Mel Guzman could have purchased it from a pawn shop, flea market or by any other legitimate means, for all we know. Yet some of you here and on youtube are passing judgement on this person. And I "love" how the speaker makes a snarky remark about having an unemployment form.

How many of you have not had to fill out an unemployment form?

Maybe this person couldn't afford the latest machine because he's, I don't know... unemployed? Maybe he didn't know how to reformat the drives on this machine? Since all the anecdotal information tells us is that Mel got the computer recently and just turned it on.

And before you people jump on my ass... lets read upon the law of Possession of Stolen Goods.

If the individual didn't know the goods were stolen, then the goods are returned to the owner and the individual is not prosecuted. Innocent possession is not a crime.. If Mel was the original thief, why would he still have the computer? Wouldn't a thief sell it quickly as possible to make money... Not hold on to it for 2 years then use it himself?

So it's okay to virtually lynch Mel Guzman... Vigilante Justice in a form of a Hacker Hipster is acceptable in Videosift world?

Videosift is liberal minded, yet there are 98 of you who just assume Mel Guzman stole this computer. You fuckers don't believe in due process before passing judgment?

And yes, it is true it's not the court of law. Yet this video has been viewed by over half of million people... What if one of these people were someone who wanted to hire Mel Guzman. Now because of some smug smart-ass douche bag, Mel Guzman will continued to be unemployed.

You know what would be true justice... If the authorities finds mp3's downloaded from Limewire and RIAA sue the speaker, because we all know Mel does not have the password to install any applications on this machine.

You bunch of phony liberal fuckers. I consider myself a center-right, yet even I know this is wrong.

Merry Fucking Christmas and Happy New Years Assholes.

Phony language - Is the term statist invective? I'd say yes. If not, then my new name for you shall be blanky, the brown nosed plutocrat.

You've dodged four questions in a row. I've not yet read the rest of your response, so I'm curious to see if you have even a single straight answer.

3. you don't have an example

Do you ever listen to your own rhetoric?

Why is the language you use to promote 'liberty' so full of insults, slogans and loaded language? You can't make a single point without employing disingenuous Rovian power words. COERCION! THEFT! STATIST! CENTRAL DESIGN! SAFETY NET!

Do you ever feel phony using this kind of cheap, fear based, language of intimidation? Wasn't it George Bush who said that anyone who disagrees with him hates freedom? Does anyone who disagrees with you hate liberty? If I disagree, does that make me a violent statist?

If your ideas cannot stand on their own without you having to resort to this kind of dishonest cable news rhetoric, then maybe your ideas are flawed.

I've told you many times that your ideology is too corruptible to ever work in practice. I've also provided you with evidence that both your ideology and party have been heavily influenced by corporations. In the current election, corporations used your ideology -and heaps of cash- to buy a sizable chunk of the United States government. Grasping at straws my ass. I nailed it to the wall.

1 and 3. Taxes are a rudimentary part of all modern civilizations. Find me an example of a modern civilization that doesn't tax and then maybe, MAYBE, you will have the beginnings of an argument.

2. By living in a country, you tacitly agree to its laws. This is called a social contract. You don't sign a social contract. If you did, it would become a regular contract.

I think your arguments would have more traction if they didn't contain so many disingenuous emotional buzzwords: STATIST! TYRANNY! COERCION! THEFT! COMPULSORY! VIOLENCE! BUTT OF A GUN! Having to use forced and phony words to make a point is a telltale sign of a weak argument.

Do you know what corporate backed, free market loving party prints up lists of disingenuous emotional buzzwords for their foot soldiers to use?

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/01/23/luntz

Just sayin'...

I generally avoid these shoddy videos. Dramatic music, incredulity, ignorance, and bias runs rampant, unchecked by reason or fact. What can we expect from spinsters who would manipulate people leaning to the right wing in the American paradigm so that large interests can continue to rake in massive profits at the expense of the very people they claim to be looking out for? As far as I am concerned, these events will play themselves out regardless of any action or inaction that people take. There is more than enough evidence and lies out there on both sides to continue the phony culture war, or have legitimate discussions. When the body count starts rising we will see the truth of these matters. There is a third actor in this debate that everyone misses, and that is mother earth, and she will have the final say, and slay libertarians and eco-scientists alike regardless of the time line / influencing factors. I advise you to spend your time being happy, and fully utilizing the amenities / technologies that currently exist, because nothing good lasts forever.

