Yes! Glorious, Bigly records like:


- Shortest Presidential Term in the 21 Century
- Most Golfing Days in a Presidential Term
- Most Lies Told by a President Before/During/After His Term
- Most Times Appearing on Time's (fake) Covers
- Most Corporate Bankruptcies by a Property Tycoon
- Most Family Fortune Lost in a Generation's Time by a Property Tycoon
- Most Ongoing Lawsuits on a Person
- Most Corporate Henchmen Jailed
- Most Unpaid Lawyers Bills on his (Very Organized) desk
- Most Orange skin on a Person
- Most Fed Top Secret Documents hidden in a Person's Home (that any monied person have access to)

I noticed that too. It takes a special kind of psychopath to enjoy breaking this lady's arm. May she receive all the monies and this cop receive all the pains.

Upvote to make up for @ant’s downvote. I need to find this fine establishment and let them take all my monies. Praise Hey Zeus! Can I get an amen brothers and sisters?

I want one but god damn... 12k is stupid amounts for that. That is jetski monies.

@bobknight33
you know bob,i owe you an apology.
i shouldnt have told you "fuck you" when my problem was with the video,and i wrongly conflated you with this video.

that being said,i still stand by my feelings of "fuck this video".

i struggle with people who have this binary view of politics.
just because i criticized the lies and deception of the republican party does not automatically translate me to promoting or defending democratic practices,because BOTH parties manipulate the body politic while at the very same fuck them over.

the two party duopoly are just different faces of the same coin.both have been purchased to serve the interests of:wall street,big business,bankers and the military.

i have never subscribed to either party.i judge on individual merit and a case by case basis.so when you call me a liberal i dont know what the fuck you are talking about.

do i hold some liberal views? yes.
do i hold some conservative? yep.

but so dont you bob,we ALL do.
of course that is not the dynamic that is shoved down our throat every goddamn day.that somehow our politics can be reduced down to this over-simplified,and overly basic dichotomy.

but nobody has such a simpleton,and almost childish politics.as humans we are pretty complex is our understandings,feelings and desires.it is those complexities that influences our politics and how we feel things should be as a society.

i am a libertarian socialist (anrcho-syndacalist).
which is why you may see me post videos that address the corruption in politics,in our economy,in our foreign policy.the hypocrisy of politicians espousing that "feel your pain" language,while they funnel public funds to their criminal friends on wall street...and point to the food stamp recipient,or immigrant and state..with zero sense of irony..THERE,that is your problem.

my politics is the reason why i may post video criticizing and ridiculing ultra-right wing politicians attempting to legislate "proper" and "moral" behavior,because they pretend they have some relationship with god,and god spoke to them.

but also why i will post videos criticizing and ridiculing the extreme left.who seek to legislate "harmful" or "offensive" speech,because they seek to control language.as if THEY are the true moral arbiters of human interaction.

so i do not necessarily disagree with you when you point to the democrats hypocrisy in regards to poor folk.that they use the language of empathy and compassion,and then enact legislation that is entirely bereft of compassion and empathy,but BOTH parties do this!

bill clinton was incredibly detrimental to the poor and working poor and made the job of digging out of poverty damn near impossible.

you may identify with republican ideology,and that is not a bad thing.republican base ideology may be a tad more pro-business,but it also recognizes that the governments job is to protect the people from fraud and over-reach from those businesses.original republican ideology was for limited government,and fiscal responsibility.which USED to translate to anti-war and dismissing the military when it was no longer needed.

i could go on.

i could also point out that democrats USED to be more hawkish and far more involved in addressing the concerns of the working man.

but look at the political landscape of today.
both of these parties are nothing even close to representing their original ideals.they are solely and totally beholden to big monied interests.

our republic has become a plutocracy,run by the plutocrats and oligarchs.

so when you delineate the argument by republican/democrat i simply do not see this play out in reality.

we might as well be arguing who is the better fottball team,because thats what american politics has become.bread and circuses and cheerleading for our "team".

it is the height of absurdity.american politics has become absurd.

as for you not seeing this for being racist.
i dont know what i can say to remove your blinders.
this video is textbook racist.
we have "black face"
we have over-generalizations.
we have ridicule and assumption based solely on skin color.

calling this video racist is a non-controversial assertion.

and you cant promote it out of discard.
the sift has spoken.you can disagree,but that wont change the fact that this video is in the discard bin.

anyways,sorry for telling you to fuck off.
i just found this video offensive,but i dont find YOU offensive.confusing at times,but not offensive.

