Really? Who in the hell is possibly ignorant of the atrocities that comprise life in N. Korea? You would have to live in a cave or be in a coma.

So, some sad news about this guy--he was in a major car accident and in a coma for a while. He's currently in rehab but there's no telling if he's ever going to play the piano again (source: this reddit post).

*promote his amazing music

So, some sad news about this guy--he was in a major car accident and in a coma for a while. He's currently in rehab but there's no telling if he's ever going to play the piano again (source: this reddit post).

*promote his amazing music

So, some sad news about this guy--he was in a major car accident and in a coma for a while. He's currently in rehab but there's no telling if he's ever going to play the piano again (source: this reddit post).

*promote his amazing music

I just watched the Tres Comas episode last night in bed. That character is hilarious.

I am still trying to figure out how to write out " doors that go like this / and the better doors that go like this | .

*promote

tres comas

Dangerous beast. One bite could be lethal!



If he didn't wash it out, and it got infected...
and he ignored it and fell into a coma where no one could find him...
and had a immunodeficiency...

No mention of the mysterious "sleepy incense" that instantly puts all animals into a coma?.. all animals except humans that is.
C'mon... you can do better than 131.

SWAT/Police consoling a terrified child in a house they've ram raided? How old is that clip?

Nowadays, they bust into the wrong house, throw a flash bang into a toddlers crib, causing critical burns to the childs body, a hole in his chest and needed to be put into a medical induced coma. The aftermath of which the child wakes up screaming every night in terror and when the family ask for compensation for medical bills, they refuse

As mentioned above, this is a prequel to Road Warrior, part 1.5, so the 'V-8 interceptor' should be in it....BUT....it looked like they destroyed it in the trailer, and it HAS to come out of this movie intact to make any sense, because it's NOT destroyed at the start of the 'next' movie.
Also, you don't start your interceptor with the blower engaged, you just don't. The whole point of a 'selectable' blower is you can turn it off both for easier starting and better fuel economy. Come on guys!

All that said, I really can't wait for this. I'm taking my coma drugs now, someone please administer the antidote 2 days before the premier so I can get in line for tickets. Thanks.

Coma's, the different between helping your Uncle Jack off the horse, and helping your Uncle Jack, off the horse.

Based on the reviews out of Sundance, it sounds like there's actually quite a bit more plot this time. More than one person has compared it to a martial arts version of the Godfather.

The reviews are nuts, too. Pretty much everyone is falling over themselves to praise it. Some are calling it one of the best action movies of ALL TIME. Like I wasn't excited enough. I think I may have to investigate putting myself in a medically induced coma.

Being unable to vote is not the same thing as being denied the right to vote. Saying a three year old is a suffragist is kind of...well, silly. But it's true based on the idea that she is "denied the right to vote."

Because the definition is so broad, it really means NOTHING at all (As John Stewart said, "When you amplify everything, you hear nothing." The definition as you use it is the same vein.)

Are corporations, declared real people by the supreme court, suffragists. Publix maybe, but not Walmart! (That was facetious, not intended to be sarcastic.)

For example Jigga, we are both poor suffragists because we can't vote--in the Iraqi elections. Poor us, being held back. I don't apply suffragist to reasonable expectations. You should have to be a citizen of the country you vote in. A certain age (Which doesn't imply you should or should not be allowed to pre-register...) A certain mental capacity (Ie., not in a coma. Ie., have the ability to spell capacity and not "compacity," like I apparently cannot do )

I do think tests on intellect make for suffragists. I do think gender and gender identification make for suffragists. I do think religious bias makes for suffragists. I do think being arrested and paying for your time yet being released and unable to vote makes for suffragists.

I don't think this girl in any way shape or form is a suffragist.

the american people are becoming more politically literate.regardless of political affiliations they are waking from a long,media induced coma.

