Nope. He really got me. I believed it 100%. Poe's law indeed.

And kudos and thanks to the OP and all the commenters to that point who kept the ruse going. What a brilliantly conceived and executed stunt.>> ^arghness:

>> ^messenger:
This interviewer is an asshat. He should never have pressed Cohen to break character. Weak sauce.

You realise it's not really Cohen? Maybe you forgot the sarcasm checkbox?

No, Monckton is definitely a real person, even though I would have liked it better if he had just been a character.

Poe's Law in action.
>> ^Quboid:

Wait, so this isn't Cohen? I thought it was, that the parody tag was because Cohen was parodying climate change deniers, but apparently this is a real guy and this is parodying Cohen's parodies. Right?

>> ^messenger:

This interviewer is an asshat. He should never have pressed Cohen to break character. Weak sauce.


You realise it's not really Cohen? Maybe you forgot the sarcasm checkbox?

Your video, Sasha Baron Cohen's new character: Lord Monckton, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

>> ^mentality:

It has nothing to do with martial rule. China's repression is notorious, but only aimed at politically sensitive topics.


As a matter of fact, China's repression is notoriously aimed at everything that moves. Never heard of the countless stories of chicken thieves sentenced to death? Or of the citizens petitioning the local government over some company dumping stuff in the river, only to get harassed by the cops, because the CEO has connections with The Party?
In China, the police and Justice are famously ineffective and corrupt. To keep up the appearance of strength, they will come down hard on anyone they catch, regardless of their crime or even their guilt. If you are a regular folk, you have no money or connection so you'd better keep quiet if you don't want trouble. Basically if you're a crook, you have less chance to get in trouble than if you make your voice heard. And once again, I'm not saying this explains this specific story, I'm saying this doesn't make for a sane society.

People have this idea of China still being some sort of Stalinist state. It is not. It's the Wild West over there, and the robber barons are in charge.


>> ^mentality:


It is comforting to be in denial, to blame this on our differences. There must be something wrong with THEM; this could NEVER happen in OUR civilized society.


Mmm, maybe you're reading a bit too much in what I said? To the question "dictature or culture", I pretty much answered "not culture". For all you know, I could be Chinese. And that kind of thing could very well happen in an European society; case in point: the "whatever happens, walk by and pretend NOT to notice ANYTHING" attitude reminded me of Central/Western Europe under Communist rule more than anything else. This has left that kind of stigma there to this day (Russia: non-white baby stabbed in stroller in the middle of the street in broad daylight? Sorry, no witnesses!).

>> ^Diogenes:

i have seen and even experienced the same in taiwan, which is democratic. the culture simply puts less value on a human life and welfare than many westerners do... you can see it in their medical system (universal health care is not what you might think here)


Your story about the good Samaritan getting sued on the spot for helping, I do get (if you were talking about mainland China), because I've seen that kind of story several times in reports covering this news here (to explain why people would not stick their neck out).
However the part about Taiwan, care to back that up? Taiwan has the standard of living of Western Europe, and they in fact do have universal health care, something which cannot be said of the USA for example.

You have been awarded 1 Power Point for fixing the embed code for Dead Pool video Sacha Baron Cohen on Interviewing a Real Terrorist as Bruno. Thank you for helping maintain VideoSift's reliability.

Wealth disparity is a red herring. It is one economic indicator out of literally thousands. Neolibs like to harp on it, but when the poorest schlub in the US has 2 cars, 2 flat screens, air conditioning, and more food than they can possibly eat then it holds very little meaning. I'm a statistician, and there is always a curve in wealth with extreme ends. Deal with it.

Again - they're focusing on the wrong problem. The problem is a corrupt and powerful government. Lobbyists push for bad laws, but bad laws can't get passed without corrupt legislators. In the past, the robber-barons just did what they wanted and government was too toothless and feckless to stop abuses. Today the robber-barons are back, but they are aided and abetted by a powerful, corrupt government that creates a maze of loopholes, exemptions, and laws to pick and choose which company gets to be the one to get away with murder.

The first thing that has to happen is that government needs to be reduced in size and power so that they cannot be the kingmakers. Then you pass a set of simple reforms that are clear and basic so everyone knows 'the rules'. Companies get away with crap because government passes laws that allows it (like the repeal of Glass/Steagall). Peel the lobbyists out of such a system, and all you do it create an all-powerful government that crushes (or blesses) specific industries according to its whimsy.

For example - Obama has been literally shovelling cash at the 'green' industry. Solyndra (and others) have shown that it was all a subsidy-scam. There was no possible way these solar companies could possibly turn a profit. Not to mention ethanol subsidies, et al... They all lobbied big time and got a pile of political payola. It is modern day patronage. Meanwhile Obama is doing all he can to slap down oil and coal. The government is picking some industries to grow, and others to punish. That is totally bogus. And (just so you neolibs don't get mad) it is bogus when it happens to companies like Exxon or Haliburton too.

