Louic CK is my favorite comedian...

My favorite bit is about showing how retarded political correctness is, and anyone should be able to say any words.

here he explains and shows in joke form nigger, faggot

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuLrBLxbLxw


He's 100% dead on that anyone should be able to say any word and fuck the political correct movement who wants to redefine words just like '1984's newspeak'

>> ^quantumushroom:

Translation: Total Ownage of the left.

"Liberals go straight to ugly racist stereotypes when attacking conservative blacks, calling them oversexualized, stupid and/or incompetent.
The late, lamented, white liberal reporter Mary McGrory called Justice Antonin Scalia "a brilliant and compelling extremist" -- while dismissing Thomas as "Scalia's puppet."
More recently, Democratic Sen. Harry Reid called Scalia "one smart guy." In the next breath, he proclaimed Thomas "an embarrassment to the Supreme Court," adding, "I think that his opinions are poorly written."
When Bush made Condoleezza Rice the first black female secretary of state, terror swept through the Democratic Party. What if people began to notice and ask questions: "Who's that black woman always standing with George Bush?" Never mind! He's probably arresting her.
In addition to an explosion of racist cartoons portraying Rice as Aunt Jemima, Butterfly McQueen from "Gone With the Wind," a fat-lipped Bush parrot and other racist cliches, allegedly respectable liberals promptly called her stupid and incompetent.
Joseph Cirincione, then with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said Rice "doesn't bring much experience or knowledge of the world to this position." (Unlike Hillary Clinton, whose experience for the job consisted of being married to an impeached, disbarred former president.)
Democratic consultant Bob Beckel -- who ran Walter Mondale's 1984 campaign so competently that Mondale lost 49 states -- said of Rice, "I don't think she's up to the job."
When Michael Steele ran for senator in Maryland in 2006, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee dug up a copy of his credit report -- something done to no other Republican candidate. He was depicted in black face with huge red lips by liberal blogger Steve Gilliard. Oreo cookies were rolled down the aisle at Steele during a gubernatorial debate in 2002.
Trafficking in racist imagery is consequence-free for liberals because they have ruined charges of "racism" with their own overuse of the term. By now, any accusation of racism has the feel of a Big Foot sighting."
AC "Why Our Blacks are Better than Their Blacks"



Not one of the people you mentioned commenting on Conservative Blacks is on the "Left" in anyway shape or form. Please apologize to us lefties immediately because we can't take this sort of abuse.

Translation: Total Ownage of the left.



"Liberals go straight to ugly racist stereotypes when attacking conservative blacks, calling them oversexualized, stupid and/or incompetent.

The late, lamented, white liberal reporter Mary McGrory called Justice Antonin Scalia "a brilliant and compelling extremist" -- while dismissing Thomas as "Scalia's puppet."

More recently, Democratic Sen. Harry Reid called Scalia "one smart guy." In the next breath, he proclaimed Thomas "an embarrassment to the Supreme Court," adding, "I think that his opinions are poorly written."

When Bush made Condoleezza Rice the first black female secretary of state, terror swept through the Democratic Party. What if people began to notice and ask questions: "Who's that black woman always standing with George Bush?" Never mind! He's probably arresting her.

In addition to an explosion of racist cartoons portraying Rice as Aunt Jemima, Butterfly McQueen from "Gone With the Wind," a fat-lipped Bush parrot and other racist cliches, allegedly respectable liberals promptly called her stupid and incompetent.

Joseph Cirincione, then with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said Rice "doesn't bring much experience or knowledge of the world to this position." (Unlike Hillary Clinton, whose experience for the job consisted of being married to an impeached, disbarred former president.)

Democratic consultant Bob Beckel -- who ran Walter Mondale's 1984 campaign so competently that Mondale lost 49 states -- said of Rice, "I don't think she's up to the job."

When Michael Steele ran for senator in Maryland in 2006, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee dug up a copy of his credit report -- something done to no other Republican candidate. He was depicted in black face with huge red lips by liberal blogger Steve Gilliard. Oreo cookies were rolled down the aisle at Steele during a gubernatorial debate in 2002.

Trafficking in racist imagery is consequence-free for liberals because they have ruined charges of "racism" with their own overuse of the term. By now, any accusation of racism has the feel of a Big Foot sighting."

AC "Why Our Blacks are Better than Their Blacks"

You're right, the association of Samhain with the Celtic God of the dead is dubious, I retract my comment there. However, you are still way off. The celtics were pagans, and they did more than just light candles. They would build huge bonfires and conduct vegetable, animal and human sacrifices to their gods. Read your own sources. This is macabre to say the least. Whatever the original purpose of the festival, which was terrible enough, it has been further corrupted by the occult over the centuries and more recently the neo-pagan movement. Ritual sacrifice as worship to spirits and spell casting is most certainly done on this day. This is a power day for the pagans. Some call it the devils birthday. Satan is indeed paid tribute, as any worship of spirits goes to demons. Before you try to correct me, let me just tell you that I have a lot of experience with the occult movement and I know exactly what they think about halloween, and how they celebrate it. They look forward to it all year. You think you're just looking at some harmless and quaint tradition, but has an evil origin, and there is much evil done on it; it is nothing any Christian should get near.

