As a parent myself, I think he's making a fair and forceful statement here. His daughter's posting clearly demonstrates her entitlement, disrespect and immaturity. I'm guessing Lou is a consistent and fair disciplinarian and to this point his daughter hasn't gotten the message.

True, he could have donated the laptop to someone. But I doubt very much that he wants to spend more time wiping the personal data off it!

"My daughter complained about me to the whole world! I will get revenge by complaining to the whole world about her!" That's some good parenting there, Lou.

Apparently Lou Ferrigno provides the voice of THE HULK.

A man can believe one thing, and be tolerant of others... as well as have faith that people, if given the choice, will eventually do the right thing... even if though that is different for everyone, the most fit and fair system has a chance to emerge




..." the problem that we have with dealing with this subject is we see people as groups, as they belong to certain groups and that they derive their rights as belonging to groups. We don't get our rights because we're gays or women or minorities. We get our rights from our Creator as individuals. So every individual should be treated the same way. So if there is homosexual behavior in the military that is disruptive, it should be dealt with. But if there's heterosexual behavior that is disruptive, it should be dealt with. So it isn't the issue of homosexuality. It's the concept and the understanding of individual rights. If we understood that, we would not be dealing with this very important problem." - Ron Paul



-------------------- So how does this translate to the issues:

Defense of Marriage Act: allows a state to decline to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states or countries.

"“The Defense of Marriage Act was enacted in 1996 to stop Big Government in Washington from re-defining marriage and forcing its definition on the States,” Rep. Paul said last week in a statement. “Like the majority of Iowans, I believe that marriage is between one man and one woman and must be protected.”

[[ SEE, there is his OPINION and PERSONAL BELIEFS ]]

“I supported the Defense of Marriage Act, which used Congress’ constitutional authority to define what other states have to recognize under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, to ensure that no state would be forced to recognize a same sex marriage license issued in another state,” he added. “I have also cosponsored the Marriage Protection Act, which would remove challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act from the jurisdiction of the federal courts.”"

He's not saying they SHOULD. He's saying the people have a right to choose. Not that they then have a DUTY to vote as he would. He wants people to decide, because he believes that marriage should ultimately not involve government

I see how his logic may appear convoluted, but it is not when taken to the conclusion: People decide (right or wrong), and everyone should be free.
---

In 2004, Paul was one of only 27 House Republicans who voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment.

In 2010, he flipped from a “no” to a “yes” on repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. “I have received several calls and visits from constituents who, in spite of the heavy investment in their training, have been forced out of the military simply because they were discovered to be homosexual," he explained. “To me, this seems like an awful waste.”
------
Eric Dondero is the one telling "eye witness" stories about Ron Paul and he is not exactly credible as a political rival and former staffer...

"After 4yrs of never accusing the Doc of actually knowing directly about it, he comes out full bore accusing he checked off on everyone of them, all the while contradicting himself in the same sentence that he only read about 30% and sent notes off to his staff or ghostwriters to complete the newsletters."

Eric Dondero was FIRED by Paul and wants to run against him for office.

Eric Dondero, a staffer who was fired.
http://www.dailypaul.com/196808/while-one-fired-fmremployee-passive-aggressively-betrays-rp-one-finally-clarifies

Rockwell has denied responsibility for the newsletters' contents to The New Republic's Jamie Kirchick. Rockwell twice declined to discuss the matter with reason, maintaining this week that he had "nothing to say."

Murray Rothbard championed an open strategy of exploiting racial and class resentment to build a coalition with populist "paleoconservatives," producing a flurry of articles and manifestos whose racially charged talking points and vocabulary mirrored the controversial Paul newsletters

In 1993, Rothbard wrote about Malcolm X and discussed the possibility of a separate state for blacks, but concluded that it would "require massive "foreign aid" from the U.S.A.". He also described black nationalism as "a phony nationalism" that was "beginning to look like a drive for an aggravated form of coerced parasitism over the white population."

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard218.html


So who else did the newsletters? Lou Rockwell isn't of interest to me, MURRAY ROTHBARD is.

I am seriously disappointed that people here can connect the dots to Dr. Paul yet Rothbard is clearly innocent.

He just happened to die in 1995... and we've heard nothing about newsletter content as inflammatory as when he was involved, since.

You don't think Murray Rothbard, is worth looking at?

