OMG IMPROMPTU DANCE PARTY!!! I'm soooo jealous!

In reply to this comment by berticus:
PARTY PARTY PARTY HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE!

let's share new years eve stories

we had a party.
a young woman slipped over on broken glass and cut her elbow severely enough that she bled all over our house and needed an ambulance. DRAMA!
i tried fire poi for the first time in about 7 years and burnt my hair but it was awesome.
and on the stroke of midnight we had an impromptu dance party in my room.

actually, i think i just had the best new years i've had in a long time.

*promote

PARTY PARTY PARTY HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE!

let's share new years eve stories

we had a party.
a young woman slipped over on broken glass and cut her elbow severely enough that she bled all over our house and needed an ambulance. DRAMA!
i tried fire poi for the first time in about 7 years and burnt my hair but it was awesome.
and on the stroke of midnight we had an impromptu dance party in my room.

actually, i think i just had the best new years i've had in a long time.

*promote

>> ^volumptuous:

omg the music is so fucking terrible, and pointless. bigtime rave dance party in the womb? wtf?


Rave? This ain't rave.

omg the music is so fucking terrible, and pointless. bigtime rave dance party in the womb? wtf?

I love this because it seems they did this anti protest exactly right. WBC's agenda is to incite anger and to draw out the worst in people. It's so easy to go out there and just want to punch Shirley Phelps-Roper right in the mouth, but then they win. Going out there and starting a festive dance party around them was just classic. My favorite signs were "God hates Jay Leno (team Conan ftw!)" and "Vampires suck!"

>> ^bmacs27:

@blankfist You're argument is bunk. It's not public property, it's government property. Try having a dance party in the Oval Office, or NORAD, or even a busy intersection to highlight your freedom of expression and see how far that gets you. As far as first amendment rights are concerned, they are equivalent.


I didn't know NORAD was a monument open to the public. Good to know it's exactly the same as the Jefferson Memorial.

@blankfist You're argument is bunk. It's not public property, it's government property. Try having a dance party in the Oval Office, or NORAD, or even a busy intersection to highlight your freedom of expression and see how far that gets you. As far as first amendment rights are concerned, they are equivalent.

Actually, this protest has its roots months ago.

A bunch of happy libertarians wanted to celebrate Jefferson's birthday. So they planned a little midnight dance party, with iPods so no music could be heard, done quietly to minimize the impact, thinking that there wouldn't be any tourists to disturb. No harm was intended, it was just a little celebration.

They were still loud though, and they were asked to leave. Everyone left, loudly protesting but no big whoop, except one woman, who got arrested.

I don't know exactly what transpired next, but she sued and lost, and appealed and lost.

It was the loss on appeal that led Adam Kokesh to post a YouTube invitation to anyone to come to the Memorial at a specific time, during the day. That is what you see at the other video -- what happened with the public demonstration.

As I posted on the first video:
For those interested, here are links to the original flash mob event that precipitated the chain of events that led to this action:

Part I - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-IpdeMqlkM&feature=player_embedded

Part II -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujrSAJ1b6Go (the first person you see is the woman who ends up getting arrested at the end of this part)

And here is the original facebook invitation to the first birthday celebration:

"It's a secret birthday/dance party thrown by a group of flashmobbing libertarians. Tell friends about it if they are 1. Awesome. 2. Can keep their mouth shut 3. libertarians

Sweet dance moves wouldn't hurt either.

It works best if we all listen to the same song (nominate on the wall) but since libertarians are "free to choose" come prepared to listen to whatever makes you happy."



>> ^dag:

^Agreed. And remember that this video has to be viewed in context, having watched this video first: http://videosift.com/video/Police-State-Arrested-For-Dan
cing-in-the-Jefferson-Memorial
This second video is a direct response to the first - these are people putting themselves at risk of being arrested - to support the innocent people who were assaulted and arrested for shuffling their feet a bit in the previous video.

This is like those Begat bible verses:

1. A group of admirers of Jefferson decide to celebrate his birthday at midnight, when tourist traffic is low, by "dancing" with iPods plugged into their ears. The original facebook page invitation, slightly edited:
"It's a secret birthday/dance party thrown by a group of flashmobbing libertarians. Tell friends about it if they are 1. Awesome. 2. Can keep their mouth shut 3. libertarians

Sweet dance moves wouldn't hurt either.

It works best if we all listen to the same song (nominate on the wall) but since libertarians are "free to choose" come prepared to listen to whatever makes you happy."

Seems to me it was a sweet idea to honor someone they admired, knowing it probably wasn't okay (secret, going at midnight, they knew they were being naughty, but no big whoop.) No disrespect intended.

2. Disrespect, however, was perceived by others. The video shows a party-like atmosphere, which attracted attention enough for the partiers to be asked to leave.

3. Being asked to leave was perceived as being disrespectful to the rights of the partiers.

4. Not leaving (the woman who was arrested, not the guy filming, who left) was perceived as disrespectful.

5. Being arrested was perceived as disrespectful.

6. Which led to a series of other events, all of which were perceived as disrespectful by one "side" or the other.

Perceived disrespect begats perceived disrespect begats perceived disrespect.

Who is going to step outside this cycle and say, hey, can we go about this differently? Because going on like this perpetuates nothing but bad feelings and a lot of lawyer fees.

This video has been declared a duplicate by the original submitter; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof declared by alien_concept.

Jesus christ, how did this not get noticed before. I went to fix the embed with the already existing one, pfft.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/The-Office-UK-David-Brent-Dance-Party

Tags for this video have been changed from 'buddy, holly, peggy, sue' to 'buddy holly, peggy sue, the crickets, arthur murray, dance party' - edited by therealblankman

Worst.
Dance Party.
Evar.

non narrated version here http://www.videosift.com/video/Sasquatch-Music-Festival-09-One-Guy-Starts-a-Dance-Party

I feel like I've just been at a politically-active dance party. Did those graphics make anyone else feel like dancing?