Where do I stand? I believe that man could have something to do with climate change, but if he isn't, we still deserve the technology, industry, and legislation that comes along with potentially fighting the proposed primitive technology future advocated here. Clean, emission free vehicle, to me, stands for "I don't have to pay for fucking gasoline". Solar and wind power, mean to me, "I don't have to pay as much for my electricity and heating bill." Every shitty video, like this one, arguing against modernizing our technology to be more efficient, is a voice calling out to the other Luddites of the world, bitching for an end to innovation and advancement for our species. You are a cancer. You are a tumor. You are literally scum. You type to me on your computer, but by your logic, walking me a stone tablet you chiseled yourself would be preferable, because microchips are a government conspiracy.

Phony

"... twisted values of a supremely sick society that encourages a 'poor me' mentality of phony victimhood at every turn."


Born in the USA.

I don't want to be a phony, since (if memory serves) you and I disagree on about everything.

But I really liked your last post.

Great find.

Um...

http://www.examiner.com/x-31532-Modesto-Political-Issues-Examiner~y2010m6d23-Sarah-Palins-phony-BP-prayers>> ^honkeytonk73:

If George Bush were president... he'd PRAY to solve the situation and it would get fixed up right quick all magical-like. Now THAT is what I call action. Now that is what I call presidential leadership!

>> ^shuac:

>> ^dirkdeagler7:
Take yourself serious a bit much?
...instead it SEEMS to be a movie that doesn't take itself overly serious (lesson to be learned?)
Let me guess, you recently learned about the concept of "taking one's self seriously" and so everything you see, read, or hear is now suddenly an affront to its antithesis?
Yeah, I've been there. For instance, it was a business 101 class in college where I learned about exploitation and how it's perfectly legal. Like Holden Caulfield being so very sick of all the "phonies," I suddenly started noticing all the examples of exploitation. That incredulous feeling goes away after a while.
It's cute, really, to see it as an outsider. So keep on fighting them "serious" people, dirk. The world is counting on you!


What?

Actually I learned to start taking myself too seriously in Highschool where i thought I knew everything and that I was somehow enlightened. Around that time I latched onto Catcher in the Rye and The Great Gatsby as examples of people who only involved themselves in the "phony" world out of necessity. And i thought of noble causes like fighting against ignorance and bigotry. Righting the wrongs of the world and how much better this planet could be without all the "phonies" and "evil corporations"

And then I grew up and realized that assuming I was somehow special and that the world had black and white labels such as "phonies" and "big bad corporations" was due to immaturity. I also realized that because of some very disheartening truths about humanity and society the best I could hope for in this world is to lead a happy/fulfilling life and to hopefully impact my loved ones and community in a positive way.

So when I see some pretentious idiot who has to tear down something he doesn't like in order to portray him/her self as clever or witty, I will occasionally (i have to let a lot slide on the internet or itd be a full time job!) feel compelled to comment and, in this case, hope that they realize that this movie is for fun and some people will enjoy it. Therefore their dumb comments contributed nothing to the conversation, and at best detracted from other peoples enjoyment of this little clip or the movie as a whole.

Realistically no one gave your comment a 2nd thought except for me and the other person who responded to you. I took the time to write this reply out with hopes that you realize that not everyone who comments or calls you out is attempting to compete for "wittiest" or "coolest" or "most genuine" person and maybe just trying to call out how dumb your comment was.

I'm also hoping that if u just eased up a bit and enjoyed things for what they were and not for what you think they should be (ie every movie HAS to be full of insight and meaning) you would find more enjoyment in the world but more than likely you'll see what I wrote as ignorant or misguided and it doesn't apply to you, but your tune may change at some point. I know I did the same thing when my dad tried to convey these ideas to me back then, as I had that same problem for quite a while

>> ^shuac:

>> ^dirkdeagler7:
Take yourself serious a bit much?
...instead it SEEMS to be a movie that doesn't take itself overly serious (lesson to be learned?)
Let me guess, you recently learned about the concept of "taking one's self seriously" and so everything you see, read, or hear is now suddenly an affront to its antithesis?
Yeah, I've been there. For instance, it was a business 101 class in college where I learned about exploitation and how it's perfectly legal. Like Holden Caulfield being so very sick of all the "phonies," I suddenly started noticing all the examples of exploitation. That incredulous feeling goes away after a while.
It's cute, really, to see it as an outsider. So keep on fighting them "serious" people, dirk. The world is counting on you!

>> ^dirkdeagler7:

Take yourself serious a bit much?
...instead it SEEMS to be a movie that doesn't take itself overly serious (lesson to be learned?)

Let me guess, you recently learned about the concept of "taking one's self seriously" and so everything you see, read, or hear is now suddenly an affront to its antithesis?

