>> ^Smugglarn:
Go fuck yourself.
Then die.>> ^Payback:
I've wondered why I've never felt any real compassion for him, then it dawned on me. Before the cancer, he was such an uptight, sanctimonious prick, so in love with his own voice... just seemed kharmically balanced to me. At least he seems to have learned some humility.



Bravo Smugglarn! As eloquent as any of Ebert's critiques! Well said!

Personally, I'm impressed you can actually type so well with your "two thumbs up" your ass.

To anyone else who might not share my derision of the man, and are unable to access their extensive vocabulary with such ease and aplomb as Smugglarn, please take my previous comments as being from someone who absolutely despised Ebert, even back when he had his health. While I wouldn't wish his fate on anyone, I still note he makes a SHIT TON of money as the newpaper critic that started his career. I just have a hard time feeling bad for someone whose benefits far outweigh their challenges.

Go fuck yourself.

Then die.>> ^Payback:

I've wondered why I've never felt any real compassion for him, then it dawned on me. Before the cancer, he was such an uptight, sanctimonious prick, so in love with his own voice... just seemed kharmically balanced to me. At least he seems to have learned some humility.

I've wondered why I've never felt any real compassion for him, then it dawned on me. Before the cancer, he was such an uptight, sanctimonious prick, so in love with his own voice... just seemed kharmically balanced to me. At least he seems to have learned some humility.

I also really agree with this one; instilling a moral compass into your child should be paramount in preventing them from being jerks. I think parenting has a much stronger influence on behavioral shaping compared to preaching, for the reasons you outlined. If everyone parented like you, perhaps there'd be less crappy people in the world.

So how do you get more parents to do their job better?

>> ^enoch:


it is the hypocrisy of the "church" that drives people away from that institution.
do as we say not as we do.
you pointed this out so lets try a different exercise.
lets change "church" to "community".
and instead of relying on religious dogma and doctrine lets instead rely on "personal responsibility".
i know many amazing christians who live by their religious faith.they teach by example and judge noone and then you have the people you mentioned hiding behind cherry picked scripture in order to admonish and judge those they disagree with and is a huuuuge reason why many ignore some of the great teachings.
hypocrisy is not a redeemable quality to admire and it harms the very pertinent message some are trying to convey.
i believe it all starts with parenting.
the way i see my job as a father is to instill in my boys integrity,character.
to have the courage to stand by their convictions and the humility to accept when they are wrong.
to realize the world does not revolve around them.
that choices have consequences and if they choose wrongly to accept those consequences without whining.
the question you seek to tackle is a societal one and will take far more than a comment thread to address but if you are refering to "church" as a community which could be a positive force in not only a growing childs development but also as a benefit for families in general.then i would tend to agree with you.
but many walked away from the religion due to the hypocrisy and in doing so lost that very vital part of raising a family.
thats my take on your comment...though it may appear off topic i agree with you that it is a vital component.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

larger societal issues
OK - let's tackle them instead of dancing around them. The human race is collectively a bunch of selfish jerkwads who by and large conduct themselves deplorably. Many of them are overtly bad and steal, swear, commit violence, or any number of vile deeds. Others are jerks who lie, manipulate, abandon personal responsibility, and seek to undermine others for their own benefit. Still more are hypersensitive and hold grudges over petty things for years, gossip, or see personal affronts where none exist. Still others are poor saps who have had bad things happen to them and use it as an excuse to Be bad themselves. I could go on and on.
Since before human history, humans have been this way. Pretending that there is some sort of "solution" that will make the tendency of humans to be jackhats just go away is preposterously naive. The best you can do is try to MANAGE this tendency. Therefore the question becomes this... "What is the most statistically effective method that will reduce the human tendency to be a bunch of jerks?"
The answer is obvious - and probably antithetical to a lot of the people here in the Sift. But it is undeniable. MORALITY. Personal morality. And what is the best venue for acquiring a personal morality and philosophical ethic?
Church.
Yes. I said it. Everyone talks about wanting to 'make a better world by making better people', but there are only a few organizations that make that their sole objective. And yet these same organizations (that are the best hope we have for establishing a 'moral people') are routinely villified, attacked, denigrated, mocked, and regarded with disdain and hostility by the very people moaning that we need 'better people'.
I'm not saying churches/religions are perfect. People are still jerks, and will misappropriate ANY organization to justify their own jerkiness. Religions have suffered from that problem for a long time. It seems to me quite a baffling degree of blindness that we have people carping about the need for a "better world" and yet at the same time the same people attack, trash, and denigrate both the organizations and people that are specifically dedicated to that function.
I fully expect this opinion to be attacked in and of itself, ignoring the fact that I have freely admitted religion isn't perfect. I'm just saying that religion - Christianity most specifically - is entirely DESIGNED to instill in people the moral base some of you are pining for. Turn the other cheek. Love thy neighbor. Do good to them that despitefully use you. Honor father & mother. Do not steal, lie, or fool around - yadda yadda yadda. Should not this kind of sentiment be promoted, rather than attacked? Or - if not 'promoted' - shouldn't it at least be tolerated and respected rather than attacked?