@A10anis
i do not understand why chomsky confuses you so easily.you pretty much have the same criticism on every video you watch of him.

his premise is fairly consistent and self evident:he is critical of power.

while i do not disagree with your assertions on personal responsibility and i suspect most people would agree with you on that point.i do not see chomsky making an argument against personal responsibility.so your point in that regard is moot.but to ignore massive monied and powerfully influential political and corporate institutions and their affects on society is naive' at best and venal at worst.

you appear to be made uncomfortable by the criticizing of the power structure and institutions of the west (i do not know where "here" is for you).which suggests to me that you have confused ideology with reality,made clearer by your suggestions:
1.taking advantage of an education system that more and more translates to debt peonage and a high percentage of not even working in the field utilizing that education.
2.free thought.
ok i have to admit this one made me giggle.
everybody has free thought but the irony here is relevant to the very video on how that thought is manipulated and your comment reveals in ironic delicousness.
3.certain rights.
yes we do have certain rights.rights that have been systematically chipped away at due to abstract wars on:terror,drugs,immigrants etc etc.rights are becoming more a suggestion than actual rights.

your conclusion has the suggested flavor that since chomsky benefited in this society that he should just shut up,sit down and behave like a good little boy,and that those who admire his courage to criticize the most powerful country on the planet are "followers".

since you do watch the videos of chomsky( you do watch them dont you?),yet have the exact same criticism every time,maybe it is time you actually read one of his books?
just an idea...
you may find much of your confusion in regards to chomsky will be clarified.

you misunderstand,which may be my fault.
anarchy=no rulers
it does not mean=no government (for some anarchists it may mean that,but not all),nor does it mean=no police or military or public schools and i do not believe i stated anything of the sort.

i also stated that while the anarchist prefers direct democracy,he/she will be ok with representative,as long as they represent..which they dont.

so the anarchist sees this non-representative government and sees it for the vile,corrupted beast it is and states that it should be killed.preferably from orbit.

please understand i am not trying to sway you to my way of thinking or convince you of anything other than to point out that anarchy is not a single,one trick pony.

ok,consider this:you are walking down the street and an important text come in with a pdf attached.you are given information and told that in two days you will be expected to vote on the matter.

just an idea how direct democracy can work.

this discussion is really fascinating me.
i call out hard-liner libertarians for not even acknowledging the massive corrupt influence of the corporation,because it is an intellectually dishonest argument to NOT point out the destructive influences of the monied elite.

i find it just as intellectually dishonest to not address/criticize and question the government.

one does not preclude the other.
we can argue which one gave birth to the other but i dont think anybody can deny that what america has now is NOT a representative democracy but rather a plutocracy.

so just as i dont understand how a hardline libertarian can ignore the power and influence of a corporation and call it "capitalism" (hint:its not),i equally cannot understand the defense of a government that threw its citizens overboard 40 years ago.

i refuse to defend moral bankruptcy,on any level.
i refuse to buy into the "its not perfect but its the best we have"
no..it is not.we can do better and what we have now is far from the best.
best intentions maybe....but not the best..

newt brought up a big point that i was unaware.
this is my flavor of anarchy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-syndicalism

which to some anarchists makes me a "bad" anarchist,whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean.

@Trancecoach
dude,its a TV show..relax.

i agree that a political argument dressed as scientific debate is a bait and switch that most people miss and buy into the bullshit.take the politics and monied interest out?

well,not much arguing going on.

now the discussions in regards to solutions are in the political realm and that my friend,scares the bejesus out of me.its like asking a crack whore to watch your kids.

how sad and shameful that the most progressive and creative solutions are coming from third world nations.these people crap outside for fucks sake!

but here in the states? too busy texting and facebooking and searching for that next new shiny,because our self worth is wrapped in what we own,what we do for a job,what we drive.we demand respect from everyone yet give none,convinced of our own superiority based on the most thinnest of veneers and baseless of subjective criteria.

we are the assholes of the world.

lets be real for a second.
this video is based on a show.entertainment.
and it plays it way over the top,but its entertaining.
its just a tv show.

i have seen some climate models that predict as early as 2050 shit is going to hit the fan,while others play it around 2100 (that was the IPCC one).all predicting some really nasty global stuff.

we aint gonna make it to 2100.
hell,i would be surprised if we made it to 2050.
because there is something far worse that will affect our societies than climate and thats peak oil.

how come nobody is talking about that?
far worse implications in regards to:food,clothes,jobs,economies did i mention FOOD?
oh,and war..lots and LOTS of war.killings,maimings and murders..oh my.
no arguing the science on that one,thats been in since the late 70's.

where is the debate on a subject that has real and immediate ramifications?

such a failed species.......

