Why go through all this work and not make the sentry blue?

What are y'all gonna do - ban people who stir up the anger in you and them blame them for ending up with a pissed-off echo chamber called Videosift? There are already sites like that. Why go there? Choggie doesn't get to decide if you're upset today or not. If it were up to me, I'd bring back him under his old account, but that wasn't one of the choices. So, I voted to bring him back under a new account.

He obviously loves all of our little pointed heads and can't stay away. Isn't that amends enough?
I guess for some . . . no. Maybe you ought to read some of Swampgirl's post again.

And like Wilford Brimley says, "Forget your troubles, c'mon get happy!"

My position is that a socialized system is not desirable in any scenario. This is a philosophical stance, which I feel is supported both by specific issue by issue evidence, as well as over-arching historical trend analysis. I'm an advocate of small government, low taxes, personal freedom, and limited federal powers.

To cede power and wealth to government is a horrible mistake that inevitably results in long term damage that far outweighs any temporary short-term benefits. Socialized systems always result in greater amounts of misery, unhappiness, poverty, and even death. Government cannot be trusted, and the less they power to control, the better off the people remain. That's what makes the Bill of Rights so fantastic.

The benefits of a social medical system are debatable (at best). Specifically, the plans under discussion have been proven to be of no economic benefit by the CBO. From a philosophical perspective they give WAY too much power & money to government - with far too few limits & controls. Why go this route when we know prima facie that it is a horrible idea? Just because a bunch of leftist theorycrafters SAY it'll work? Not buying it.

Door usage *fail, I must say.
Makes you wonder why going straight through glass seemed like a viable solution to the problem at hand.

^ Mr. Megarchist, stop looking at Europe and look at Asia, there are currently many countries there enjoying a lot more economic freedom than we do right now, and their prosperity can be directly linked to how unregulated their markets are, unless you're using special distorted vision liberal glasses and attributing all that economic growth to their spiffy governments.

Socialism does not mean evil. It's just that the theory is a convoluted mess of lies, and, as a social system, it's incredibly oppressive towards the inconvenient human nature of individuals. That's not evil at all.

Libertarians are much more about liberty than liberals, they win hands down, why go there? No one's got a knack for reducing a person's liberty more than the government. Libertarians want less govt and liberals want more of it. Do the math.

You're not "letting" people die when it's not your duty to take care of their health in the first place. That's like saying people are keeping me from being a millionaire because they won't give me a miserable dollar.

Before you rush to judge me callous, it's a lot worse to see govt stealing the life out of millions of productive taxpayers (remember, hard-earned money requires work and time out of people's lives) through taxes to support a wasteful healthcare system. Why isn't your heart bleeding out for *them*?

It's more resource-efficient to let people help each other out voluntarily and compete than letting govt step in and do it. Those led to believe otherwise are suckers who are not seeing those who rake in the most benefits out of socialized healthcare: government and those in bed with it.

Cool, just came up with a new name for liberals: Suckers.

I'm on fire.

"they're black people, not chimps you racist!11"

this is really more about social interaction than 'human learning'
the kids are intimidated by the foreigner with their 'magic box' and rather obey the directions when the foreigner is right next to them

on a second thought.. i take my joke back.. this IS racist..
why go to africa to do these things?
is it supposed to mean that they're more primitive and more suitable for human study or what?
you could go to your local kindergarten and have a toy with candy
teach a child to instruct the test-child so the tester doesn't feel that the test instructor is at a position of authority toward them

Why go to the effort of wearing monkey print underwear and not just put on pants for your video to the world?

Westy and gwiz665, you both make a good point. What you're speaking of could be called "emotional economy". It's the idea that we only place emotional investment in those close to us - those whom we expect will in return invest emotionally in us. This is the natural way of human civilization, and it is an important psychological defense mechanism. For instance, as i write this, someone somewhere in the world just died. If all people could feel the death of all other people (or creatures in general), we would all be overwhelmed by the constant flood of pain and emotion.

However, you fail to understand the nature of the situation. And while it is important to have a rational outlook on the subject of celebrities, it is also important to understand this next concept:

When you kill an animal for food (or buy a packaged, pre-killed, animal product) it is healthy to thank that animal for giving its life to sustain your own. Too many people thank God, or some other thing, but thanking the animal - so that you understand your own place in the natural order - is the true purpose of saying grace before eating.

Without that thanks, and without the understanding that comes with genuine gratitude for the sacrifice of another life for your own, a person begins to devalue the life of the creature they killed. The devaluation continues and grows in its own way, until eventually that person (and all people) come to believe themselves to be above less intelligent forms of life. Understand: Just because humans are higher on the food chain doesn't mean you are any more significant than a deer - or a bee. Or even a virus.

It is not possible to understand the meaning of this overnight. It is a kind of insight that must grow in you until the meaning becomes clear on its own. It is the same as when your parents push you to say "please" and "thank you" and to show respect in general and have good manners. As a very young child, you don't understand the necessity. But as you grow older and gain experience with other people and social situations, you begin to understand that the words "please", "thank you", "excuse me", "i'm sorry", and so on, have a deeper purpose that goes beyond mere manners.

And so it is with emotional expression. People form attachments to artists and performers. These attachments are, in truth, almost always made to the image that the artist is projecting of him- or herself. But even that projected image is a part of the person. Just as importantly however, it should be understood that celebrities /become/ celebrities not just because of the link between their image and their fans, but also because of the links between people who share a love or interest in what that famous person is doing. People tend to congregate around ideas (and ideals). That's why going to church is so popular. People could worship in the privacy of their own homes, yet many choose to go to a church (or temple, etc). Why? Because of the social aspect. Because of the shared links, not just between the congregation and the topic at hand, but also between all the people present! It is this way with all things.

