouldn't they be honest, open, and forthcoming and willing to engage the people?

When these bozos start getting all defensive, snippy, angry, and insulting to the people who are challenging them, it doesn't make me think that these are poor, innocent Democrats that are the victims of mean old mobs of extremists...

...It makes me think that the citizens are hitting these Democrats RIGHT between the eyes with truths that the Democrats want to hide so they can pass this bill before anyone can stop it. And it also makes me think that the Democrats are a bunch of slimeball hypocrites - because they sure didn't have ANY problems with 'community activism' during the Bush administration, or during Obama's campaign. But now the they are on the other end they want to act like citizen participation is a nasty, ugly thing that needs to be suppressed. Shame on them, and shame on anyone defending them.

The music gives me vibes of Debussy's Clair de Lune. Excellent one.

Denis (the actor) is also featured here:
http://www.videosift.com/video/UNKLE-Rabbit-in-Your-Headlights-featuring-Radioheads-Thom-Yorke-directed-by-Jonathan-Glazer

Yes, I 've seen 35 Rhums in the cinema and that indeed brought me to posting some of the earlier Claire Denis..like her older work the film has a light narrative..with dramatic shots of bodies, touching other bodies or cups with warm drinks or rice cookers. Case studies of life in a flat and metro life.

In reply to this comment by griefer_queafer:
I posted this maybe. maybe i took it off. THis is one of my favorite scenes and one of my favorite movies. Claire Denis is so awesome. HUGE upvote.

I posted this maybe. maybe i took it off. THis is one of my favorite scenes and one of my favorite movies. Claire Denis is so awesome. HUGE upvote.

I think most musicologists find the documentary quite lacking, but as a layman's introduction to the early history of jazz it's quite decent.

It's well put together and contains a lot of great music and video clips that can serve as an introduction to the diversity of the earlier forms of this genre.

I think this quote from Jeffrey St. Clair sums up the brunt of the criticism:

"Ken Burns's interminable documentary, Jazz, starts with a wrong premise and degenerates from there ... Burns is a classicist, who is offended by the rawer sounds of the blues, its political dimension and inescapable class dynamic. Instead, Burns fixates on a particular kind of jazz music that appeals to his PBS sensibility: the swing era. It's a genre of jazz that enables Burns to throw around phrases such as 'Ellington is our Mozart.' He sees jazz as art form in the most culturally elitist sense, as being a museum piece, beautiful but dead, to be savored like a stroll through a gallery of paintings by the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood."

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jazz_(TV_series)#Negative_reviews

first you took my dupeof virginity, then you are the first to drop a doublepromote on one of my vids. poppin' my cherries left and right dude! thanks!

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
You find some of the best clips, jakester. "Clair de Lune" has a similar effect on me. To me it's so full of yearning.

*doublepromote

You find some of the best clips, jakester. "Clair de Lune" has a similar effect on me. To me it's so full of yearning.

*doublepromote

thanks deano!

In reply to this comment by Deano:
*promote

Your video, Lydia Kavina plays "Claire de Lune" on the Theremin, has made it into your personal Highest Rated Videos listing. Congratulations on a job well done. For you contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

It's a win-win situation, Paul earmarks the funds for his district, then takes a "principled" stand, and votes against the spending, but when it inevitably passes anyway, he gets to take credit for bringing the money to his home district.

All the other Republicans do it too.

That said, Paul's right, earmarks are a made up issue. If Republicans think it's a bad practice, they could have put an end to it permanently while they were in power.

Even if you eliminated all earmarks, it wouldn't change the amount of spending by one cent; it'd just mean individual congresscritters can't put a stamp on portions of it and say "I personally want this bacon to go to this project".

FWIW, Democrats are not saints on this topic either, but we have our own anti-earmark Senators too (Claire McCaskill and Russ Feingold). Just neither of them based the entire economic leg of a presidential run on ending earmarks. Though ours are a little less hypocritical about spending -- they aren't in the habit of earmarking a bill, voting against it for the "irresponsible spending," then basing a reelection campaign on having secured funds for their state.

oh, problems at St. Clair West? You don't say!

(TTC riders know...)

Like I said, it depends on the mood. Plump DJs is hardly romantic. It's for those time when you would describe it as fucking, not making love (though still with someone you're in love with, of course .

There's some other techno remixes that are pretty sexy.

not the mix I would use, but here's a decent example (probably worth stopping at 3:30, especially if you're at work!):


Roger Sanchez's remix of "Hella Good" is another (I actually didn't hear the original of this tune until fairly recently, and it is not nearly as good).


Of course, with electronica, you'll generally have to mix the songs, not just copy them together.

And, don't forget things like Ravel's Bolero, Clair du Lune, and all those other sexy/romantic classical pieces.

Really, the list of music that is bad for intimacy is probably much shorter. What music works really depends on who you're with and the mood. Even stuff like The Grateful Dead, or Benny Goodman, or NIN would work with the right partner.

Nooo. The poor double bass players have to be pulling their hair out with boredom playing the same riff over and over and over and over....oy gevalt!

Clair de Lune is more better.