@bobknight33
you are confusing a political argument with a scientific one.

as @bcglorf has pointed out,the science is already In and established.the debate is on the relative parameters i.e: how much/little the affects will manifest.
so while it has been established their IS climate change and man HAS affected that change.the debate is the varying degrees and the level of impact.

so we know there will be a global effect,the debate is HOW and WHEN it will manifest,and on a smaller scale,just how much influence humankind is responsible.

some predict an extinction level catastrophe,while other predictions are not quite as apocalyptic,but the debate on whether or not climate change is real..is over.

because that is a scientific debate.

now in the political arena,whose job is to obfuscate any relevant facts to muddy the argument to propel the interests of extremely monied and powerful interests,they create a faux debate to give the appearance that the debate is still ongoing and the science is not settled.

which is exactly what this video is addressing.
remember,they dont have to win the argument.they just have to make a reasonable sounding argument..even if based on bullshit...to make you think.."well,...maybe" and they GOTCHA!

so you can make this a liberal vs conservative argument if you wish,but i would just point out that you playing the game exactly they way they have set it up.to manipulate you.

as for your assertion of "liberal owned media".
dude...
stop parroting that tired old trope that does not hold up to one minute of scrutiny.you are literally doing the plutocrats work FOR them.
every outlet of media in the united states is owned and operated by FIVE companies.

FIVE.

and not a single one could even remotely be considered "liberal",because that does not serve their interests.

this debate is simply NOT a political debate,it is a scientific debate.
plain and simple...learn to recognize the difference buddy.

and stop being a tool for fuck sakes.../slap
you are better than that.

and just a side note,for my own personal pleasure and enjoyment:
@dannym3141 you are my fucking hero brother! between you and @newtboy i struggle to hold onto my cynicism around both of you.

you guys give me hope.

now lets go grab a smoke @bobknight33 cuz these pansies wont let me smoke inside and i have to do it on the patio and they keep trying to get me to drink that godawful "redbull" when crystal meth does a much better job.

sheesh..kids these days.

ok..enough ranting for today and smacking bob around.
ya'all stay awesome.

@newtboy
now we are getting somewhere.

let us look at your first paragraph.notice anything?
ideology vs reality.
what you are proposing is the initial intent and ideologically i totally agree but even in your paragraph you concede to the truth,albeit a cynical truth.
(the referencing of the necessity if an informed public).which is only one aspect of a much greater whole which should be criticized and addressed.

understand i am not disagreeing with your assessments of the original intent.what i am pointing out is that what we have now is no where near a reflection of that intent,to which i have added that each right,privilege and dignity has had to be fought for and extracted FROM the government.

the government is "supposed" to represent the people.
it is "supposed" to protect and secure our rights.
but is that what we see play out?
i certainly dont think so.

the case is not exactly hard to make that the federal government no longer serves nor represents the will of the people but rather large corporate and monied interests.

though i will concede that revisionist text books can fascilitate indoctrination.

i am also not trying to make the argument this video is some political masterpiece of criticism.
it is a pandering,condescending,simple-minded piece of work BUT it is the criticism i admire.

i could go on for days on the failures of the public education system and it has very little to do with the teachers but rather the delivery system itself,which has become a machine which comodifies people into class categories.

henry giroux called it punishment creep.

school is not longer about education but rather about learning to obey.

quick story before i totally go off the rails and write you all a book:
i was subbing a history class for a friend and decided to teach shay's rebellion,since he was just completing america's war for independence and the rebellion is vital to understand the debate over federal powers.my friend was delighted with the idea but the administration was,less than enthusiastic.

the next day i was handed my third disciplinary notice and reprimanded for not following curriculum.which was bullshit because i was never given specific curriculum.

they wanted a babysitter...not a teacher.

i have not had a teaching gig since,because i didnt learn the lesson they are drilling into those kids brains.....obey.

sit down.
shut up.
and do what you are told.

do you truly think obedience should be the primary lesson learned at school?

well done on that physicists video.
political arguments dressed up as science is such a cynical and disrespectful approach to such a complicated,and possible species ending,situation.