Yeah, I've been there. For instance, it was a business 101 class in college where I learned about exploitation and how it's perfectly legal. Like Holden Caulfield being so very sick of all the "phonies," I suddenly started noticing all the examples of exploitation. That incredulous feeling goes away after a while.

It's cute, really, to see it as an outsider. So keep on fighting them "serious" people, dirk. The world is counting on you!

@ForgedReality: There's a guy here that was convinced it was fake, and this is VS where people are a little more credulous than Youtube at large. I'm sure the tube is full of people screaming "Hey, everyone, this guy's a great big PHONY."

Skeeeve: If you think I'm "covering for the government" you don't know me very well.

Shit like this starts with the people directly involved. YES, I want an end to the phony WOD immediately, which should've been known not only by the fact that I sifted this video, but also created the sensational headline.

I am a card-carrying medical marijuana "patient" in Los Angeles. I directly identify with the people terrorized by this horrible event caused by local police and judges.

I will first condemn the police officers who raided this poor guys house and shot his dogs in front of his fucking kids, and then go after politicians who are involved in making this type of evil, beyond-Orwellian shit be possible.

Just because Lyndie England was just some country dumbass following orders, doesn't excuse her taking thumbs-up pictures with piles of tortured, innocent civilians.

Again, if politicians didn't have thugs with badges, these types of events could never happen. This is why I believe in criminal punishment for police officers.

First, you're not actually challenging the facts of what Obama said in this clip. Second, you're going to have to cite your "quote", since I bet you're overstating what he said.

You are hard pressed to find a speech where Obama DOESN’T pull this rhetorical stunt. But specifically, the example I was thinking was at the Republican retreat in January. I mis-remembered it being about health care, when it was about job creation & stimulus spending. There was some other health care event where he did the same thing, but I can’t remember which one it was. I think it was the summit in March, but I’ll have to research that. Anyway, here’s an Obama-isms like what I'm talking about from the retreat…

OBAMA: “The notion that I would somehow resist doing something that cost half as much but would produce twice as many jobs -- why would I resist that? … The problem is I couldn't find credible economists who would back up the claims that you just made.”

OBAMA: “Those job losses took place before any stimulus…could have ever taken into effect. Now, that's just the fact, Mike, and I don't think anybody would dispute that. You could not find an economist who would dispute that…”

What were their names? What are their credentials? When did he talk to them? What did they say? Obama just waves rhetorical magic wands and conjures phantom armies of ‘economists’ who all agree with him when he wants to justify some stream of BS that sluices out of his piehole. Health care, foreign policy, cap & tax, NASA, you name it - he does it. Bank on it. When ANYONE challenges him - Joe the Plumber, a reporter, a politician, a climatalogist, an industry expert - whoever... Obama will pull this trick as his response and just bat them aside. Why? Because he's a childish douche who can't handle it when reasonable people disagree with his baloney.

Third, the CBO said it would reduce the deficit, and reduce the final cost to all Americans relative to the status quo.

During the whole debate process - Obama was claiming it would save money. The CBO disagreed as far back as July of 09, and through February of 2010.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/16/AR2009071602242.html?hpid=topnews
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/23/plan-sweetened-for-gop-baffles-cbo/

I find it very interesting now that the bill has passed that the CBO can magically rush a favorably report in a couple weeks - even though many of the plan's details are not yet final. Good enough for places like HuffPo I guess, but they conveniently ignore a lot of the bad stuff.

http://blogs.investors.com/capitalhill/index.php/home/35-politicsinvesting/1524-five-reasons-the-cbo-figures-are-phony

Regardles, Obama’s claims were that it would cost less than 900 billion. It doesn’t. And the point was that Obama goes around bragging about how “every economist” says his plan is great. But that’s untrue. Even economists that are in his back pocket are (at best) saying HCR is kind of a wash, and it takes 20 years to accomplish it - and you can only do it by counting 10 years of taxation for 6 years of benefits. Move out of the realm of Obama administration puppets and there are TONS of 'economists' who stridently disagree with his plans.

Political game at work

I don’t really need to play the political game as I’m in a research position. I’m not trying to manage. However, I am put in a position where I supply data to business leaders, and all too often see the data ignored by “Obama” types who prefer to act on guts, instincts, and opinions – often resulting in millions of dollars in losses because they wouldn't listen to basics. It’s no skin off my nose at work, as I can shrug and move on to the next project. It's dissappointing to see bad decisions made in the headwind of facts at work. In the government it is alarming.