The government should not be this power broker that picks and chooses which industries get favoritism, and which ones get the thumbscrews based on the political preference of the legislators in power. That creates an unpredictable, uncertain, arbitrary system where industry is more beholden to politicians than the public. Who cares if a company makes a lousy or unprofitable product when they can just pay a lobbyist, or donate to a candidate, and end up getting piles and piles of taxpayer cash?

THAT is the real problem here. Wall Street, Solydra, Enron - all these companies are just symptoms. The disease is the government.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Another defector:
Nobel Prize-Winning Physicist Resigns Over Global Warming

If man-made global warming is really happening, then you have to agree:
1) somewhere exists a group of scientists who know the precise temperature the earth is supposed to be.
2) these scientists can somehow "set" this temperature by taxing and regulating industries.

BONUS: Do you really think there would ever come a day when the alarmists concede they were wrong, especially after establishing a world climatocracy of near-absolute power? Ha.


Second time of saying this to you - who has ever claimed to know the exact right temperature the earth is "meant" to be? It doesn't even make sense as a statement. "Meant" to be how, in what way? You must be quoting something a knowlessman has said.

Second time of saying this to you as well - you have the wrong target. The politicians are manipulating "climate change" into a money-spinner. But that doesn't mean that climate change is wrong, it means the politicians are wrong.

They and the oil barons are manipulating you and you owe it to yourself to go out and independantly educate yourself. The data is there qm, and it is abundantly clear that there is an anomalous spike in temperature which presents itself around mid 1900s. The only thing left to discuss is why it is happening, and david mitchell is suggesting that no rational human being would simply do nothing when there is even the vaguest chance that we are contributing to the anomaly.

Hate the politicians, not the science they use and abuse to manipulate you with. I hope you listen this time, but i know you won't.

Soooooo, both sides receive massive amounts of money from the rich and powerful but one of those sides is moral and the other not... because, why?

Why do you think welfare was created by a bunch of rich, racist white guys? Could it have been, instead of goodness, a corporate money laundering scheme? I mean it goes straight from the most poor of souls--barely keeping them afloat. Not to mention limiting them-- and straight to businesses.

I would say Walmart is very happy with this program and the people it helps are barely scraping by. I would also add that those rich people also put into place our justice system, which further makes the poor dejected…

Or better—--look at corn subsides… Goes straight to big corn, puts small famers out of business. But does it help the poor? You bet your fucking ass it “helps!” More than welfare any day of the week. It reduces the price of all food by leaps and bounds. That’s millions of restaurants too. But is it for you and I? Even though it benefits us? Fuck no… It means more money for the fat cat.


>> ^raverman:
The problem is that the two branches of Civil Liberty and Small Government are opposing objectives because Bureaucratic corruption aside, the government plays a role in representing and protecting the liberty of the people.
The left likes Civil Liberty, but doesn't believe the massive base of working class individuals can protect themselves from the rich and powerful barons and corporate warlords that develop in the power vacuum without central government.
The right likes the idea of small government purely because it gives more power to the rich and powerful barons and corporate warlords. They manipulate the concept of 'civil liberty' that individuals do not need the government to limit the control of the rich.. while unspoken is interpretation that this is fend for yourself or die trying world.
The Left won't accept giving up control will give more civil protection, but the right can give lip service to civil liberties and ignore it as 'aspirational' when need be.

The problem is that the two branches of Civil Liberty and Small Government are opposing objectives because Bureaucratic corruption aside, the government plays a role in representing and protecting the liberty of the people.

The left likes Civil Liberty, but doesn't believe the massive base of working class individuals can protect themselves from the rich and powerful barons and corporate warlords that develop in the power vacuum without central government.

The right likes the idea of small government purely because it gives more power to the rich and powerful barons and corporate warlords. They manipulate the concept of 'civil liberty' that individuals do not need the government to limit the control of the rich.. while unspoken is interpretation that this is fend for yourself or die trying world.

The Left won't accept giving up control will give more civil protection, but the right can give lip service to civil liberties and ignore it as 'aspirational' when need be.

One of the few ultra-rich who made it there without being crummy to other people.

Among the investment barons, he is one of the few saints.

I'll say something: Sacha Baron Cohen has balls the size of those people's ignorance.

and you wonder why men don't want to get married...

married men have been portrayed on television as doofuses since the early days of TV -- from Ralph Kramden to Cliff Huxtable to Dan Connor to Ray Barone to Homer Simpson... once they're married, they're effectively neutered and submissive to the exaggerated power of their wives... thus providing a facade to serve as a distraction from the unequal distribution of resources in public education.

A rather simplistic, populist bit of tripe.

To start with, if this guy thinks that things were so great back in the 1960s then maybe he should think again. The 'middle class' he talks about in the 60s was a far smaller entity than it is in 2011. In the 60s the country had a higher proportion of people in the 'lower' class. Since that time, the average american family has gotten proportionally wealthier - not poorer - and enjoys a higher standard of living, more property, and greater economic freedom than ever before. The entire premise of this video is nothing but an anachronistic fantasy.

The pap about families easily affording homes, cars, education, and retirement in the 60s on a single income is also a load of bull feathers. Middle class stiffs had to make tough choices back then too, and didn't have the dosh to just toss around money like that. His cutsey chalkboard claptrap cartoons of a smiling 'middle class' family easily affording any expense they wanted is stupidly wrong.