the movie "they live" was a documentary.

i promoted the video if only to further the discussion and expose a political argument that has NOTHING to do with the science,but rather EVERYTHING to do with the singular,monied interest of powerful influential players who care nothing but their own self-interest.

and at what cost?
possibly everything and everybody.

this physicist sold his soul for money.
he is a whore.
no..worse than a whore,because at least a whore has more integrity.

yeah........
ill upvote for discussion purposes and to bring to light that climate is not a one dimensional argument.

so when i see these very targeted and one dimensional arguments using people with credentials (usually NOT in the field they are commenting on) sounding very reasonable...my alarms start going off.something is not quite right.

i call it the apathy argument,which is not really an argument at all but rather a political strategy.they dont actually have to WIN the argument,they just have to sound reasonable enough to make you think "well..maybe" and now you are a neutralized participant.

the gruber incident is now getting some serious airplay lately and everybody is sooo offended.
i am offended as well,but for different reasons.
calling the american voter "stupid" or any other human society stupid is an inaccurate term.

they are ignorant in most cases,and that is by design.

to deny that there are immensely powerful monied institutional forces attempting to muddy the argument for their own,specific interests and goals,while the fate of humanity can go fuck itself...now THAT...is stupid.

political arguments dressed up as as science really piss me off.

so i woke up this morning,grabbed my coffee and started my routine of seeing whats happening on the sift to be greeted by your comment.

thank you my friend.
it brought a smile to my face.
and brought me back to earth with a giant dose of getoveryourself.
my comment had a certain..shrillness... that,while unintended,was very evident with a reread.

i would love the assistance to get to the truth of the matter.i would not even know where to start.the articles i found for/against seemed to be a tug of war between vegans and big monied interests.

i think everyone here would benefit from your talents.

i guess i just find it ironic that one video has 24 votes,while mine is left floundering,yet both are basically saying the same thing.

grant you,the related video if far more entertaining.

anyways,thank you for bringing me down to earth my friend.
/tips coffee
and have a great morning! (or afternoon/evening)

I can only judge the police on a person by person basis when they act independently.

Myself, I respect the police, and I obey and cooperate with them as required.
I've never done anything to necessitate any negative behaviour from them, so from experience, I have only good things to say about them. Though, I must admit, I've encountered some that were amazingly nice, and also some that were absolutely on a power trip.

BUT I know of three scenarios which Make them less than desirable.

1). The term Police should be synonymous with Peace (Peace officer). They are a team created to keep people safe. They uphold laws. Laws are meant to keep people safe.
But when they are used for other things, like aggressively engaging groups of protestors, they often behave against the people they have sworn to protect in insite more violent behaviours just so they can create arrests.

2). Police are given quotas. This is inherently corrupt. It's only purpose is to extort monies from the public and creates tensions between them and the people they are supposed to be helping.
It serves no purpose and forces even the good police to commit crimes against the people just so they can keep their jobs. These quotas are often passed down from ranking officers or higher up in the system.
This includes everything from Stop-and-frisk policies, to Speeding-infractions, to Roadside-vehicle-searches. It gives police a legal excuse to badger, bully, extort and abuse the people.

3). There are police not cut out for the job, and we've seen this in video time and again. The officer labelled as the "Hot Head". They over react, insight conflict, and use their position to create problems where none exist.
I can only attest to this example from what I see in the news. Being from Canada, we have different laws than the US, and I see this abuse most often in news from the US.
This type of officer either joined the system so they could be above the law, or has been tarnished and gone bitter along the way. They need to be weeded out and removed from duty.

All this being siad, the Police is an exclusive club. They are a close knit group of members which stand up and support each other. This could be a good thing. they need to rely on each other, especially in times of life or death.
Unfortunately, they also stand up for each other in times where they shouldn't. They protect the wrong doers in the system, cover up irregularities and just basically lie to cover up those officers breaking the law.
It's a system of "not covering up, means you can't trust others to come to your aid."

So, yes, we need the police. We like the police.
But if they don't rethink the way they operate, they only increase the gap between helping ind hindering the people. On the current course, they are forcing a large wedge between themselves and the people that are paying their pay check to keep them safe.
If you can't trust the police, they are no longer the police -- just thugs.

The good police need to stand up against the police that are abusing the system and making their job harder on a daily basis. Fix the system, fix the interaction, and then it will fix the work environment police work in.