OMG - Share the WIFI already - It's not sharing something personal - It's like letting someone hear your music or watch your TV while they are over. This is so messed up .
If it bothers you that much, change your password once in a while.

So he messed up the first trick but Jimmy didn't out him? Am I reading the body language properly? Jimmy seems to give him some shit on the second trick "nice trick". If that is correct, perhaps it was intentional to lure him into a false sense of security?

I could be wrong but I feel like he didn't get a correct read on the cards he picked.

Am I the only one who thought that the test where they showed the little girl a lineup of different colored children and asked her to point out the good one and the bad one seemed a little messed up? Is it even possible to give an answer that wouldn't be disturbing in one way or another? What if she chose a white person instead of someone of color?
Sorry, but that test just has WTF written all over it.

oops ... did I mess up the length? Should be 60 seconds

*cute *length=60

Can't watch the vid because it's blocked for me, so I apologise if anything I mention is covered by the vid.

There are very few cases where opiates are a good idea for chronic pain (as yours is). The research (which the new CDC guidelines on pain management incorporate) shows there is very little evidence opiates are beneficial for managing chronic pain. The only situations where it should be considered for chronic use are basically end of life (including cancer and palliative). The downsides are just huge, and outweigh the benefits for just about every other situation.

The reasons? Apart from the obvious stuff like tolerance, addiction, death and the rest of the massive list of side effects, there is also a lesser known problem called hyperalgesia. Opioid induced hyperalgesia is where the use of opioids actually prime the body to become more sensitive to pain, even after the opioid has left the body. So in essence, people unaware of this problem think they are reliant on opioids, but in reality taking the opioids may make them more likely to need more analgesia. It's pretty messed up actually, and there should be more education about it, particularly to the doctors doing the prescribing.

They messed up a little bit. Hand wound pocket watches don't tick in the traditional sense as they have a balance spring that causes the balance wheel to oscillate at a resonant frequency typically much greater than once per second (usually at least 4 beats per second). Only quartz watches have the classic tick/tick/tick sound each second. Those only came out in the late 1960's and don't require winding.

That was a nice discussion about buying the election. I think that possibly the worst fact in the world is that marketing works. On everybody. If you spend enough money, you will influence more than enough people to do pretty much anything. The only defence - and what stops this from literally being 'buying an election' - is the other side spending money on marketing too.

In my opinion, two things need to change. 1) campaign financing, and 2) replace First Past The Post.

Having said that, I'm in Ireland, and we do have a good voting system, and reasonable (if not great) campaign financing laws, but it's still messed up. I've voted in every election I could, but have only ever voted against candidates, never for (i.e. I order my vote from least bad to worst). I've only seen one candidate I'd vote for, but he wasn't in my constituency.

The difference is, at least if/when a good candidate or new party comes along, we can vote for them without losing our voice.

This American election cycle has been the best ad for these facts that I've ever seen.

Same here, I don't think I will buy an iPhone ever again after the 5s I have. I usually hook it up to my PC, and I swear that iTunes for PC is so shitty that it has literally messed up/bugged out the iOS, so that it's always restarting on it's own. I took it into be repaired, they couldn't figure it out and recommended that I buy a new iPhone... typical. It still works, but it's a pain in the ass.

I fully support messing up ALL instragram food photos! I'm coming for you now, wife!

I guess that's where we differ.

I find it funny precisely because such things really happen.

In a world where no such cruelty exists, I think this kind of material would then become empty and pointless. Comedy thrives on the defiance of our misery.

I dare say it would get less of a laugh in Sweden for this very reason.

I'm clearly in the minority here, but then I suspect few people have developed the same sense of cynical detachment I have (working with the severely mentally I'll and dieing will do that to you).

The humour is definitely there, I guess you just need a suitably fucked up perspective to appreciate it.

Out of curiosity, did you find Jim's old bit about the child getting shot when he was in Iraq funny? I might suggest that is an even more cruel and fucked up situation than the subject matter being discussed here.

Would that only become funny when children are no longer victims of wars? Or is it funny precisely because of the incomprehensible cruelty and misfortune underlying it?