it is the hypocrisy of the "church" that drives people away from that institution.
do as we say not as we do.
you pointed this out so lets try a different exercise.
lets change "church" to "community".
and instead of relying on religious dogma and doctrine lets instead rely on "personal responsibility".

i know many amazing christians who live by their religious faith.they teach by example and judge noone and then you have the people you mentioned hiding behind cherry picked scripture in order to admonish and judge those they disagree with and is a huuuuge reason why many ignore some of the great teachings.
hypocrisy is not a redeemable quality to admire and it harms the very pertinent message some are trying to convey.

i believe it all starts with parenting.
the way i see my job as a father is to instill in my boys integrity,character.
to have the courage to stand by their convictions and the humility to accept when they are wrong.
to realize the world does not revolve around them.
that choices have consequences and if they choose wrongly to accept those consequences without whining.

the question you seek to tackle is a societal one and will take far more than a comment thread to address but if you are refering to "church" as a community which could be a positive force in not only a growing childs development but also as a benefit for families in general.then i would tend to agree with you.
but many walked away from the religion due to the hypocrisy and in doing so lost that very vital part of raising a family.

thats my take on your comment...though it may appear off topic i agree with you that it is a vital component.

>> ^Drachen_Jager:

Yeah, Watson is a bit of a cheat. Give him average human reflexes if you want to test how good he is at Jeopardy. We all know a computer can beat a human in the reflexes department.


Not just reflexes...give him human humility or doubt. That'll be enough to slow him right down and start Hunting Sarah Conor!

>> ^NinjaInHeat:
First of all, you misunderstood me completely, I was talking about spiritual belief, there's a difference between believing the sun will come up and believing in god and even there I have a problem with the verb "believe". I don't believe the sun will come up, I know it has come up every day since the day I was born so I assume (with quite a bit of certainty) that it will come up again tomorrow.
I understood from your words that you believe in god, you talk about meaning with such certainty and then you talk about humility? To me, true humility is accepting you can't truly believe in things of the spiritual nature, they are metaphysical, you have no means of judging their meaning/existence or lack there of. You could look at the different explanations science/religion/your own personal interpretation can offer and say which you feel the most at peace with.
You talk about the "trap" of nihilism, again, ironic. As far as I'm concerned religious belief is the trap, it is in of it self arrogance, it is saying "I believe in something because I do, because I have faith". I don't "believe" in science, I accept that it is our most efficient tool at understanding the world, it isn't an answer, it is a means. I don't understand how any humble human being deems it justifiable to just pick from a plethora of so called "answers" or "truths" and say "this one, this is true, this explains everything, there is meaning". Again, if I misunderstood, I apologize, but if you are religious then why would you talk about something like the sun rising and falling? It is a physical phenomenon that we can observe and make (somewhat) objective assumptions about. You must realize that in religion logic is never on your side, it is the belief in spite of logic, the insistence on the least likely, arrogance.


I can tell you're itching to attack my views here, but since you're not sure, you can't unload the big guns. I'll make it easier for you. Yes, I believe in God. No, it isn't because I was raised with religion (i wasn't), nor was I indoctrinated. I was agnostic until a few years ago. I believe in God because of personal revelation.

Now you say God isn't likely. How would you know? If you want to look at it that way, everything is equally unlikely. Why should anything exist at all? I think you're having the problem that most atheists have, seperating the question from religious ideas about it. The question, "Was the Universe created?" is a perfectly reasonable one. I don't see why it seems so out there to some people to believe that the Universe could have been created. To say it all exploded out of nothing randomly I think is a much more bizzare (and ridiculous) thought.

