>> ^brycewi19:
As far as Im concerned you shouldnt make peoples health into a business though, and lucky for me it isnt where I live


We shouldn't pay doctors? Nurses? Residential care and medical office administrators? X-Ray technicians? Database managers and data entry personnel? EMT? Diagnostic technicians? Occupational/physical therapists? Medical assistants? Personal and home care aides? Health services managers? Dispensing opticians? Mental health counselors? Respiratory therapists? Human service assistants? Clinical laboratory technologists? Diagnostic medical sonographers? Pharmacy technicians? Medical records technicians? Building cleaning workers? Bookkeeping and accountants? Receptionists and information clerks? Clinical researchers? Et cetera. Et cetera. Et cetera.

Surely, it's still a business where you live; it's just a business paid for by the coerced taxes of the people as opposed to being a voluntary business.

Unless, of course, your parents, doctor, teacher, counselor, minister, or rabbi was the one who touched you.

Then you're hosed.

I wonder if Walmart would have greeters double as the end of life counselors.

It's not a bad way of expressing the usual conservative argument that business uber alles, but I wonder why he didn't use a company who's actually providing health coverage that everyone's utterly satisfied with in his little story.

It's also something that the reform would let us test in a straight up experiment -- can private insurers compete with government? I suppose we're supposed to oppose reform on the basis that private is inherently better than public, even though the plan would let you choose either one.

*news

I looked into this a couple years back and found some credible stuff basically saying he wasn't working on a 9/11 story anymore - don't remember if it was never in the works or if it was dumped. Wish I could find that info now, because I was convinced at the time that this murder conspiracy was a non-story. I'm a big HST fan, so it would've been fun for me to believe in a mystery like this.

As far as nobody hearing anything, I do remember his son saying that he was downstairs, Hunter was upstairs, and he heard what he thought was a book hitting the floor, which was actually the gunshot.

The biggest mystery to me, though, if true: When he was discovered, a single word was typed out on a page on his typewriter: Counselor. Wonder if that had any meaning to it, hmm...

>> ^JiggaJonson:
I have read a bunch of Hunter S Thompson books and always enjoyed them. The details surrounding his death, however, were always a little confusing for me. As far back as I can remember his wife was on the phone with him, he was talking about finishing some sports column and put the phone down a second then didnt get back on it. The fact that she, who was waiting for him to get back on the phone, and her son, who was upstairs at the time, both didnt hear a gunshot was suspicious to me. I dont know how much putting a gun in your mouth muffles the shot but it just seemed odd that neither person heard it. My opinion is there had to be someone else in there with a silencer.

I'm sorry I corrected your spelling. I should have been nice, but I didn't like your insinuatioin that I'm a liar. You have to forgive me when it comes to grammar and stuff. I'm studying English, and while mine is not perfect, I am slightly annoyed by people who completely disregard grammar and capitalization like you do. But that really isn't your problem, because it doesn't matter. Just a pet peeve of mine.

How long can you go without watching porn?

In reply to this comment by deputydog:
>> ^thepinky:
DeputyDog, I'm not a counseller or even a counselor...


are we pouncing on spelling now ms pinky? ok then. 'heroin' is a drug, whereas 'heroine' is the word used to describe a female character much admired for her heroic actions.

you should clean your own stinking kitchen before reporting my cockroaches to the authoritays.


>> ^thepinky:
...but why is it so hard to believe that I know three guys who have talked to me about their porn dependency? I talk about serious topics with lots of people, not just you guys. One of my good friends told me this after I knew him for about 2 weeks. I'm very open with other people about my own experiences, and they often confide in me.


it's not impossible for you to know that many porn addicts by chance, that much i admit, but it's extremely unlikely. either a) you're incredibly 'lucky', especially at your age, to have randomly met these guys, b) you haven't met these guys, or c) they're feeding you a lot of bullshit (maybe through fear after realising you want to end porn's life).

if you have somehow met all these tragic porn addicts, please realise that this is not the norm. it's very much the opposite. i also talk to people about serious topics (it's not whoopee cushions all the time) but don't know a single man, or woman, who has a problem with porn, and that includes friends of friends of friends (and so on).

i'm actually surprised you haven't boycotted the sift anyway. i take it you've seen pornbumper?

>> ^thepinky:
DeputyDog, I'm not a counseller or even a counselor...


are we pouncing on spelling now ms pinky? ok then. 'heroin' is a drug, whereas 'heroine' is the word used to describe a female character much admired for her heroic actions.

you should clean your own stinking kitchen before reporting my cockroaches to the authoritays.