Perhaps you have an easier time detaching yourself from something that isn't as likely to happen to you? This seems reasonable, but I don't see how it precludes such material from being funny, only more challenging for one to engage with. (and thus more powerful if one can do so)

To bring in a thread from another reply "And this is the brilliance of Louis -- that he lays bare the humanity of even pedophiles. The truth of pedophiles."

In what sense is Jim not doing the same thing here? He is flippantly exploring Cosby's desire to victimise women, we all have desires and sometimes act on those impulses when we shouldn't.
Rape is an extreme example, but the thought process is ultimately the same thing writ large. "I want a thing I can't have, but I'm doing it anyway".
I might argue he is laying bare the universal human condition in just the same way, albeit with something closer to home for most people than paedophilia.

Presumably it's the other thread that's proving challenging, i.e. the masochistic idea of enjoying ones abuse? And again, there is something deeply fucked up at the heat of the human condition here. Deriving pleasure from victim hood, or having messed up priorities about fame and opportunity.
Stockholm syndrome, abused partners loving their spouses, groupies allowing themselves to be abused just to be near their idols.

We are really that fucked up as a species sometimes, cognitive dissonance is almost a way of life for most of us in our own little ways. It's clearly a deeply risque subject, but there is something dark at the core of the human condition there none the less.

The actual victims don't need to have the kind of mixed up priorities Jim is alluding to, we only have to recognise that we posses the capacity for that dissonance ourselves. (The joke being at the expense of our own inherent hypocrisies, not specific victims)

The only big difference I can really see is that child rape is much rarer than the kind being discussed here. (and thus I suppose easier for most to detach themselves from)

Is it really any less horrific? Surely if anything it is far more terrible for most victims and usually seems to cause more damage to their lives.

How does Louis's material on Child rape remain funny in a world where children are raped, yet Jim's material about women being raped only become funny in a world where they do not get raped?

Paedophiles have a culture too. They form groups, exchange materials, praise each others work etc. etc. Not to mention grooming rings and other such reprehensible things.

I understand that a particular subject can strike too close to home, but for me that was my failing to rise above my own fears and traumas. When I finally got to a place where I could laugh at my own victim hood, it was one of the most liberating experiences of my life. (Don't get me wrong, that shit never completely goes away)

I'm not pointing at anyone here. You seem to have taken this as personal offense. I am not asking you to apologize for anyone. You didn't enslave anyone and neither did I. I didn't choose my parents or my race so I don't expect to be blamed for my ancestral guilt. If someone were to blame me for that, then that would also be racism.

Not sure what you read, but what I said is once enslaved people go back into society, there should be some radical reparations to bring them back to societal standards. Historically speaking, we failed miserably at that. If we can't even accept that, then we are not there yet.

My original comment was not an apology, but a highlight on the fact that we, as a nation, messed up. Your expectation that "everyone on the planet regardless of race, religion, nationality and life experiences to be a decent human being" is a valid one. What irks me, though, is when people blame one bad action on the individual at times, yet at others times, they conveniently blame the exact same bad action on an entire race.

*WTF

Politician getting voided out for not being truthful. This is so messed up.

In USA there are 2 professions that are legally allowed to lie, Politicians and cops.

Making choices of a higher morality and ethical value definitely makes anyone superior. You yourself are more superior than anyone that has made the choice to beat a woman, are you not? You are physically capable of it, perhaps there might even be a life threatening or survival situation where it's necessary, but you don't do it simply because "you can" or because it makes you feel good. That is what makes you superior.
You're also superior to anyone that has decided to drive drunk too. You are superior to people who take slaves, you are superior to people that run or knowingly buy from sweatshops, etc etc.

Churches and cults are different story because they are based on flawed traditions instead of logical and consequence based choices, and demonstrable fact. Becoming vegan is a rational decision (funnily enough "spiritual" people are the ones that tend to be most aggressive when approached about veganism).

Even non vegans like Sam Harris will agree that it's the ethically superior thing to do.

Three year olds aren't necessarily self-aware either, and I hear that with a bit of south-west sauce they cook up real nice. But wait, you know that's wrong, because being self-aware isn't the only thing we measure this situation by. There are a lot of factors that go into this and in our current time and state of civilization we know it's wrong, however there have been cannibals in the past after all. Sentient or not we know that animals feel pain, they get sad, they can be happy etc. Yet we inflict pain onto them for our pleasure, that is wrong. When you see a street dog all messed up you feel sad for it. Compassion is built into us.

