The last bit of faith I had in the ways of old is now gone. All that steel hammering and for what? Stamp out a sword from cold steel.

That's my cyberpunk samurai. A disillusioned samurai in a not too distant future 3D prints a sword out of plastic and kills robots made out of martian alloy.

His faith is restored when he realizes it is not the sword that makes the samurai, but the way of Bushido which allows man to overcome the tyranny of martian robots. That and a moderate amount of armor blessed by the spirits of earth and infused with the wielder's chi, such that to break earth's samurai defender's armor would be to shatter his very soul. Split a bullet with a glance.

I really doubt that. If they were having a real fight I'd bet on the trained fighter (above a certain level of training anyway). Size isn't as important in fighting like this as technique.

If the little fella can take him to the floor in a grapple I think it would be game over for the mountain. Just being able to squeeze hard wouldn't be enough, and an arm or leg in the right place would give the little guy the leverage he'd need to overcome the strength.

Plus, in a real fight I'm guessing there'd be a hail of punches like hammers from McGregor. The mountain is big, but one good punch in the right place and he'll drop the same as anyone.

Hmmm. Apparently, it was a guy who was overcome with emotion since the death of his mother 6 months ago...

"Explaining how he was feeling at the gig, Anthony said: “My mum died about six months ago and I just got back from Europe putting her in her crypt. “He (Grohl) started singing it and I felt all emo.”

Unafraid to admit he was crying, Anthony was however keen to establish the fact that he was not drunk on the night; though he may have been stoned. “I was dead sober,” he said. “I don’t drink. I might have had a little Colorado green but I’m not a drinker.”

“I was crying, I’m not afraid to cry,” Anthony added. “I started getting all teared up. I was trying to hide from him.”

http://gawker.com/dave-grohl-accidentally-berates-grieving-son-for-crying-1725145495

Because nicotine itself is not terribly addictive. The main components of addiction to tobacco are now believed to be other substances.

Now consider the mechanical act of smoking; inhale, exhale cloud, reward.
Using a vaporizer reproduces the physical act that smoker's brains associate with the reward.

There does seem to be a period at the beginning of using a vaporizer, where there's a craving for cigarettes, perhaps because of the other addictive chemicals that are absent. But this craving isn't particularly difficult to overcome when you're satisfying the other elements of your habit. Not to mention, lungs clearing, sense of taste returning...

Then there's the final stage of using a vaporizer, which I've seen happen with others and I've experienced...you lower the nicotine levels further and further and then one day you start forgetting to use it at all. Your frequency of use may drop to nothing. Not always though. Some people go truely insane. We call them "scuba vapers". One of my buddies has earned the nickname "Darth Vaper".

One of our greatest strengths as humans is the physiological ability to adapt to anything, from smells (e.g., any scent including perfumes and garbage dumps) to physical discomfort to the abuse and suffering other living beings, like with this dog or at Terminus (in The Walking Dead) or in Nazi Germany or in human slavery.

One reason the human being is so successful as a species is this ability to overcome great adversity through subconscious hardening and numbness.

So much of progressivism is masked racism. Minorities struggle against many forces that aim to keep them down, and none are as pernicious and challenging to overcome than those posing as defenses of "civil rights."

Wow, this dude has serious mental problems.
He thinks he heard Michelle say that? Odd, I didn't hear any of that when I listened....in fact I heard her say clearly 'that's not an excuse' repeatedly. I also heard her say repeatedly 'we' can overcome those obstacles, not 'we need government to overcome those obstacles'.
Hilarious, "what makes the tension die down is getting out there and using your 'god given talent' to be of good service to each other" sure sounds a lot like 'when we channel our frustrations into study and organizing...we can build ourselves and our communities up', but this guy shouts one from the roof top, and shouts down the other. WTF?!?
Open your F'ing ears, jackass.
What outrageously insane, inflammatory, inappropriately infuriated BS.
*fail