> "you are sounding more and more like an anarchist.
> you didnt click the link i shared did you?
> it explained in basic form the type of anarchy i subscribe to. "

The link is about libertarian socialism, not strictly anarchism. I consider libertarian socialism, not left-libertarianism, but rather a contradiction. Coherent left-libertarianism, like that of Roderick Long, is for free market, not the traditional definitions of socialism. Different people define these differently. I use libertarianism to mean adhering to the non-aggression principle, as defined by Rothbard. But whatever it means, socialism, communism, syndicalism, and similar non-voluntary systems of communal ownership of "property" cannot but interfere with individual property rights, and by extension, self-ownership rights. These also need rulers/administrators/archons to manage any so-called "communal" property, so it cannot fit the definition of anarchy. If you don't have a bureaucracy, how do you determine how resources get allocated and used? What if I disagree from how you think "communal" resources should be distributed? Who determines who gets to use your car? It is a version of the problem of economic calculation. That wikipedia article conflates several different "libertarian socialist" positions, so which one does he adhere to?

> "i agree with your position.
> i may word mine differently but our views are in alignment for the most part."

This may be true, at least once we do away with any notions that socialism, or non-voluntary "communal" property can be sustainable without a free market and the notion that you can have any such thing as "communal" property, owned by everyone, and not have ruler/administrators/government to make decisions about it. that shirt you are wearing, should we take a vote to see who gets to wear it tomorrow? How about if there is disagreement about this? Anarcho-socialism is unworkable.

> "what i do find interesting is how a person with a more right leaning ideology will
> point to the government and say "there..thats the problem" while someone from a
> more left leaning will point to corporations as the main culprit."

Governments exist without corporations. Corporations cannot exist without government. Governments bomb, kill, imprison, confiscate, torture, tell you what you can and cannot do. Apple, Microsoft, Walmart do not and cannot. Government produces nothing. Corporations produce things I can buy or not voluntarily and pay or not for them. There is no comparison in the level of suffering governments have caused compared to say Target.

If you disobey the government, what can happen? If you disobey Google or Amazon, then what?

> "in my humble opinion most people all want the same things in regards to a
> civilized society. fairness,justice and truth."

Yes, but some want to impose (through violence) their views on how to achieve these on everyone else and some (libertarians) don't.

> "i agree the federal government should have limited powers but i recognize
> government DOES play a role.i believe in the inherent moral goodness of
> people.that if pressed,most people will do the right thing."

If people are inherently good and will do the right thing, then why do we need government/ruler?

Why not just let everyone do the right thing?

> "this is why i think that governments should be more localized.we could use the
> "states rights" argument but i would take it further into townships,local
> communities and municipalities."

I agree. And from there we can go down to neighborhoods, and then households. And of course, logically, all the way to individuals. And any government a voluntary one where everyone unanimously agree to it. But this is not longer government per se, but rather contracts between voluntary participants.

> "for this to even have a chance this country would have to shake off its induced
> apathetic coma and participate and become informed.
> no easy task.
> in fact,what both you and i are suggesting is no easy task.
> but worthy..so very very worthy."

Ok.

> "when we consider the utter failures of:
> our political class.
> the outright betrayal of our intellectual class who have decided to serve privilege
> and power at the neglect of justice and truth for their own personal advancement,
> and the venal corporate class."

So if people are basically good and do the right thing, why has this happened? Then again, when have politician not been self serving kleptocrats?
few exceptions

> "we,as citizens,have to demand a better way.
> not through a political system that is dysfunctional and broken and only serves the
> corporate state while giving meaningless and vapid rhetoric to the people."

True.

> "nor can this be achieved by violent uprising,which would only serve to give the
> state the reason to perpetrate even greater violence."

True.

> "we cannot rely on our academic class which has sold itself for the betterment of
> its own hubris and self-aggrandizing."

True.
Nothing a libertarian anarchist would not say.

> "even the fourth estate,which has been hamstrung so completely due to its desire
> for access to power,it has been enslaved by the very power it was meant to
> watchdog."

I have not gone into this, but you can thank "democracy" for all this.

> "when we look at american history.the ACTUAL history we find that never,not
> ONCE,did the american government EVER give something to the people."