>> ^thepinky:
...but why is it so hard to believe that I know three guys who have talked to me about their porn dependency? I talk about serious topics with lots of people, not just you guys. One of my good friends told me this after I knew him for about 2 weeks. I'm very open with other people about my own experiences, and they often confide in me.


it's not impossible for you to know that many porn addicts by chance, that much i admit, but it's extremely unlikely. either a) you're incredibly 'lucky', especially at your age, to have randomly met these guys, b) you haven't met these guys, or c) they're feeding you a lot of bullshit (maybe through fear after realising you want to end porn's life).

if you have somehow met all these tragic porn addicts, please realise that this is not the norm. it's very much the opposite. i also talk to people about serious topics (it's not whoopee cushions all the time) but don't know a single man, or woman, who has a problem with porn, and that includes friends of friends of friends (and so on).

i'm actually surprised you haven't boycotted the sift anyway. i take it you've seen pornbumper?

Bah! Nothing substantial to back it up? Okay, maybe not, but QM and I are the only ones who have cited any actual scientists in this thread. EDD (who HATES it when I make claims based on my own experience) made up his own statistics, and the rest of you guys are throwing around generalizations like it's nobody's business! It's almost laughable that you ask me to back up my claims when no one who agrees with you is doing so. I just searched my college academic article resources and Google for about 30 minutes looking for studies that show that pornography is healthy. Guess what I found? Studies that show that it's unhealthy. The only scientific conclusion that I found is that occasional porn use isn't harmful. I can't find anything that says it's good for you. I found lots of proof, however, that regular porn use is unhealthy on multiple levels. I don't even have to give you links. Just do a Google search and you'll be bombarded with this stuff.

Spoco, when have I ever been reasonable?

When I say "reasonably" satisfied, I mean that you can't be fully sexually satisfied without actual sex imo. I'm just saying that you don't need porn in order to be reasonably satisfied. Porn isn't totally satisfying, and I should think you would agree with that.

You're mad at me for being stubborn, but my opinions about porn have become far more moderate that they used to be, if you remember. And what about you? Are you really listening and trying to find value in anything I say? I doubt it. Because you think that I'm incredibly wrong, and that's okay. Despite what you may think, I read and understand what you guys are trying to explain to me. Why should I be blamed for being as convinced of my opinion as you are? Because I am the only woman and only person arguing this side?

DeputyDog, I'm not a counseller or even a counselor, but why is it so hard to believe that I know three guys who have talked to me about their porn dependency? I talk about serious topics with lots of people, not just you guys. One of my good friends told me this after I knew him for about 2 weeks. I'm very open with other people about my own experiences, and they often confide in me.

I'm really sorry that I got sucked into this discussion again. I wish that the other people on this website who agree with me would come in and comment instead of making private comments on my profile. That would be really nice.

Skeeve, to me this statement is evidence that your perception of sex has been warped (possibly by porn?): "If his wife wont do these things with him then that is her problem, not his and definitely not porn's fault."

I don't know what you mean by this. Are you suggesting that women should consent to doing whatever a man wants to do in the bedroom? Couples have to compromise about sex as with anything else. He is saying that he can't be satisfied without doing these things, and that IS porn's fault, not his wife's.

"...a marriage in which the partners don't agree on matters of sex is a marriage that shouldn't last. This is something that had been known for thousands of years by nearly every civilization... until Christianity started forcing itself into the bedroom."

What does this even mean? And what's up the whole part about Christianity? How does that make any sense whatsoever? Christianity ruined sex or something?

If a couple can't agree on matters of sex, it's just like everything else in a relationship. They have to work it out. I agree that sex is extremely important for healthy relationships, but it isn't the MOST important thing. I know a lady who was sexually abused as a child. She remained a virgin until after her marriage. The couple soon realized that her sexual abuse had seriously undermined her ability to have a good sexual relationship. He loved her, so they went to counselors and therapy and they worked it out. They've been married for over 30 years now.

In my culture, porn is discouraged. Believe it or not, many men and women don't use it. Also, many people are virgins when they get married. Sex is kind of amazing in that if you're attracted to someone, it usually works just fine. It's as if people have been having sex for thousands of years! It's almost like it's a natural thing that people do, even without porn! It's amazing!