"WE" is the nation as a whole. Because you wish to separate yourself from the rest of us does not mean 'there is no we', it only means you aren't one of us (or don't want to be).
I live in the real world, where most people are poor planners, and most people don't have the means to plan anyway (more every day, thanks to un-livable wages being the norm). It's not defeatist, it's realist. It would be wonderful if we all had the gift of forethought, perfect knowledge of financial planning, prognostication to be able to know what your needs WILL be, and the income to be able to follow through with financial plans. I live well on 1/2 of a <$30K income and take NO help from anywhere, but most people don't have my advantages or the willingness to live with less, or the time and space to do things like grow their own food, or the property and money/credit to get a solar/wind generation system, even though it saves them tons in the long term, they simply don't have the financial ability to plan long term.
I don't see what your next paragraph has to do with the topic. (It reminds me of the saying 'god only gives you the burden you can carry' which ignores the thousands that commit suicide because their burden was more than they could stand.) One can only rise to the opportunities one is presented with, those that have limited opportunities often have no way to 'rise to the occasion' or 'over come adversity', they can't even overcome their food bills, no matter how hard they work at Wendy's.

I'm for getting rid of 'government cheese' for anyone that does not need it, but removing all programs leaves us back in the 30's with roving gangs of the destitute clogging the streets, expensive abusive state run institutions for the elderly poor, and the economy tanking. I could support a 'means test' or the like for 'welfare' and social security, but it would benefit us all if everyone had access to healthcare, and in the long run would even save those who do pay for it, because as I've said repeatedly, we already pay their bills after the fact (by paying higher bills to cover for those that don't/won't/can't pay their bill). Giving us all access to healthcare outside the emergency room saves us ALL money...and removing the insurance industry middleman saves another 10%-25% that we get NO benefit from.

It's about addressing the real world, not insisting all people should act intelligently and fore-thoughtfully at all times, and designing a system that only works if they do and leads to disaster if they don't. I do not believe people, as a group, are good at planning for their future, and we all do better when at least the minimum of financial planning is taken care of by intelligent educated people rather than left to those who plan poorly. Sometimes that means paying to not have people camped on your lawn waiting to rob you...and it's cheaper to put them in an apartment than in jail. The systems could certainly be better (I'm not holding my breath that they will be improved though), but having no 'safety net' at all has already proven to be far worse for everyone, and the country as a whole in many ways.

WE as is "That's not the country we have decided we want to live in" Who is WE??

I don't agree with the WE. So there is no WE.

Anyway:

After reading you response it appears that you premise is this:

People are too inferior to make reasonable and logical decisions to succeeded in life so we need a benevolent government to provide for its people.

----------------Such a defeatist position.-------------------------



I believe that it is a basic instinct to want to succeed. That one naturally raises to the occasion and overcomes adversity. I believe in ones ability to rise to the occasion. To get knocked down and get back up. I believe in the human spirit.



AS for "How about we just remove all corporate welfare" Yep I agree and also get rid of mortgage deductions and all other government cheese.

This video has been declared a duplicate by the original submitter; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof declared by eric3579.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Spider-Attack-Watch-me-Ant-overcome-a-spider

@lantern53

Christ, dude, he doesn't "think" he is surrounded by racism, he clearly IS surround by racism! The events in Balitmore and Ferguson (and N.Y. and L.A. and Atlanta and all the other cities where this has happened before) clearly demonstrate that.

The media in this very video are trying to make it seem like smashed windows and burning buildings are a worse problem than black people being killed in custody by police! Meanwhile, the media barely even cover white kids rioting in Huntington Beach for reasons not even remotely as good as protesting racist oppression. How can you not see the racism that is right in front of your face--the racism that literally is dripping from the screen in this video?

It's not about "letting your skin color hold you back." It's about overcoming the odds that are stacked against many black people born into poorer communities, which takes incredible luck as much as it does incredible effort. Black people want an equal chance to succeed. They've been asking for a more level playing field for quite literally decades now and they still don't have it. Can you really not understand that anger? That feeling of powerlessness and rage? Can you really not see how condescending and patronizing it is for you to suggest people to just suck it up and get over it? How ridiculous it is to comparing overcoming low grades to get into college with constantly getting pulled over and roughed up (or killed) by cops simply because of the color of your skin? Is there no cognitive dissonance at all?

As long as you let what you think other people think affect you, you will not succeed.

You are so ate up with hatred you will never succeed.

You need to get off your pity train because it's going nowhere.

Maybe I've never been called a 'nigger', but when I was a child, my own grandfather said I'd never amount to a hill of beans.

There are millions of successful minority people in this country and they don't let other people's prejudices get in the way of their life.

You think you are surrounded by racism. You use that as an excuse.
Why don't you try and overcome it instead of letting it eat you out from the inside.

