Tags for this video have been changed from 'prog rock at its best' to 'prog, genesis, gabriel, hackett, collins, banks, rutherford, lamb, broadway' - edited by silvercord

I saw this just a few days ago. Decided not to post it here because prog rock is so hard to get sifted; I've submitted my share (including a lesser quality copy of "Supper's Ready" from this very show), and recognize a few of the usual suspects in the voted-for list. Regardless, this is a great quality copy of a rarely captured and unique performing group. Maybe I can help with a *promote.

I love King Crimson but out of all the prog rock bands my favorite was Henry Cow. They were an experimental prog band from the mid seventies, highly anti capitalist and took me a long time to get into. Like most awesome shit, My favorite prog song: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=374qf7xCFkY , Beautiful as the Moon - Terrible as an Army with Banners . A couple of members were in Slapp Happy that Faust played in, in the early seventies. Fred Frith in the late seventies left Henry Cow and put out a really amazing experimental prog album called Gravity.

Yay, it's back!

The video on the new embed looks much better than I remember the other one being. Thanks @UsesProzac ! Can always watch this one more time.

Slate are running a nice series of articles on prog rock at the moment.

That's not what progressive means, in this context. A progressive tax system is one where you pay a (progressively) higher rate when you have more income. What you have is a regressive tax system.

Do you happen to know what percentage of U.S. companies actually pay tax at the stated high rate? How does that compare to other countries? I know that quite a few of your companies weasel their way out of paying any tax at all, but I don't know how many overall manage this.

The ancient Roman empire also had social welfare, of a sort, increased after 122 B.C. See http://www.roman-empire.net/society/society.html for an overview. Then, as now, it was expensive to run.

The comparison is actually quite fair, except that in ancient Rome it was expected that wealthy citizens would give back to society and the idea of unbounded avarice as a virtue would have been quite foreign to them... so in a sense it's back to front.
>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

Not quite sure how comparing that to the US economy makes any sense. The US has the highest corporate tax rate on Planet Earth now. We have very high capital gains taxes (compared to global averages). Our income tax is so "Progressive" right now that the bottom 50% of taxpayers only pay 5% of the taxes. Over 75% of the Federal Government's 1.6 trillion dollar budget is dedicated to social programs for the poor.
Only way comparing it to the vid makes sense if if you contextualize it by stating that it is the GOVERNMENT that is deciding the screw the poor by the process of its own incredible incompetence, malfeasence, and mismanagement. Since only about 20 cents on the dollar comes 'out' of government versus what goes in, then yes - the U.S. Federal Government is entirely oriented around screwing the poor.
But of course, that's not what Prog-Lib-Dytes mean. To a leftist, the video means "tax breaks for the rich" ... (insert liberal talking point) et al.

Not quite sure how comparing that to the US economy makes any sense. The US has the highest corporate tax rate on Planet Earth now. We have very high capital gains taxes (compared to global averages). Our income tax is so "Progressive" right now that the bottom 50% of taxpayers only pay 5% of the taxes. Over 75% of the Federal Government's 1.6 trillion dollar budget is dedicated to social programs for the poor.

Only way comparing it to the vid makes sense if if you contextualize it by stating that it is the GOVERNMENT that is deciding the screw the poor by the process of its own incredible incompetence, malfeasence, and mismanagement. Since only about 20 cents on the dollar comes 'out' of government versus what goes in, then yes - the U.S. Federal Government is entirely oriented around screwing the poor.

But of course, that's not what Prog-Lib-Dytes mean. To a leftist, the video means "tax breaks for the rich" ... (insert liberal talking point) et al.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

It's always amusing when Prog-Lib-Dytes start eating each other.


And your solution?

Vote Romney/Fuckface 2012?

It's always amusing when Prog-Lib-Dytes start eating each other.

Yeah, it's weird. His douchebaggery slipped under my radar, maybe because I tended to agree with his critiques and observations.

Well - there's a list of others I can give you who are all equally huge d-bags. Just run down the roster of so-called 'journalists' MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN, the AP, NYT, USA Today, FOX... And hey - while we're at it throw in the roster of psuedo-journalists posuers on all the blogs & websites. Not to mention all the politicians who play revolving-door journalists. Basically every news outlet you care to name is staffed to the man with 99.9999% smarmy, arrogant, closed-minded, self-important douches who think the world revolves around them and who are so biased and agenda driven that they cannot be trusted to recite a farm report or the local weather - let alone national news.

Olberman was perhaps one of the most exaggerated of the lot, but not by much. And Bill Maher (a staple of the Videosift) is only two hairs and some air away from Olberman. Intellectually they are the same person. News isn't news anymore. It's become increasingly thinly disguised propoganda, and I don't trust a single word of it.