Understand further that a person's emotional investment itself is so often times tied directly to some event in their life. Perhaps someone experienced her first kiss while Elvis was playing on the radio in the background. Perhaps a close family member died 20 or 30 years ago, and at that time, that person heard a song that echoed the same feelings he or she was feeling at that moment. There was a sense that "Yes, someone else out there /knows/ what i'm going through. Their lyrics comfort me. Their melody is a catharsis of my very soul." There's a gratitude there. And now that the musician has died, it is as if the person has lost a piece of themselves.

It may not seem rational, but it is most certainly logical.

Understand finally that this emotional connection to a person's outward persona is a fine and necessary substitution for having a direct emotional connection to them. (Regardless of whether they're a so-called "celebrity" or not.) The problem isn't that we have too much of that, it's that we don't have enough of it going around to more people. And what we do have is too often abused by unscrupulous journalism (ie: "The Media"). Perhaps you would find it interesting to know that i personally have more emotional resonance with Tori Amos than i do with any one of my blood kin. She and i don't know each other personally, but her actions (her music) have helped me through situations that none of them would or could have (and in fact, some of those situations were caused by them).

There's so much more that could be said on this subject, though i will simply close with this: All things in moderation. Balance.

what a boorish and careless question. but, you know, I think there is a way in which she was not totally at fault. i mean she is a total weasel, just like larry king or barbara walters, and has absolutely zero class and close to no restraint. and yes, she can manage what does and does not get asked. but in so many ways she is just a mouthpiece for the producer's idea of what audiences want to hear.

yeah, hammer handled himself gorgeously. but, to be honest, why go on such a lightweight show to begin with if you have respect for yourself and what you're doing?

total interview fail.

I'm not a fan of the Chaser when they do things like this, I mean, they are making life hard for people who are otherwise just trying to do their jobs.

Plus it is a little lazy, I mean there are plenty, plenty of better ways to make fun of the Outback Steakhouses.

Just show one of their ads... they're terrible enough.

But yeah, at least themed restaurants of other countries at least TRY to be a tiny bit authentic.

HOLY CRAP! I was just looking to see what's on their menu (as I can't remember it all from last time I was in the States)... They are now in Australia! I can't believe that a fake Australia restaurant created in America is now IN the country it's pretending to be.

Stunning.

Now, looking at their menu.

No damper (real Australian bush bread)
Hmmm, he goes off about beetroot not being on the burgers and he's right, actually, the menu is different in the Australia Outback steakhouse menu vs the America one... let's see:

US burger: A burger topped with Bloomin’ Onion® petals, American cheese, lettuce, tomato and our famous Bloom sauce.
AUS burger: A ridgy didge works burger, served with bacon, egg, cheese, beetroot, lettuce, tomato, grilled onion & Outback´s special BBQ sauce

So, in the US they get... um... an American burger, and in Australia they get an Australian burger.

WHAT IS THE POINT? If you're going to have a friggen themed restaurant, bloody well let people ACTUALLY EAT THE FOOD! I mean, why go to a place like that if you're just going to eat a US burger anyway? GEEZE... It's the standard US thing of 'oooh, better just give them what they're used to, don't want to shock them'.

It happens with books, movies, music, food, everything.

And I think it grossly undersells the actual people of the States. I'm sure the majority of you Americans would actually LIKE to try a real Australian burger... wouldn't you? Rather than just having yet another US burger with American cheese and everything you expect?

Yea... I would have thought the other video would have posted, but no worries... But yes... I have too many Pqueued videos... to think I could be close to getting 500 by now, let alone 250...

In reply to this comment by gorillaman:
I didn't see the other video.

In reply to this comment by mas8705:
Err... Why go half way and discard one video if I had another video that had the exact same thing?

While I disagree with a playlist being used, I not going to fight the rules... Don't worry the other one was removed...

>> ^Farhad2000:
The acts of a few does not reflect the views of the many.
You wouldn't have heard about this if it didn't have OBAMA sprayed on the side. It's simply an act of vandals not political revolutionaries.


Then why go to all the trouble to tear the Obama '08 bumper sticker off the back yet leave the others alone? I'll agree that it's simply an act of vandals, but they seem to be politically motivated vandals.

I didn't see the other video.

In reply to this comment by mas8705:
Err... Why go half way and discard one video if I had another video that had the exact same thing?

While I disagree with a playlist being used, I not going to fight the rules... Don't worry the other one was removed...

Err... Why go half way and discard one video if I had another video that had the exact same thing?

While I disagree with a playlist being used, I not going to fight the rules... Don't worry the other one was removed...

>> ^CaptainPlanet420:
You must by default be pro-abortion to be pro-choise. Only you kids on here would argue otherwise.
Don't kill the environment, noooooo, and don't kill that poor kitty, nooooo, but let's suck little Johnny's brains out thru a tube, while still in the womb. I think in high skool they called ya'll "posers." hahahahaha, too easy


why go for just the brain. you apparently have some sort of tube de suck, get the whole fetus.
I really really want to hit you.
who else thinks a kitten = human fetus -if it saves a single PERSONS life, you can kill them both. idk wtf that environment comment was. i didn't know that pro-choicers were all green hippies (no offense hippies)

edit: ur name is stupid.