I grew up in a lower middle class environment, one working parent who dropped out of high school in the 9th grade. My dad taught himself everything he needed to know, became an accomplished pilot and treated the world as his stepstool. He taught us to be positive. We had no money for college so I did 3 easy years in the Army. I met a lot of black guys who had awesome attitudes and wouldn't let what someone else thought get in their way.
When I got out I went to college, a good one because they didn't want to turn down a veteran, even though my high school grades were mediocre.
I graduated and got a good job with the gov't, by the grace of God. I work with minorities. One of the smartest people we have is a girl who has a degree from William and Mary. She doesn't let her skin color hold her back.

I feel sorry for you because all you have to hold on to is this 'racism'. You let it defeat you. It is bigger than you. Until you decide otherwise.

I understand your discomfort with my phrasing. My beef is with the electoral college system.

While I was getting my degree, I took some really good American History and Government classes at college. The prof in the Govt. class really went into depth explaining the electoral college to us, and to me the shittiness of that system was just shocking. For example: (none of this is news to a truly informed voter or an interested person with an internet connection, but it WAS news to me when I was ~20 years old, and I think it still would be news to a really high percentage of US voters)

* First is the very idea of an electoral college. The only way to become president of the US is to win the most electoral votes. But voters don't cast electoral votes, the people of the electoral college do. OK, the electoral college is supposed to follow the votes/will of their state/constituents (more on that next), but the fact remains that literally/practically, our votes as citizens don't matter. Only the electoral votes count. So yes, in the most literal sense ... NONE of our votes "matter".

* In general, the "electors" (the people on the electoral college) are supposed to cast their electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote in their state / district. I think 2 states (Nebraska and Maine?) divide up their suggested electoral votes to be as close as possible to the actual proportions of the popular vote, but that's a whole other issue. Anyway, in general the electors are supposed to cast their vote for the popular vote winner in their state. BUT, that process isn't automatic. The votes that actually matter, the electoral votes, are cast by fallible human beings -- and they might "go rogue" and vote against what they are "supposed to" do. That is called a "faithless elector". That would be bad enough if it was just some weird loophole that technically exists but has never actually happened in practice, but actually faithless electors happen fairly frequently. The only upside is that they haven't ever changed the outcome of an election. Yet.

* When we're young and in civics type classes in school, we're brainwashedtaught about Democracy as a very simple, will of the public, one man one vote system. The electoral college shits all over that. One can win the popular vote but lose on electoral votes, and that actually has happened multiple times (not just to Al Gore). In my opinion, the electoral college creates a laundry list of problems (swing states are the only ones that matter, so campaign there and ignore everybody else, etc. etc. etc.), has very few benefits (any supposed benefits of the system are tenuous at best), and is completely contrary to the core concepts of Democracy.


Without the electoral college, a blue vote in Kansas would matter, as would a red vote in Massachusetts. Or a vote for a 3rd party or independent, anywhere. With the electoral college, edge cases like any of those can be safely and easily ignored by candidates.

I think it is unlikely that Kansas would turn blue, even if all of the democrats voted. That being said, we're not a complete LOCK for red; heck, out of the 10 most recent Governors we've had before we turned into Brownbackistan it is an even split between Democrats and Republicans with 5 each. And actually the Democrats had significantly longer total number of years in the office.

So basically, I don't actually think that a vote cast on a losing candidate is "pointless", I just think that the electoral college system does a really good job of making sure that some votes are more pointless than others. It amazes me that there wasn't a MUCH bigger stink made about it when Gore "lost" in 2000, but I guess voter apathy can overcome any challenge to the system.

The D.A.s office and the police department are very chummy usually as they are always on the same team when prosecuting people. So there is that relationship that has to be overcome when prosecuting a police officer. Often tough to do.

The DA is also employed by the city same as the police force. Funds for both come from the same place.

A DAs decision to prosecute with the potential of finding a police officer guilty of abuse makes the possibility of the city losing a lawsuit due to police misconduct/abuse much greater. So the DA on top of going after their everyday working partners(the police) are also fucking with their employers money. Never a wise move for any department or employed person.

So what happens? The police are rarely held accountable for what they do. When you allow them to act out and never punish them for the abuse why would they change? You actually are constantly moving the line back in the way of what they can get away with.

Things tend to change pretty quick when you mess with peoples money.

Of course its just how i read these types of situations