The spiritual is not something you believe in, it's something you experience. It's not a matter of conceptualizing it, it's a matter of what is happening in actuality, real time, in the here and now. Before my beliefs changed, I had no clue what any of it was all about. I presumed people were imagining it. Not so. There are interconnections between us which transcend physiciality. There are parallel realities in which people can and do travel, in their dreams or wide awake. Until you experience it personally, you absolutely won't know anything about it what-so-ever. It's like trying to watch a football game from outside the stadium based on the noise the crowd is making.

I don't believe the things I do, or have the faith I have, because of some selfish need or weakness or fear. I believe as I do because of my personal experience. I wouldn't believe it, otherwise. It isn't arrogant of me to believe in something in which I have sufficient evidence personally. To me, truth is something tangible; it is not a vague conception. It is the framework of who and what I am. Regardless of whether it seems real to someone else, it is real to me, and the impact I have on the world is a direct result of that truth. So, either way you look at it, it's a real thing. This is what I meant about all the meaning out there. 7 billion human beings living out their truth. It is tangible to all of us.

First of all, you misunderstood me completely, I was talking about spiritual belief, there's a difference between believing the sun will come up and believing in god and even there I have a problem with the verb "believe". I don't believe the sun will come up, I know it has come up every day since the day I was born so I assume (with quite a bit of certainty) that it will come up again tomorrow.

I understood from your words that you believe in god, you talk about meaning with such certainty and then you talk about humility? To me, true humility is accepting you can't truly believe in things of the spiritual nature, they are metaphysical, you have no means of judging their meaning/existence or lack there of. You could look at the different explanations science/religion/your own personal interpretation can offer and say which you feel the most at peace with.

You talk about the "trap" of nihilism, again, ironic. As far as I'm concerned religious belief is the trap, it is in of it self arrogance, it is saying "I believe in something because I do, because I have faith". I don't "believe" in science, I accept that it is our most efficient tool at understanding the world, it isn't an answer, it is a means. I don't understand how any humble human being deems it justifiable to just pick from a plethora of so called "answers" or "truths" and say "this one, this is true, this explains everything, there is meaning". Again, if I misunderstood, I apologize, but if you are religious then why would you talk about something like the sun rising and falling? It is a physical phenomenon that we can observe and make (somewhat) objective assumptions about. You must realize that in religion logic is never on your side, it is the belief in spite of logic, the insistence on the least likely, arrogance.

>> ^shinyblurry:

>> ^NinjaInHeat:
The lack of conviction you speak of, the unwillingness to accept any "truth" as absolute is by definition the opposite of arrogance. How can anyone who -believes- in anything say to the "non-believer" that he's arrogant? A believer must be arrogant enough to say "I believe in this, I don't believe in that", a logical person simply says "I am not informed enough to decide what is true and what is not, I believe everything is possible". As far as I'm concerned, belief is the ultimate form of arrogance: a person allowing himself not to be completely objectiveBR>

Believing something is not the ultimate arrogance. I believe the Sun will come up tomorrow. Is that arrogant, or is it just good sense? Essentially, I am taking a leap of faith, but the precipice isn't very high. We can believe things just on the basis of observation and deduction. Just because I could be wrong doesn't mean I have no basis for my belief. My belief there is completely justified by the long history of the Sun coming up every day without fail, the stability we find in the continuim, and what we have observed about the behavior of Sol and other similar stars.
How is one supposed to be truly objective? Only God could be truly objective. We simply don't have enough information to be objective about anything. Our lives are consumed with self-interest. Just to maintain our life here we have to eat, be clothed, etc. I guarantee you no one on Earth is as interested in this as you are. We are inherently selfish for this reason. We have to be. It isn't like someone else could or would live our lives for us. Unless we reach out and grab it for ourselves, no one is going to be putting it in our hand.
A logical person may say he isn't informed enough to make judgments about everything, but he is reasonably informed enough about some things to feel fairly confident in his stance. Is that arrogance? To believe something is true, regardless of whether he could be wrong or not? We all have that in common, you know. Every one of us could be wrong about absolutely everything we know as true and real. I think its admirable, to take a stand for what you believe in, as obviously Mr Hitchins did and still does. I think its cowardice to dismiss it all as meaningless. The Earth is ripe with meaning, with value. It screams out to us every moment of every day. To look at this world and see nothing meaningful has got to be a mental illness at best.