Case in point. This morning I was highly amused to be flipping channels as the Morning "News" shows started up. ABC, CBS, NBC... EERY SINGLE ONE of them started with the exact same thing... Obama's "Job Report" and how things were looking fantastic. I literally just kept rotating through all three channels without stopping, and it was almost the EXACT same words being parroted at the exact same time with the exact same interpretation. They didn't question anything. They just recited Obama's press release flack on it. They ignored the fact that non-working Americans are at an all-time high. They ignored the fact that jobs were only HALF of what was 'projected'. Nope. Just three completely identical, laughably positive "120,000 new jobs!" stories all being repeated almost verbatim. That isn't news. That is propoganda - and it's creepy just how in lock-step these mental midgets are.

I actually posted a different video of this madness on my Facebook feed a couple months back. Upvote for 3:02-3:12 -- it's not prog rock if it doesn't have a flute!

>> ^Barbar:

If you actually believe he is setting laws based on his belief in Jesus, based on that link, you're an imbecile. I expect you're smarter than that, but sufficiently dim to expect nobody to follow the link. Yeah, he mentions Jesus, but I rather suspect it's an attempt to reduce the deficit that's driving him, not a religious compass. He's just saying in an offhand way, 'Hey republicans, here's a way to square this with the ministry of Jesus.' presumably to preemptively take the wind out of their sails in the future head butting.
Yes, Obama is campaigning. I'm no fan of Obama any more, that is for sure. Never really was a fan of either party, although Obama briefly gave me Hope(tm) before flushing it down the toilet. I don't see how it's relevant that some of his grassroots efforts are in churches. Is that not typically the case? Either way it's a complete straw man.
What Santorum said was on a whole other level of idiocy. It was based on a misunderstanding not only of the text, but also of the practical implementation of the ammendment over centuries of history.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
All the Prog-Lib-Dytes out there are such hypocrites on this subject. Santorum says a few things about religion, and the neolib goons all start freaking out about how he's "violating the wall of seperation".
Meanwhile, Obama - your beloved dictator - has directly and clearly stated that he is setting government policies based on his belief in Jesus...
http://money.cnn.com/2012/02/02/news/economy/obama_tax_rich_jesus/i
ndex.htm
And he has also called on churches to start telling thier congregations to vote for him...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=BdjoHA5ocwU
So - to put it bluntly - you people who are pretending you are so offended by guys like Santorum are nothing but partisan hacks. You completely ignore when social progressives directly use religion to push political agendas that you agree with. You get all upset when conservatives even hint that they have a religious faith. It gives you zero credibility, and makes you a bunch of blinkered, pig-ignorant hypocrites.
Anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows what Santorum and other conservatives mean when they talk about religion. They support the 1st Amendment in its true sense - religious freedom FROM GOVERNMENT. That's all the 1st Amendment ever meant; not the selectively applied "Oooo - you aren't allowed to even THINK about religion in a public place" that you Prog-Lib-Dytes use as a rhetorical club to beat down any ideas that you dislike.




I pretty much agree with Barbar.

And, criticizing Santorum doesn't mean I can't criticize Obama. His appeal to religion is nowhere near the same level as Santorum's, but I don't like either tactic. I think it's more in line with how things are "supposed" to run to leave religion out of the entire process, no matter who is running.

I use more than two brain cells when I think, and when I do, I infer that the right usually have specific social policies in the crosshairs when they try to get us revved up by using religion. Abortion, contraception, gay marriage. These are all specific issues that are directly impacted by the Right's appeal to Christian voters. They aren't shy about name calling (neither is Winstonfield_Pennypacker it seems). They tend to forget, if they were to be elected, they would have to represent all Americans, not just Christians.

And so, while I'm not a fan of Obama's appeal to churches or religion, it's different from the way Republican candidates, namely Santorum, invoke religion to get a vote. If you look at my previous posts, I make a pretty clear distinction between an individual stating his believe and a government official letting his personal religion guide policy. The thinking seems to be: Since most of us are Christians let's use religion to our political advantage.

So, when religion becomes a justification of the decisions our government makes, we need to call them out.

If you actually believe he is setting laws based on his belief in Jesus, based on that link, you're an imbecile. I expect you're smarter than that, but sufficiently dim to expect nobody to follow the link. Yeah, he mentions Jesus, but I rather suspect it's an attempt to reduce the deficit that's driving him, not a religious compass. He's just saying in an offhand way, 'Hey republicans, here's a way to square this with the ministry of Jesus.' presumably to preemptively take the wind out of their sails in the future head butting.

Yes, Obama is campaigning. I'm no fan of Obama any more, that is for sure. Never really was a fan of either party, although Obama briefly gave me Hope(tm) before flushing it down the toilet. I don't see how it's relevant that some of his grassroots efforts are in churches. Is that not typically the case? Either way it's a complete straw man.