"Equality is not in the natural order of things, and the crusade to make everyone equal in every respect (except before the law) is certain to have disastrous consequences." - Murray Rothbard
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

he (Rothbard) also wrote film reviews under a pen name (anonymously)

Someone did the newsletters... in a way THEY KNEW would ensure their anonymity (because Ron Paul did not write the racist articles), perhaps by their position of trust in the company, or with tacit approval by one or more people attempting to subvert a cause for their own.

written misinformation is surely not all it takes to win you over

Why is it so hard to conceive that an active conspiracy to hide the newsletters from Paul was successful, when the outcome would be exactly the same as the one we're debating? The one where NO ONE has heard Ron Paul ever, EVER say anything like the things in the newsletters?

Ever. Not even HEARD him say it.

I knew of

Double Dagger ... punky band from baltimore

LCD Soundsystem ... guy who runs DFA but LCD was bigger than his own label somehow.

REM ... duh

The White Stripes ... duh

Ludicra ... metal band from east bay that had a wicked female vocalist

The Stills ... fuck em

Ponytail ... some weirdo mathy band from baltimore that probably should not have had a vocalist at all.

and Sonic Youth. Had no idea Sonic Youth threw in the towel but knew that Thurston and Kim are getting divorced which is sad in and of itself.


All I know is that I did not see Lou Reed or Metallica on the list ... leaves me disappointed.

That's good assuming there, Lou!

So you're saying the US government is going to specially treat certain groups poorly because Ron Paul would be in office? FAIL.

go to Mississippi, talk to anyone black over the age of 60 about life before the late 1960s. Then ask them if federal enforcement of civil rights helped at all.

The civil rights act helped primarily because it prevented the public institutions run by the local, state, and federal government from discriminating. We definitely have a problem when the government treats people unequally. And yes, I'm sure that there were some private institutions that did more than inconvenience minorities before the 1960s because they discriminated, but guess what? That's not applicable today. If Taco Bell says no more white people allowed, the white people will go next door! Barely even an inconvenience.

You don't care because you don't think you will be turned away from buying goods or services. Not your problem.

This is where you show that you're just trolling and not actually serious. If you were serious, you wouldn't make an ass out of yourself by ass-uming.

>> ^longde:

No, the reason I'm not going to vote for Ron Paul is because of his specific position on a specific piece of legislation and policy.
Special (negative) treatment for certain groups is what I don't want. I'm not even talking about affirmative action (where did that come from?), I'm talking about the civil rights act of 64.
"Social change comes from social elements, not the government. A person feels much more pressure from their peers than from laws."
As one example out of many, go to Mississippi, talk to anyone black over the age of 60 about life before the late 1960s. Then ask them if federal enforcement of civil rights helped at all.
As for businesses not allowing a certain group or groups to buy from them, and people putting up signs of "none of your kind here"... who cares?
You don't care because you don't think you will be turned away from buying goods or services. Not your problem.
Let that occur on the state level, if it's needed at all. Could it cause certain states to become more racist? Sure, but that would only hurt that state more in the long run.
I'm sure any brown citizen in Arizona strongly disagrees. Again, you don't care because you don't think you'll ever be affected negatively.


I'm sure any brown citizen in Arizona strongly disagrees. Again, you don't care because you don't think you'll ever be affected negatively.

Again, we're talking about government legislation. Silly laws get passed all the time. In this case it has surely hurt Arizona already, and will continue to hurt them. I'd say 'let them be dumb', but in this case we don't really need to, as I doubt their law is constitutional.

Lou Reed is spinning in his grave before he's even dead.

Lordy-Lou!

awww...thanks anyways! I am glad someone likes it.

In reply to this comment by oohlalasassoon:
>> ^siftbot:

Invocations (promote) cannot be called by oohlalasassoon because oohlalasassoon is not privileged - sorry.


Click this, siftbot \

>> ^siftbot:

Invocations (promote) cannot be called by oohlalasassoon because oohlalasassoon is not privileged - sorry.