>> ^pho3n1x:
There is no "Celtic God of the Dead"...
It's not a celebration of evil at all, and no worship is paid to any "adversary"...
It is a time for passed loved ones to be remembered and honored.
It is a celebration of death, yes, but not in the morbid fashion. The spirits (your loved ones' ghosts) are said to roam more readily during this period, which is why Gaels and Pagans set out a candle (sometimes within a carved turnip) to represent a guiding lantern home.
Also, spirits != demons.
--
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samhain
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hallo_sa.htm
http://www.chalicecentre.net/samhain.htm
http://wicca.com/celtic/akasha/samhainlore.htm
http://www.witchvox.com/va/dt_va.html?a=usxx&c=holidays&sc=samhain&id=1984
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/paganism/holydays/samhain.shtml
>> ^shinyblurry:
Halloween has both Christian and pagan origins. Christian, because November 1st was All Saints Day, and October 31st was All Saints Eve. Pagan, because November 1st is called Samhain, which is the celtic new year. Samhain is the celtic god of death. On the eve of Samhain, pagans would make sacrifices to their gods and the spirits of the dead were said to roam free. Today, the pagan and occult community embraces Samhain as their new year. It is regarded as the day when witches are at the height of their power, and they cast many spells and worship spirits(demons) on this day. Whatever it once was, today, behind the facade of candy and costumes, it is a night when evil is celebrated and worship is paid to the adversary. It is certainly not anything Christians should participate in, nor anyone else with a single ounce of discernment.

There is no "Celtic God of the Dead"...
It's not a celebration of evil at all, and no worship is paid to any "adversary"...

It is a time for passed loved ones to be remembered and honored.
It is a celebration of death, yes, but not in the morbid fashion. The spirits (your loved ones' ghosts) are said to roam more readily during this period, which is why Gaels and Pagans set out a candle (sometimes within a carved turnip) to represent a guiding lantern home.

Also, spirits != demons.

Also, animal sacrifices which are then cooked and eaten? I don't see a problem. Sounds a lot like Thanksgiving.

--

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samhain
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hallo_sa.htm
http://www.chalicecentre.net/samhain.htm
http://wicca.com/celtic/akasha/samhainlore.htm
http://www.witchvox.com/va/dt_va.html?a=usxx&c=holidays&sc=samhain&id=1984
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/paganism/holydays/samhain.shtml

>> ^shinyblurry:

Halloween has both Christian and pagan origins. Christian, because November 1st was All Saints Day, and October 31st was All Saints Eve. Pagan, because November 1st is called Samhain, which is the celtic new year. Samhain is the celtic god of death. On the eve of Samhain, pagans would make sacrifices to their gods and the spirits of the dead were said to roam free. Today, the pagan and occult community embraces Samhain as their new year. It is regarded as the day when witches are at the height of their power, and they cast many spells and worship spirits(demons) on this day. Whatever it once was, today, behind the facade of candy and costumes, it is a night when evil is celebrated and worship is paid to the adversary. It is certainly not anything Christians should participate in, nor anyone else with a single ounce of discernment.

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by Sarzy.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/1983-Apple-Keynote-The-1984-Ad-Introduction

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by Grimm. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'wham, wake me up, 1984, cheesefest, cheese, george michael, the other wham dude' to 'wham, wake me up, 1984, cheesefest 2011, cheese, george michael, the other wham dude' - edited by Ornthoron

Tags for this video have been changed from 'chicago, 1984, chicago 17, 1984, cheese, cheesefest, 2011' to 'chicago, 1984, chicago 17, 1984, cheese, cheesefest 2011' - edited by Ornthoron

>>
^marbles:
He's mischaracterizing George Orwell's views on technology.


Moreover, I would argue that 1984 was *not* about technology at all. Items like the Telescreen were just narrative devices.


>>
^ZappaDanMan:

Anyone else notice that in 1984, there is no mention of religion?


That's because the world of 1984 was modeled on contemporary Stalinist USSR, where religion was very much suppressed.

Orwell wrote about the perils of Stalinism in 1984. If the printing press hadn't been invented when he wrote, he would have been a philosopher in the forum.
And children should be monitored by their parents until their old enough to vote.
Fuck this guy for using Orwell to make a buck.

>> ^marbles:

He's mischaracterizing George Orwell's views on technology.
http://revieworld.info/?p=3
George Orwell gives no evidence anywhere against his aversion to technology that he has discussed in his novel. On the contrary, his opinion is presumably neutral throughout the narration of 1984. However, his imaginations (not everything is his imagination!) portend not a very socially desirable use of technology. It is not even neutral technology. The telescreen is best being used as a propaganda machine. The microphones are used to pry upon personal conversations. There are other sophisticated gadgets to put an end to individual freedom. Since Oceania is always on war against some state or the other, such a society will make a feverish innovation in technologies.


That's an interesting read, thanks for that. I'm always looking for new perspectives on 1984; I've read it so many times.

Anyone else notice that in 1984, there is no mention of religion? Apparently that form of mind control is obsolete
Now let's all drink some victory gin and kill some proles.

He's mischaracterizing George Orwell's views on technology.

http://revieworld.info/?p=3
George Orwell gives no evidence anywhere against his aversion to technology that he has discussed in his novel. On the contrary, his opinion is presumably neutral throughout the narration of 1984. However, his imaginations (not everything is his imagination!) portend not a very socially desirable use of technology. It is not even neutral technology. The telescreen is best being used as a propaganda machine. The microphones are used to pry upon personal conversations. There are other sophisticated gadgets to put an end to individual freedom. Since Oceania is always on war against some state or the other, such a society will make a feverish innovation in technologies.

>> ^xxovercastxx:

promote because I'm going to 1984 this weekend


Olympics in L.A.?