What Santorum said was on a whole other level of idiocy. It was based on a misunderstanding not only of the text, but also of the practical implementation of the ammendment over centuries of history.



>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

All the Prog-Lib-Dytes out there are such hypocrites on this subject. Santorum says a few things about religion, and the neolib goons all start freaking out about how he's "violating the wall of seperation".
Meanwhile, Obama - your beloved dictator - has directly and clearly stated that he is setting government policies based on his belief in Jesus...
http://money.cnn.com/2012/02/02/news/economy/obama_tax_rich_jesus/i
ndex.htm
And he has also called on churches to start telling thier congregations to vote for him...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=BdjoHA5ocwU
So - to put it bluntly - you people who are pretending you are so offended by guys like Santorum are nothing but partisan hacks. You completely ignore when social progressives directly use religion to push political agendas that you agree with. You get all upset when conservatives even hint that they have a religious faith. It gives you zero credibility, and makes you a bunch of blinkered, pig-ignorant hypocrites.
Anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows what Santorum and other conservatives mean when they talk about religion. They support the 1st Amendment in its true sense - religious freedom FROM GOVERNMENT. That's all the 1st Amendment ever meant; not the selectively applied "Oooo - you aren't allowed to even THINK about religion in a public place" that you Prog-Lib-Dytes use as a rhetorical club to beat down any ideas that you dislike.

All the Prog-Lib-Dytes out there are such hypocrites on this subject. Santorum says a few things about religion, and the neolib goons all start freaking out about how he's "violating the wall of seperation".

Meanwhile, Obama - your beloved dictator - has directly and clearly stated that he is setting government policies based on his belief in Jesus...

http://money.cnn.com/2012/02/02/news/economy/obama_tax_rich_jesus/index.htm

And he has also called on churches to start telling thier congregations to vote for him...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=BdjoHA5ocwU

So - to put it bluntly - you people who are pretending you are so offended by guys like Santorum are nothing but partisan hacks. You completely ignore when social progressives directly use religion to push political agendas that you agree with. You get all upset when conservatives even hint that they have a religious faith. It gives you zero credibility, and makes you a bunch of blinkered, pig-ignorant hypocrites.

Anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows what Santorum and other conservatives mean when they talk about religion. They support the 1st Amendment in its true sense - religious freedom FROM GOVERNMENT. That's all the 1st Amendment ever meant; not the selectively applied "Oooo - you aren't allowed to even THINK about religion in a public place" that you Prog-Lib-Dytes use as a rhetorical club to beat down any ideas that you dislike.

I was thinking more about this guy

http://youtu.be/7syx26QtQIM

To a health care rally.>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

People taking to the streets to demonstrate - it's crazy, radical, violent and lawless
As is typical with Prog-lib-dytes, this ignores the 400+ actual examples of craziness, radicalism, violence, and lawlessnes. Congratulations on flunking Common Sense 101 and Remedial Reading.
displaying this website's bias
Of course Big Government is biased. Videosift is biased. CNN is biased. Fox is biased. MSN is biased. Now - at least you haven't flunked Remedial Reading like Drax, but you still flunk Common Sense 101. The bias of Big Government as a website is rather irrelevant compared to the CONTENT of the listing. Maybe you should - you know - actually read the 400+ independant news articles from the AP, NYT, CNN, NBC, Fox, and many other news outlet from which the unbiased and accurate list of OWS crimes was compiled. Your call. You can keep pretending that OWS was just a bunch of people 'taking to the streets' if you want. Fact and reality tells quite a different story though. But - as I say - facts and reality are foreign to the typical Prog-lib-dyte, so I wouldn't be surprised if you keep trying to ignore them.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

People taking to the streets to demonstrate - it's crazy, radical, violent and lawless
As is typical with Prog-lib-dytes, this ignores the 400+ actual examples of craziness, radicalism, violence, and lawlessnes. Congratulations on flunking Common Sense 101 and Remedial Reading.
displaying this website's bias
Of course Big Government is biased. Videosift is biased. CNN is biased. Fox is biased. MSN is biased. Now - at least you haven't flunked Remedial Reading like Drax, but you still flunk Common Sense 101. The bias of Big Government as a website is rather irrelevant compared to the CONTENT of the listing. Maybe you should - you know - actually read the 400+ independant news articles from the AP, NYT, CNN, NBC, Fox, and many other news outlet from which the unbiased and accurate list of OWS crimes was compiled. Your call. You can keep pretending that OWS was just a bunch of people 'taking to the streets' if you want. Fact and reality tells quite a different story though. But - as I say - facts and reality are foreign to the typical Prog-lib-dyte, so I wouldn't be surprised if you keep trying to ignore them.


You are very, very confused.