Yeah, governments are generally no-good.
Let me interject to say that I agree that plutocrats cause problems. I certainly agree that kleptocrat cause even more problems. But I am not ready to exclude the mob from these sources of problems. As Carlin said, "where do these politicians come from?

> "it is the social movements which put pressure,by way of fear,on the political
> class."

The mob can and does often get out of control.

> "we have seen the tea party rise and get consumed by the republican political
> class."
> "we saw occupy rise up to be crushed in a coordinated effort by the state.this was
> obama that did this yet little was ever spoken about it."
> "power is petrified of peoples movements."

I don't disagree. But people's movements are not necessarily always benign. And they have a tendency to fall in line with demagogues. Plutocrats bribe kleptocrats. Kleptocrats buy the mob. They are all guilty. I know, you say, they people need to be educated. Sure, like they need to be educated abut economics? How is that going to happen? If everyone was educated as an Austrian libertarian economist, sure, great. Is that the case? Can it be? Just asking.

I do support any popular movement that advocates free markets and non-aggression. Count me in.

> "power is petrified of peoples movements."

People's movements are often scary. And not always benign. But non-aggressive, free market ones, like Gandhi's, sure, these are great!

> "because that is the only way to combat the power structures we are being
> subjected to today. civil disobedience. and i aim to misbehave."

Maybe. This is a question of strategical preference. Civil disobedience. Ron Paul says he thinks that maybe that's the only option left or it may become the only option left sometime in the future. But, like you said, secession to and nullification by smaller jurisdictions is also a strategy, although you may consider it a "legal" form of civil disobedience. You seem on board.

I see great potential for you (writer), once you straighten out some economic issues in your mind.

> "there will be another movement.
> i do not know when or how it will manifest.
> i just hope it will not be violent."

If it is violent, it is not libertarian in the most meaningful way, adhering to non-aggression.

> "this starts exactly how you and i are talking.
> it is the conversation which sparks the idea which ignites a passion which turns
> into a burning flame.
> i am a radical. a dissident. but radical times call for radical thinking."

If you want something not only radical, but also coherent and true, here you have libertarian anarchy.

> "you and i both want fairness,justice and truth. everybody does."

Yep.

> "some of our philosophy overlaps,other parts do not.
> we discuss the parts that do not overlap to better understand each other."

Yes, good. Keep listening, and you will see for yourself.

> "this forms a bond of empathy and understanding.
> which makes it far more harder to demonize each other in terms of the political
> class and propaganda corporate tv."

And for clarity, I don't say the corporate is made up of saints. I only point out that their power to abuse comes from government privilege that they can control. Whether corporations control this power or the mob does, either way, it is a threat to individual liberties. Break the government monopoly, and let the market provide for what we need, and they will have little power to abuse, or as little as possible, but both more power and incentive to do good.

> "I don't say the corporate world is made up of saints"

As long as government and not the market distributes the spoils, abusive plutocrats will arise.

As long as government and not the market distributes the spoils, kleptocrats will seek office to enrich themselves and cronies, as well as for the power trip.
As long as government and not the market distributes the spoils, kleptocrats will bribe the mob (the so-called people) with stolen goods taken from their legitimate owners through force.

The only real positive democracy, is market democracy, the one much harder to exploit and abuse. the one that is not a weapon used to benefit some at the expense of others.

> "the power elite do not want me to understand you,nor you to empathize with me."

But I do empathize with you! And you are making an effort to understand me.
And remember, many not in the "power elite" have been bribed/conditioned also to turn on you and prevent you from understanding/empathizing.

> "fear and division serve their interests.
> hyper-nationalistic xenophobia serves their interests.
> i aim to disappoint them."

Good for you! And for everyone else.

> "maybe it will help if i share the people i admire.
> chomsky,zinn,hedges,watts,harvey,roy,
> just some of the people who have influenced me greatly."

I know them well. Now perhaps you can take a look at things from a different angle, one that I think corrects some of their inconsistencies.

> "nowhere near as polite and awesome as you."

Thanks, man. You too