>> ^EmptyFriend:

>> ^MonkeySpank:
I hated every movie this guy has made, but people can change. So I have, and now I like him for his humility and sense of humor in such difficult times. I hope he beats it!

I'm not a huge fan of most of his movies, but I do appreciate "Romancing the Stone", "Falling Down", and "Traffic".


Yeah, Falling Down was brilliant, and I don't say that about a lot of films. Also, don't forget some of his other gems: The Game, War of the Roses, Black Rain. Come on!

>> ^MonkeySpank:

I hated every movie this guy has made, but people can change. So I have, and now I like him for his humility and sense of humor in such difficult times. I hope he beats it!


I'm not a huge fan of most of his movies, but I do appreciate "Romancing the Stone", "Falling Down", and "Traffic".

I hated every movie this guy has made, but people can change. So I have, and now I like him for his humility and sense of humor in such difficult times. I hope he beats it!

Apart with all the embarrassment and humility this caused. She knows she made a goof. She's embarrassed and feels foolish. So what.

Now, the video is a whole different issue. I'm not a lawyer nor will I pretend to be but this has got to raise a few eyebrows. This video turns a silly mistake into a gigantic problem.

It's the whole "Smile, you're on public camera" issue. It's a Big Brother thing.
What do the invisible people behind all these cameras do with the footage of you (a private citizen) as you go to the mall, walk in the park, fill up with gas and generally go on with your day to day activities. Why do they have the right to film everything you do? We all assume the video is logged in some sort of system and deleted down the road when not used for any reason (ie: a robbery didn't take place).

If it is deleted, we all say, "whatever, that footage wasn't used" and we move on. If it does get used to expose a crime, we say, "great, I'm glad they caught the guy - hey look there's me in the background."

But what about all the footage being misused? Posting it to youtube and being publicly humiliated on a large scale is just part of it. What about using it to stalk, invasion of privacy and many other things people can think of? Now we have to be afraid to scratch our nose in public for fear of being recorded and posted to Youtube with a caption reading "Man picks nose in public". (Ewe gross!).

The point is, regardless of the humility this woman received and then was elevated to, these companies need to take a professional outlook on this information and be held accountable.

It's like going to the Emergency ward because you got shot in the but (keeping it Disney here), and then they video tape you coming in and them removing the bullet (as part of their procedure). OK, you leave, no problem. then one day you find out the video is on Youtube. Ya, you feel dumb, and embarrassed for shooting yourself in the rump, but you sue because of the gross violation of personal medical information.

There has got to be some accountability here, if there is no policy in place, she should be able to sue the Mall. If there is a policy in place, the individual should loose his job and be found liable. If they can't find out who did it, then the Mall is responsible for not having proper security measures in place to track who had access to security information.

I couldn't stop staring at the reflection of the teleprompter in her glasses.

I am unable to bring myself to like this woman. I have watched her and I have looked for a behavioral pattern that would help me to discern what motivates her. All that I can see is selfishness, zealotry, and mindless far right wing fundamentalism. The only time that I have seen her display emotion that might not be described as disingenuous was when she was directly confronted by an Alaskan resident who was not happy with her. It was that sudden look of surprise at the possibility that someone might not think that she is wonderful. There is no humility here, there is only ego. I get no sense that she has ever done anything in her public life that could be considered truly selfless.

I am tired of her and I hope that one day she gets left behind by the world of politics and personality and we never have to experience her flavor of nonsense again. Sarah Palin, reduced to a footnote in the political history of the country as a person that did nothing, changed nothing, knew nothing.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

gorilla: dghandi said it better than I could have.
danny: If I called you racist or a homophobic, it was because I found something you wrote racist or homophobic. Don't take it personally. Post the link if you'd like me to further clarify.
As for Geesus, he chose to out himself. I didn't mention his name. Here's the thread: http://videosift.com/video/Tea-Party-Only-Property-Owners-S
hould-Be-Allowed-To-Vote


Yes, your modesty and humility is fast becoming legend.

I would like to see a movie, where humanity gets its ass kicked for good and no one, not even the HUAAHH mighty US army can do damn thing. Learning humility the hard way! Get a message to the people for christmas! But then, some smart scientist plants a virus ... erm, wait ... is this not the Hollywood producers meeting?