>> ^critical_d:

dead


Fixed and thanks.

>> ^Sagemind:

Um, wouldn't that "Ass-hole-ery make them Sith - not Jedi?


Depends on what denomination of Jedi you are. I believe that backsliding Jedi never truly become Sith and are forgiven when they die.

Thanks for the double promote

In reply to this comment by EDD:
*doublepromote

Your video, Freddie Wong - Jedi A-Holes Strike Back, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

>> ^Arkaium:

This is actually from Deep Space Nine.


This is actually from The Empire Strikes Back

These guys have eyes suspiciously like the Empire's probe droid in 'Empire Strikes Back'. Clearly they were created by George Lucas. I'm calling fake.

Well, it's not about just calling him a war criminal - he is a war criminal (or that's what the evidence I've seen so far leads me to believe, at least). I wouldn't want diplomatic relations with him, I would want to topple him by force. Like Hitler.

In answer to your question. No, you are not morally responsible for the misery in the world. No more so than your conscience dictates. I do think there's a difference between someone actively forcing someone as opposed to someone who have made some bad choices. At some point we, as a society, should say when enough is enough. If there is a benevolent dictatorship, if you can imagine such a thing, then we should not break that up for the hell of it, if the people don't care. If the people are actively rebelling against their dictator and he strikes back with full force, then I think that we should try to minimize the suffering from it

Do the least harm is basically what I want to live by, but I don't want it to be "I go out in the world to fix suffering where I see it", it's a balancing act, eh? When a certain threshold of suffering is passed, it seems prudent to me to take action.

For instance, if someone was homeless I would not necessarily give him money and stuff, but if someone fell over and hurt their leg, I would. It's all a cost/benefit analysis, the benefit being a limiting of suffering.

/ramble
>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

>> ^gwiz665:
The people are trying to stand up to him, and he's committing outright genocide. Of course, we must do what we can to help the people liberate themselves. Unlike Iraq, this is not just for the hell of it - we are helping the people free themselves, when they do not have the strength themselves, as opposed to Egypt, Tunesia and so on.
If we sit and watch as the civilians are butchered, we are no better (or at least very little better) than the butchers ourselves.

I don't exactly prescribe to your exact moral position on this, but it does seem like a "better" version of Iraq as open rebellion has been happening in the whole region. The tricky problem is, how do you support rebels without directly supporting rebels (look at how well cruise missiles helped stop the fighting in Iraq), while also having to maintain diplomatic relations with the ruler if the rebellion fails, even more so if you are saying he is a war criminal? I can't bring myself to vote for this video though, this lady seemed like she was harboring some irrational hatred for anything US, even though I think it is France (lol?) leading the charge on this one.
Just a little moral question for ya. If you buy a CD player that you don't need, are you morally responsible for the homeless person you didn't give lunch money? Not trying to be snarky, I just find problems with believing in that exact moral position. It would result in a complete stimy of action because you actions could never be probably meshed with all outcomes of maximum happiness. Technocratic morality boredom, signing out!

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

Yup. I stand by every word of that. The whole Wisconsin kerfuffle had almost nothing to do with "fairness". It was all about Union power and money. To a man, the protests were bought, paid for, and stoked by a bunch of swaggering, thuggish, threatening, mafioso sleazebags.
ht
tp://bigjournalism.com/jjmnolte/2011/03/18/20-days-of-left-wing-thuggery-in-wisconsin-when-will-obama-democrats-and-msm-call-for-civility/
And after the law passed they are not done. They're going around threatening businesses who don't actively support THEM (unions) with financial ruin. They are threatening families. They are threatening people. They are using violence. There is nothing to praise about these people. They are scum and don't deserve one iota of sympathy.
But of course they are not done. This Cenk vid showing them ratcheting up their rhetoric and activity was easy to predict. Unions were never going to just shrug and go, "Oh well - guess we better start behaving..." Nope. Not with Indiana, Ohio, and several other states in the process of passing similar laws that scale back on the lavish union gravy trains in many locations. The unions know they are facing a huge tide of popular sentiment against them, and they are going to bus in every thug, make every threat, slap every woman, punch every old guy, and beat up any kid they have to in order to make sure they can keep living like pigs on the public dollar.