And this moron acts like people on a single income TODAY can't afford a home, car, college, and retirement. I am the lone wage-earner in my family. Not ONCE have I gotten government assistance or a handout on the dole. And I own a home, 2 cars, have $13,000 in savings for the kids, and I'm on track to be a millionaire when I retire. How did I do it? Because I'm not stupid. The middle class doesn't have to go into debt for these things - and this JERK'S premise that MC families have to rack up huge debt to live life is absolute specious.

And unions - yeesh. I noticed carefully that this obviously neolib goombah didn't bother mentioning that the over 26 TRILLION dollars in debt this nation has only exists because of private and public sector union unfunded liabilities. Corporations send world overseas because unions ARE making the cost of business in the U.S. (not to mention the fact that we're #1 in the world in corporate taxation) unfeasible for many industries. And he also doesn't mention the decrease in union size is only in the private sector, but that PUBLIC sector unions have swollen in size to gargantuan, slovenly, grotesque levels - and are (of course) literally breaking America's bank with thier costs. Of course companies outsource labor when paying a US employee costs them 100X as much money for only a fraction of the output. Only in the neolib Planet Fantasy does everyone get 100,000 a year for pushing brooms, assembling widgets, and other unskilled jobs that any reasonably trained lemming can perform.

He also doesn't mention that the top 50% of American taxpayers are paying 95% of the taxes, and that the "middle class" that he disingenously claims to speak for is actually paying almost NO INCOME TAXES at all. The bottom 50% of wage-earners (that's the middle class for you neolib idiots out there) only pay 5% of the taxes. How much more can the you burden the top 50% with before they pull up stakes and leave? That's the problem New York City, Chicago, LA, and many other neolib Meccas are facing. They have raised taxes so high on "the rich" (which Obama defines as anyone earning over 200K) that they are leaving these leftist enclaves, which in turn are literally dying on the vine under the weight of their own stupid policies and union debt.

But I do agree with some of the comments about lobbyists and the tax code. I do believe that is a problem, but it is a GOVERNMENT problem not a lobbyist problem. The government is the new "Robber Baron", when 100 years ago the government was protecting people from Robber barons. But of course this guy doesn't focus on the fact that it is GOVERNMENT making these stupid laws, and not companies. In fact, many companies hated the repeal of Glass-Steagall but government wanted it so Barney Frank could have is precious UFFODUBBLE HOWZING! Banks never wanted to be forced to give loans to people who they never would have touched in the 1960s - but Government played the Race Card with accusations of redlining and forced it through.

The problems with income disparity people whine about are largely a phantom. More people in the US are wealthier than they've ever been in the nation's history. Carping about how much MORE the uber-rich have than the middle class is pure sophistry.

Gryffindor
Gryffindor values bravery, daring, nerve, and chivalry. Its emblematic animal is the lion and its colours are scarlet and gold. Minerva McGonagall is the most recent Head of Gryffindor. Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington aka Nearly Headless Nick is the house ghost. The founder of the house is Godric Gryffindor. Gryffindor corresponds to the element of Fire. The common room is located in one of the highest towers at Hogwarts, the entrance is situated on the seventh floor in the east wing of the castle and is guarded by a portrait of The Fat Lady. She permits entrance if given the correct password which is changed numerous times throughout the school year.


Hufflepuff
Hufflepuff, founded by Helga Hufflepuff, is the most inclusive among the four houses, valuing hard work, patience, loyalty, and fair play rather than a particular aptitude in its members. Its emblematic animal is the badger, and Black and Gold are its colours. Pomona Sprout is the Head of Hufflepuff. The Fat Friar is its ghost. Hufflepuff corresponds roughly to the element of earth. The Hufflepuff Dormitories and common room are located somewhere in the basement, near the castle's kitchens.


Ravenclaw
Ravenclaw values intelligence, knowledge, and wit. Its emblematic animal is the eagle, and its colours are blue and bronze. The Ravenclaw Head of House in the 1990s was Filius Flitwick. The ghost of Ravenclaw is the Grey Lady, who was the daughter of Rowena Ravenclaw, the house's founder. Ravenclaw corresponds roughly to the element of air. The Ravenclaw common room and dormitories are located in a tower on the west side of the castle. Ravenclaw students must answer a riddle as opposed to giving a password to enter their dormitories.


Slytherin
Slytherin house values ambition, cunning and resourcefulness and was founded by Salazar Slytherin. Its emblematic animal is the serpent, and its colours are green and silver. Professor Horace Slughorn was the Head of Slytherin during the 1997–1998 school year, replacing Severus Snape, who as well, replaced Slughorn when he retired for the first time several years ago. The Bloody Baron is the house ghost. Slytherin corresponds roughly to the element of water. The Slytherin Dormitories and common room are reached through a bare stone wall in the Dungeons. The Slytherin common room is a long, low underground room (probably under the Hogwarts lake, thus Slytherin house's affiliation with water) with rough stone walls and round greenish lamps hanging from the ceiling.

-http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Hogwarts_Houses