>> ^charliem:
Force of the weight being dropped difference in distance from pivot point = smushed bones.


= knees driven through his chin

Force of the weight being dropped * difference in distance from pivot point = smushed bones.

Wit and wisdom from the Windy City. Because I couldn't tell the sex of that dog avatar, (needs a virtual tour cursor), I too thought her humor masculine. I kept thinking, that is one funny dude. When I found out it was one funny dudette, I was glad I hadn't made a gender gaff along the way, (at least, I don't think I did.)

Your Queue remains pivotal. What would the Sift be without it?

good stuff.
lots of tasty morsels here for a libertarian to munch on.

>> ^blankfist:
> I wish neo-conservatism was more like conservatism.

fiscally, yeah. you, me, ron paul, and a massive majority of the sift, and the internet in general, clearly wish that. which means the younger fiscal conservatives. the ones whose opinions will actually matter in 10 years.

> I don't know when the Republican Party changed...

reagan.
for better, and worse, but undeniably pivotal. he changed things.

> ...but they've strayed so far from their original small government, non-interventionist platform.

no doubt. here's a quick outline of how i see some of the important bits.

basically, (fiscal conserv) republicans got sick of watching (fisc lib) democrats get so much mileage out of what they saw as often milking the middle class, with the false promise of helping the poor, with your tax money.
but often helping themselves first. the poor get some crumbs. that way, you'll always have more poor people around, to beg on behalf of.

but hey. the social safety net sells well.
getting up to debate it, and replying, "instead, i promise not to raise anyone's taxes, or coerce you with the comforting illusion of security, supposedly provided by a more powerful and centralized government."

no. we want smiling poor, soft pillows, and free beer.

that was a watershed where many republicans said fuck fiscal conservatism because otherwise we'll keep getting our asses kicked.
party fundraising is noticeably easier in the free beer tent.

ergo, neither party is fiscally conservative anymore.

so we'll take the same taxes, and instead of feeding the crumbs down to the bottom of the system, we'll feed them into the top of the system and let it just sorta...
trickle
down.
aka corporate welfare, and a very un-free market.

which reagan's own vp, ghw bush, referred to at the time as...
anyone? anyone?
voodoo economics.

oh, and reagan himself wasn't really a neo-con. but enough of his cabinet was, and many were still-embittered nixon aides. some with ties to large defense contractors, hence...

> They're like the nation-building spendthrifts of the Democratic Party but with a heavy heaping of religious arrogance thrown into the mix.

and that was the other seismic shift with reagan. prior to that, it was the democrats who were perceived to be god's party. because they wanted (or pretended) to help the poor.

> I think the two parties just need to fuck and get it over with.

party at my place in november.

> Then we can just call that party the DemoPublican Party and we'll all continue to lose.

one of many alternate scenarios i'm clinging to:
whichever party starts getting real about fiscal solvency, continues to enjoy the kind of response ron paul has been getting.
often across previously well-established party lines.

lines drawn by those 2 parties, neither of which existed in 1776.

lines neatly down the middle, of what i believe to be the government we clearly started with.
socially liberal.
fiscally conservative.

damn. that's so much more than i had intended to write, and i haven't even gotten to a 10th of what i wanted to say here. oh, hey. i've got one o them blogothingies, maybe i oughtta' use that again sometime soon...

>> ^radioRaheem:
could have been zoomed and thus he was far enough to feel safe.


I don't think so - you can more or less gauge his position when the camera pivots, and he's clearly right up against the barrier. I call steelballs.

"As the pivotal intellect in the breaking of the German Enigma codes, Turing arguably made a greater contribution to defeating the Nazis than Eisenhower or Churchill. Thanks to Turing and his 'Ultra' colleagues at Bletchley Park, Allied generals in the field were consistently, over long periods of the war, privy to details German plans before the German generals had time to implement them. After the war, when Turing's role was no longer top secret, he should have been knighted and feted as a saviour of his nation. Instead, this gentle, stammering, eccentric genius was destroyed, for a 'crime', committed in private, which harmed nobody. Once again, the unmistakable trademark of the faith-based moralizer is to care passionately about what other people do (or even think) in private." -- The God Delusion, by Richard Dawkins.

Points taken. My left eyebrow (the one that detects oddities) raised when I noticed the weird pivoting from camera to camera, i.e. say something, look down, shake head, look at new camera, say something, look down, shake head, ... etc.

all modern military fighter jets pucker their assholes; in this one the assholes (thrusters) can pivot around, like if you were to strap rockets on your boots and steer some by aiming your feet... anyhow, thats why its kind-of a big deal, and the reason why it can flip around in a loop in like 2 seconds.

In reply to this comment by Payback:
So? The Russians can pucker the assholes on their planes as well as their pilots. Big whoop.

anyone else think its odd how slowly the euphoria bodies flip and pivot around when run into, or especially when they skid and bounce along the ground? Floaty is a good word to describe it.