To me it seems obvious that if you use porn and need to fantasize about other women to perform, sex in general isn't going to be as satisfying or as intimate. I would venture to say that most people who use porn think that fantasizing about someone other than your partner is normal, even necessary. And, actually, it may be more common than not. This is the result of a diseased, confused society. It's emotional infidelity. It is neither natural nor necessary. Porn makes thousands of women feel inadequate. When guys don't use porn, their sexual partner (and perhaps some useful ideas on how to keep your sex life exciting) is all that they need for a good sex life. It worked that way for thousands of years.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'university admissions, admission counselor, community college, college degree' to 'banned, redacted' - edited by rasch187

^ That's probably because it sorta is. Gungor is a pastor and marriage counselor, not a standup comic.

From "The Washington Post," 11/22/07:

As a former English major -- he dropped out of the University of Maryland to pursue his music career -- [Bomani] Armah has conducted creative writing and audio/video workshops for kids. He has worked as a youth counselor. He has seen firsthand one of the most pernicious effects of the rap game, the warping of black reality into a one-dimensional caricature. Too many in his generation of artists, he says, aspire to be "as grimy and gangster" as they can be, a depiction of black life that filters down to the kids, who become the next inaccurate storytellers.

"As an educator and an artist, it was hurting me both ways," says Armah, who is hardly the first "conscious" artist to come along advocating a hip-hop makeover. But most artists who feel as he does, Armah adds, "write essays or long esoteric songs" that are indigestible. Armah was determined to do something more jolting. Provocative, but funny.

" 'Read a Book' was a joke from the beginning," he says. "It was more about parodying the state of hip-hop." And now it has become the thing that defines him. He thought about that for a moment. "Damn, do this many people not get me?"

Personally, if I don't like someone I don't engage them, at all. If someone engages a person who pisses them off, that is their responsibility. Dag doesn't need to put up with personal attacks, and I doubt he takes them seriously.
Speaking in kindergarten terms here, it is a whole other matter entirely when the schoolyard bully is in someone's face and demanding that they hit first, or else he/she will keep pestering everyone in the schoolyard beyond ignorable behavior. That's when the first available person who is capable should physically remove the bully. He jumps the fence during recess and keeps harrasing? Remove him again. When the school suspension (in metaphorical terms here, his two week ban) is over, no one in the real world would hesitate to kick him out again if he starts up again.
But then what if said bully then spends every day outside the fence watching and making comments to anyone who will listen? Were I a school counselor, I would have to ask myself "Does he have nothing better to do and just likes causing a raucus, or is he genuinely wanting back into school to continue his invested time & efforts?".
At such a point I would think that the question would really be whether any person with authority would be willing to take on the "project" of having him back, being as that person would ultimately be dealing with any messes created in the process.
I have made a point of letting "choggie" know that I like him, I believe he is an essentially good person...but that like it or not, every interaction in this world is political and people have a threshold of tolerance that is up to them. It is not a person's god-given right to be however they want to be and expect unconditional acceptance.
If he has crossed Dag or Lucky's threshold of tolerance, then that's that. Just because a couple of us in the schoolyard miss and like him doesn't give us the right to demand that the principal must willingly take on the burden.

>> ^K0MMIE:
This is a site about posting videos, it's not a fucking summer camp where the counselors should help us resolve our naughty behavior.

I couldn't have put it better myself, K0MMIE. You are absolutely right - this place is first and foremost about posting and watching excellent videos. And there are very few sifters I can name that posted more outstanding videos than choggie. That the two of you had a personal grievance with each other should not be any of our concern. Neither dag nor Lucky are camp counselors ready to make you feel better when somebody punched you. What they can do is give you medical attention when needed (e.g., deleting abusive downvotes). But I don't really care if you had a personal problem with him. Or if anyone else did. He (and any number of others) pissed me off directly and personally at times, but I did not ask you or anyone else to intervene. Because, like you said, this isn't summer camp.

I know that I rub a lot of folks the wrong way. I'm arrogant, occasionally loud-mouthed, and even self-righteous at times. But I've played by the rules, even while trying to change them or at least ensure they are applied consistently. So what makes me different? I haven't contributed nearly as many quality videos as choggie. Why is my presence tolerated when his is not? I'm sure I've poked some folks in the eye just as nastily as he has, only, like the naughty school kid that doesn't get caught, I've done it in a way that doesn't violate certain rules. Is that really the distinction we want to make? And is it a distinction that has ever been consistent at VideoSift?