God-fucking-dammit.

This is not about some "mafioso" union crime bosses. This is about a Republican governor and Republican senators eliminating by fiat collective bargaining.

Collective bargaining! The heart and soul of the only protection and means of progress that the laboring class has ever known in the history of the human race.

From wikipedia: Collective bargaining is a process of negotiations between employers and the representatives of a unit of employees aimed at reaching agreements which regulate working conditions. Collective agreements usually set out wage scales, working hours, training, health and safety, overtime, grievance mechanisms and rights to participate in workplace or company affairs.

The unions acquiesced to Walker's salary demands. They acquiesced to his demand to contribute more to their health care. And yet, even as they acquiesced to the financial aspects of Walker's plan, this still wasn't enough. The Republicans voted to eliminate nearly ALL collective bargaining rights.

Read the above definition of collective bargaining again. Do you really think it's moral to strip workers of the power to declare their workplace is unsafe without fear of retaliation or access to a grievance system that protects them from unfair discipline or termination, or any of a thousand other issues that infringe on basic human rights?

Collective bargaining means far more than just wage negotiations. It is the means by which ordinary workers across a broad range of careers have any leverage to stand up to enormous government and corporate entities (which in this day and age are nearly the same thing thanks to people like the Koch brothers who are funding Walker's criminality) that can and do exploit them in any way that is not strictly prohibited by law.

This is class warfare.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

Yup. I stand by every word of that.

Yes, and when there are threats and violence in conservative groups you label those people "fringe"... not part of the "real" movement (ex- tea party).

It isn't unexpected though. It's fairly common for people to highlight the positives in their own groups and the negatives of opposing groups. When discussion of a group's ideas is ineffective, attack their character instead.

But of course, I'm not telling you anything you haven't lambasted others for. =)

http://videosift.com/video/Wisconsin-Governor-Prank-Called-By-Billionaire-Tea-Party

Wait, who was bought? And who are the thuggish, threatening, mafioso sleazebags? Hint: Answer in above video.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

the protests were bought, paid for, and stoked by a bunch of swaggering, thuggish, threatening, mafioso sleazebags.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

pigs
thuggery
force
violence
threats
sour
swaggering
threatening
'consequences'
bought & paid for
mafioso
sleazebags

That seems "fairly balanced". ;-)

... and then you remembered what the "MS" part of "MSNBC" stands for?

>> ^handmethekeysyou:

Maybe it's because I work in television and sit next to the head of rights & clearances, but my first though was "there's no way they got that logo clear with Microsoft for that use.">> ^ToastyBuffoon:
Remember: The web = Internet Explorer.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

In other news - human beings need to respirate oxygen to survive.
I don't think there's anyone particularly amazed at the concept that the unions would continue to squeal like stuck pigs and use thuggery, force, violence, and threats to make sour grape juice. Unions are swaggering around Wisconsin in droves threatening businesses and consumers alike with 'consequences' unless they do what they want. It's hard to say what will happen in the long run, but I really hope all these bought & paid for mafioso sleazebags get what they deserve - a swift kick in the pants.


Yeah got it. You wanna join your fellow Americans in fighting for fairness...or you wanna support rich people as they get richer and hurt the middle and lower classes. Cause for the past 30 years the people have been getting fucked...everyone knows it just ask the Tea Partiers.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

In other news - human beings need to respirate oxygen to survive.


"In physiology, respiration (often mistaken with breathing) is defined as the transport of oxygen from the outside air to the cells within tissues, and the transport of carbon dioxide in the opposite direction."

-wikipedia

It would seem to me mr. pennypacker, that if respiration only involved oxygen we would perish. Ignoring carbon dioxide, how republican of you!

Maybe it's because I work in television and sit next to the head of rights & clearances, but my first though was "there's no way they got that logo clear with Microsoft for that use.">> ^ToastyBuffoon:

Remember: The web = Internet Explorer.