Well yelling at a stranger without provocation is a pretty shitty thing to do. Like I said vegans are a varied group of people, so naturally some of them are rude c***ts that forget that they weren't always vegan lol. I make no excuses for them. But as with any demographic unfortunately the obnoxious ones are the ones that get noticed. To give you an example of nice vegans, there is always someone like John Venus on youtube or the Light Twins.

Let's maybe make a distinction here though when two kids attend the same elementary school, and were good friends that still remember each other years later as adults. When one has made it up to being a judge and the other has messed up and is headed to jail, maybe lets not automatically chalk that up to the color of their skin, no?

The GOP has had problems since at least 2008, and they keep building up and up on the same issues.

The problem is the party is sort of stuck, and the split that it desperately needs would hurt it. Fox and the right wing talk radio aren't really on the classic GOP (of the Reagan and prior eras) side. Fox and talk radio and the social media that surround their viewers/listeners has shifted very far to the right. So much so that Reagan would in no way win the nomination today. Today's far right Republican party sees governing, and negotiating with the other side of the isle as a weakness. They don't want a representative democracy, they want a theocratic dictatorship while calling it democracy.

A party split is needed though. They need to split the two elements of the party from one another. Let the Tea Party form on it's own and let Fox and talk radio follow it. They'll find that the mass media is still far more central and closer to them than what they've been led to believe via Fox and talk radio, who accuses it of being far liberal. The party would be hurt for a couple election cycles, but as people start to wise up, they'd come back to the GOP from the Tea Party and the Tea Party would eventually become a footnote. As it stands, leaving the Tea Party elements in it will destroy the party in full.

The GOP keeps trying too hard to appeal to the far right element of it self and abandoning the central core. They are appealing to the hate mongers and bigots rather than the compassionate conservatism that Reagan at least pretended to have (though didn't).

I still think that McCain made two major errors when he ran. First was stepping too far to the right of where his voting record was while running. Had he stuck to what his record showed, he would have stood a semi-decent chance of winning... had he not made a second major fatal error and that was putting a batshit crazy, way far to the right, person as his VP candidate. Even if she wasn't crazy, or had a brain, she was far too the right for most Americans. Now, even if he had stayed true to himself, and used a centrist VP candidate he may have lost as Obama tapped into something... and I don't think anybody saw that coming.

Then the GOP embraced the hatred of Obama too much. Obama could cure cancer and they'd decry it as a bad thing, he can do nothing right so far as they are concerned. They should have toned that down. They also messed up the messaging on Obamacare. They should have embraced it, noting that they invented it, and tried to pass the same thing into federal law 3 times prior, twice under Bush Sr and once under Clinton and each time it was the Democrats who wouldn't take it. Showing how the Democrats embraced your idea would have shown, "look, we were right the whole time. We could have had this ages ago but the Democrats said 'No' and now they realized we were right." Rather than take the high rode though, they rode the crazy train of hate, and pushed more and more to become obstructionist.

Now side note, obstructionism works. Many Republican and non-affiliated voters, blame Obama for the lack of progress, though none of his ideas really got to be tried since they were bound and determined to obstruct everything and have done everything they can to ruin the Nation so they can blame him for the state of affairs, knowing full well most Americans don't know Congress controls the purse and pretty much all things related to it.

Anyhow, then Romney too shifted far to the right of what his record as Governor showed, and again went with somebody who's too far to the right (who oddly enough is now seen as too establishment by the Tea Party element) as a VP candidate... though Obama's popularity, and the popularity of Obamacare would have made it hard to overcome... though again, if the GOP had handled Obamacare properly, as their invention, then Romney would have ridden that strongly as his state used the previous Republican led efforts to create the same program, to do so on the state level. He could have ridden the fact his state had it before anyone else... again they let hatred of Obama override the logical move.

The party in the end is too afraid to do what it needs to do. It's too afraid of the short term losses and doesn't realize that the far goal is obtainable.