As much I rail against the arbitrariness of VideoSift justice, I'm not so blind that I can't see the reason for it. We're all human and react differently from day to day. What I'm asking everyone to do is to take a step back, detach yourself from the personal emotions you have invested here, and consider swampgirl's proposal from a neutral position, if not from her own POV.

Dag - I can't imagine having the weight of this community on your shoulders. I understand your desire to spread that power out to as many points as possible. But you have to remember - you created this, and it is your responsibility so long as you want it to be your site. I don't think swampgirl is trying to frame this as dag v. choggie. I believe she is asking you to use that demonstrable wisdom in setting yet another new precedent (which we seem to do on a weekly basis). I am somewhat disturbed by the revelation of direct personal emails in which he not only insulted you, but persephone as well. That crosses a line for me that is hard to forgive. So I understand your position. But again, that doesn't really have anything to do with the site itself. It's a personal issue between you and him.

There is an argument to be made about whether or not he is capable of acting with any responsibility in this kind of community. Are the contributions he makes worth the disruption he causes? My only answer to that is to look at the sift as a whole. There are a lot of members who contribute far less than he ever did, but occasionally cause just as much grief. Again the only difference is the violation of a particular arbitrary rule and how such violations are being handled that month.

It's also worth pointing out that the grief he caused was often in the purpose of trying to open others' minds. Getting smacked with a bamboo staff is sometimes necessary, however unpleasant. The problem with choggie is that when the recipient of such a smack doesn't get it, he just keeps hitting them harder. Admittedly, it's not terribly effective.

Ultimately, I think his contributions far outweigh his disruptions. AFAIK, he has never done any irreparable harm to the site (though he may have caused some to certain users). His contributions, on the other hand, are irreplaceable.

On what other site would getting banned get reversed after a set amount of time because you might have changed. Your internet "friends" acted in a way that was destructive to other people using this site. The End. Game Over.

This is a site about posting videos, it's not a fucking summer camp where the counselors should help us resolve our naughty behavior.

Why people still bring him up as some kind of redneck lord and savior to internet ranting is beyond me. Grow the fuck up. You don't own this site, Dag and Lucky do. The community all pretty much agreed he was a pain in the ass. Also I seriously doubt you would want him back after he downvoted YOUR entire video queue like he did to me and a few other vocal members.

If you really want to continue the conversation of what the fuck ever with him, then PM him on youtube and ask where he trolls now so you can be a member of THAT community.

Communities change, new people show up, and old people leave. Such is life on the internet. It's just for some reason when they leave this one they want to make a big scene.

1. I am insecure about the girth of jonny's peni-- er, feet.
2. I started opening bottles with my teeth because I read GIJoe's Barbecue could do it.
3. I was in the US Navy from 1991-1994.
4. The bassist for the Psychedelic Furs took a picture of me at a Swatch party in NY back in 1993 or 94.
5. My favorite number is 9.
6. One of my first jobs in LA was working for Jan De Bont and Lucas Foster.
7. I once got to drive Maria Grazia Cucinotta to her hotel and fell in love instantly!
8. I used to draw my own comics on folded and stapled notebook paper when I was young.
9. My nickname as a child was Bozo.
10. My nickname in the military was Skip because I wore down my knee muscles and limped about.
11. I graduated from North Carolina School of the Arts with a BFA in Filmmaking.
12. I used to be a Christian.
13. I worked as a Special Effects crew member for my internship and made bombs and blew up cars. It was rad.
14. I used to have a thick southern accent.
15. My first car was a 1979 dookie brown Camaro with hubcaps and whitewalls affectionately labeled the brown turd.
16. I wish I would've stayed in the abusive Hollywood machine instead of switching careers to the interactive industry.
17. My bootcamp company made hall of fame.
18. I graduated with a 99.39 average from Naval Training School.
19. I graduated fifteen from the bottom of my class in high school.
20. My buddy and I once conned a chick at a bar in NY into buying us drinks all night because we told her we were talent scouts from Reprise Records.
21. I still have my first skateboard: a hot pink Powell & Peralta Sword and Skull.
22. I own a signed copy of the first appearance of Spider-Man (Amazing Fantasy #15) in pretty shitty quality.
23. I've worked in textile mills off and on from high school through college.
24. I was once an RA, a Head RA and a Summer Counselor in college.
25. I once asked John Ritter if I could call him Jack Tripper. His response, "As long as you don't call me Janet or Crissy."