Click this, siftbot

You're wish is my command

http://videosift.com/video/Emmy-Lou-Harris-Transatlantic-Sessions
>> ^deathcow:

would like to hear some ELH from this same gathering
some youngg ELH http://videosift.com/video/Emmylou-Harris-Pancho-and-Left-1977-live

Tags for this video have been changed from 'brad, nowell, lou dog, lovin, overdose' to 'brad, nowell, lou dog, lovin, overdose, sublime' - edited by DerHasisttot

Yes, yes. Any school with famous liberals who graduated are now completely invalid as educational institutions. That's how you get around that one. Harvard Law is a crap school. So here are the conservative graduates who also don't have a valid degree according to you:

Chief Justice John Roberts
Former Chief Justice William Rehnquist
Justice Antonin Scalia
George W. Bush
William Bennett
Henry Paulson
Bill Frist
Ted "Series of Tubes" Stevens
Mitt Romney
Alan Keyes
Lou Dobbs
Bill O'Reilly

Man... too bad they must all be idiots... and they clearly don't have a grasp on being "American".

Do you ever stop and think before you say things like that?

You don't get to invalidate someone's academic achievement because you politically disagree with them... Well, you can, but it just makes you look incredibly stupid. There's something horribly wrong with people who look down on someone's intelligence despite graduating from one of the elite colleges in the US because they disagree with them. Ridiculous...

Sarah Palin can really galvanize and lead, eh?

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/07/palin-unfavorable-rating-reaches-new-high/

What, are all polls now liberally biased, too?!

And nice try attempting to make this about how well Obama has done as President. That wasn't the debate. You said Palin is just as smart, if not smarter, than Obama. She's not. Period. You can't even sanely argue that she is. She's of average to above average intelligence overall, but sorely lacks knowledge of the economy, foreign policy, and other crucial topics needed to be a good president. Plain and simple. Your political leanings shouldn't cloud that assessment. There are plenty of right wingers who also can accept Palin just isn't smart, and Obama is.

Bonus: The only person who brought up Al Gore is you. This isn't a liberal vs conservative thing. This is you saying idiotic things flying in the face of simple facts.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Did you seriously just say Obama's intellect is comparable to Palin's?!
Palin has a far better grasp on what it means to be an American than a bitter leftist who sat in a hate-Whitey church for 20-plus years. His Earness is endlessly promoted by His media lackeys, so a fair comparison is not possible.
SERIOUSLY?!?!?!? Look, gaffes aside, Obama graduated from Harvard Law School with a JD magna cum laude. Palin took six years to get a bachelor's degree in communications bouncing around from school to school to get it!
You might have had a point when Harvard wasn't a politically-correct degree mill. Speaking of kollij, we will never see Obama's kollij papers to know his genius even then. Community organizer? Do you even need higher education to become a rabble-rousing 'activist'?
Dude, if the conservative/libertarian ideology concluded the world is flat, would you spout that crap, too?! In fact, your beloved Ron Paul wouldn't tell Obama he's not smart enough to be president.
I don't need any labels to denounce His Earness. I merely observe the results of his incompetence (or genius, for those promoting the one-world illuminati worldview). His results are indefensible by any metric you care to name.
Just ridiculous. I get you don't like Obama, but that doesn't mean you should ignore basic fact. And I'm sorry, but she's simply not smart enough to be president. This has nothing to do with her ideology. Plenty of conservative politicians are out there who have the intellectual capacity to be president, but she's not one of them.
Due to an unfortunate media-created outbreak of Palin Derangement Syndrome, your observation cannot be quantified. Anyone here think Joe Biden is smart enough to operate a doorknob much less be President?
BONUS NO. 2 -- "Who are these people?" -- mid-90s Vice President and supergenius Al Gore, referring to the busts of Jefferson, Washington and Franklin during a tour of Monticello, home of Thomas Jefferson.

>> ^raverman:

Music as an 'art form' requires artistic talent and skill to be considered "good". The various skills necessary to be a talented singer are well known and documented.
This can only be classed as Entertainment... people are entitled to enjoy it much as they would America's funniest home videos, a bad pun, or a children's clown act.
But it's not Musical Art as it includes no skill or talent.


If we were to only talk about singing then you could say the same about Bob Dylan, Jimmi Hendrix, Lou Reed, or hundreds of other obviously talented people.

Her singing is not the best in the world, but it's certainly good enough to be a part of a music project of some kind.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'klemen slakonja, Just Gigolo, live, Louis Prima David Lee Roth Lou Bega Slovenia' to 'klemen slakonja, Just Gigolo, live, Louis Prima, David Lee Roth, Lou Bega, Slovenia' - edited by eric3579