In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
I make my living as an artist, and part of my income comes from royalties, but I am very much opposed to current copyright and patent laws. The record industry isn't suffering because of piracy. The record industry is suffering because it is bloated, stagnant and boring.

The film makers and songwriters who are popular enough to be mass downloaded are too busy sniffing coke off a hookers ass through thousand dollar bills to give a fuck (Maddona and Lars excepted). The film makers and songwriters who are not popular enough to be downloaded would kill for the amount of exposure mass downloading would provide. This issue isn't really about the artists. It's about record execs who need a third yacht or a summer home on the French Riviera.

When the major record labels die, I will dance on their grave.

I also have a major problem with the concept that certain combinations of notes and words can be claimed as property by individuals. I have an even bigger problem with medical patents that allow drug companies to hold a monopoly on life saving drugs, allowing them to play extortionist or executioner to the misfortunate of the world. Our concept of economics is completely out of whack.

I have to respectfully disagree. Firstly, the sheer fact that major record/distributing institutions have survived is because they are an unfortunate necessity. Smaller artists simply cannot pull off a Radiohead/NiN and distribute their work single-handedly. The onerous costs and social networking involved in trans-continental product proliferation and promotion far exceed the capacity of a group of twenty-something year olds out of high school. Perhaps sometime not too far ahead in the future when high speed internet subscription reaches a certain level globally, file sharing promotion may play a pivotal role but as of now any such capacity is all too evidently dwarfed by the lucrative publicity big record companies can offer. If anything, traditional distribution companies will likely be replaced by online counterparts such as iTunes which will make previously culturally segregated media available to the world. In addition to that big record companies also act as financial lending institutions to unrealised artistic talent, usually in return for exclusivity deals and nowadays further encroaching upon merchandise and concert returns for years to come.

I think the real question should be, are record companies abusing the leverage in a predominantly oligarchic industry structure? I wholeheartedly agree that the methods being used by the RIAA and their associates are counter-productive, but I have yet to see any conclusive evidence that these measures have come about due to affluent corporate executives scouring for additional earnings.

As for medical patents, again an even more apparent necessary evil. The costs involvement in clinical research and in particular testing and safety verification are exorbitant. Extortionate, even for the mammoth pharmaceuticals industry. Were it not for the presence of patents, then nobody would undertake such an 'investment' and medical breakthroughs would stagnate.

Well, of course you had to post Hamster Love. But I'm afraid it only enhanced Muskrat Love...

In reply to this comment by snoozedoctor:
I had to post "Hamster Love" to counteract "Muskrat Love." It was necessary. Critttter, your queue is pivotal. Keep it that way.

I had to post "Hamster Love" to counteract "Muskrat Love." It was necessary. Critttter, your queue is pivotal. Keep it that way.

The only thing i hate about this movie is Tarantino's name on it. Hey dont get me wrong he is fine with his own movies but he had nothing to do with the making or producing of this movie. He just brought an already successful asian movie to America and plastered his name all over it. Did the same thing with Iron Monkey. Pisses me off how people i run into to this day swear that he directed that movie and point to Kill Bill as some sort of twisted proof. He even buys into his bullshit (though he is known for talking big) where in an interview he was saying how he brought kung fu movies to America and he played a pivotal role in making martial arts popular here. Excuse me jackass? I think Bruce Lee did that 30 years ago and I didnt see Jackie Chan or Jet Li needing your help before now. Sorry for that, beautiful movie, if you like see House of Flying Daggers as well.

Senator Arlen Specter was on Charlie Rose's show (PBS) last night, and a quick question at the end was about his role in the Warren commission championing the single bullet theory. I had no idea that a still acting senator had such a pivotal role in the still contested aftermath of this event.

As a further aside, there was an Australian show I saw once which did an excellent job of examining how a single bullet could have traveled how it was said to, and replicated the shot with gel dummies positioned exactly how the President and the Governor were sitting before the shot(the rear seats were elevated, a fact I had never known), even using the same style gun and ammo Harvey was found with, from the same distance, etc. It was pretty convincing. The head wound with ballistic gel dummy, if I recall correctly, did rock forward with the hit and then backwards in recoil, but it wasn't so much discussed.

As interesting as this is, I don't see a real practical application. As demonstrated, they are playing with a remote (a la the Wii) which doesn't allow for very "twitchy" movement (req'd by Quake imho). Also, I can see if you were playing with mouse/keyboard as a regular player and having your entire FOV taken up. That would be cool; however, it wouldn't need to go a full 360. In other words, if I'm getting shot with a rocket from behind, I'm sure not going to swivel around in my chair to see who's shooting me. I'd pivot with the mouse. Therefore, no need for the screen to go completely around me. Also, where the heck to I bind my "rune drop" and +hook on the Wiimote?

Regardless, I'm not trying to knock down the clip; very cool find. I just don't see the practical use for it.