Payday loans EDB, in the United States: Fast-money strip-center locations have been popping-up all over in every city now like warts on a leper, for the past 25 years, operating in a regulatory blind spot. They loan you money at an exorbitant, unfair interest rate fully expecting and banking on the person loaned not being able to pay back the loan according to contract then penalize with fines when the debt can't be repaid. Criminal organizations have relied upon USURY as a means of extracting money from helpless or uneducated and desperate people for centuries. Mafia organizations the world over have relied on this practice since they began. I don't expect the federal government to do anything much different as much of their activity has been criminal for quite some time.

Inhumane, predatory, sick.

SO it looks perfectly reasonable at face value??I call bullshit when I see it before it happens usually... Cenk here sees it as a wonderful way to create revenue out of thin air by taking the model of the payday loan places that already exist over, not unlike a mafia organization takes over territory of another criminal's organization.

If you think I'm skeptical you are correct, if you think I am wrong that is your prerogative. If you choose to block my comments or 'ignore' them, I don't care at all-It simply proves the point I make continually here, that those who chose to place their hands over their ears, or their heads in a sand-bucket are minion, and the few dissenting opinions are met with torch and pitchfork, either because of the language used to do so is too caustic, or perhaps that the truths in my babble that are too horrible and painful to consider are much easier to deride and deny or to even consider, to damaged sensibilities combined with an ego the size of Asia.

I also consider that your stance on guns and gun ownership as equally skewed, as is much of your political rhetoric. But hey, there are a lot of folks here who think the way you do. I happen to be one of the other people.

And again, Cenk, yer a pompous git whose ego is also bloated beyond fat, and your smarmy, smug delivery makes me want to hack-up my lunch.

BULLSH!T!!! You engage anyone that will respond. You have never been choosy.
And in case you didn't understand...I'm saying YOU ARE A TROLL (and you appear to be racist judging by past posts, don't get it twisted though, so do I and many others).
In fact, you are the most sesquipedalian wannabe erudite troll I've ever had the misfortune to converse with (I have read worse, but not conversed). Once in a blue moon I actually agree with your point, but NEVER do I agree with your insulting, whining, angry, rambling, faux intellectual way of saying it.
PS ...and before you decide I'm the troll because that's been YOUR experience with me (I admit, I probably look trollish to you), I ask that you note that YOU are the only one I respond to in this manner, and I do it based on our past conversations and your past postings. On the other hand, you pick fights with nearly everyone on the sift, then lambast the sift for being homogeneous (which it's not) and insist that we NEED you here and actually want your ranting and anger. I agree we need dissenting ideas, but not that we need the trolling. I wish you could see that they are different things and separate the two. (To be honest, I don't mind the racism if it's in jest, but I do insist on calling it racism if it is.)

There is a huge difference between a dissenting opinion and making noise for the sake of making noise. If choggie has a valid dissenting opinion, it is Lost in the noise. Personally I've taken him off ignore now because as others have noted, he's heading towards full on meltdown.... again. I want to see it

Of course we wouldn't have this problem in the first place if people who were booted off the sift once already weren't allowed back in eventually Dunno why anyone is shocked when this pattern keeps repeating over and over

Ok. let me answer those points...and apologize for the wall of text in advance.
As I said, this was the first time I have ever tried (or even wanted to try) the ignore button, and I found it quite wanting. It's already not working at all, after one day.
It is not at all about a dissenting voice I'm trying to silence or deafen myself to, it's about his personal grating style and the apparent complete lack of self knowledge or examination coupled with vitriol at every chance. It's about trying to avoid people that search for any possible thing to attack, even when they must make mistaken assumptions to find something to be irate about, and appear to do so consistently with glee and zealotry. I welcome dissenting voices, listening to other points of view is the only way one can really evolve socially and intelligently, but when those points of view are always presented with vitriol and insult the message is often quickly lost.
I must ask, how do you come to the translations you have applied to his statements? For instance...
QUOTE:"As to some ' deliberate affectation designed to make me appear intellectual' You might want to check your own understanding of intellectual versus one's perception of self, I tend not to place much credence in the concept, overrated and ultimately soulless when used to assert one's own importance or place the herd over some one else.
Intelligence in the grand schemata, does not necessarily connote wisdom."

your TRANSLATION: i dont know everything and neither do you.
Where I read this as :'I know you are, but what am I?...I don't care about intelligence, intelligence isn't wisdom.' (implying-'and I'm wiser than thou').

If he could have recalled who he was responding to and the numerous personal discussions we have had, where he always ended up backing down and apologizing for his (feigned?) outrage at a mistaken assumption he had made, I probably wouldn't have lost all patience. Having to remind him every time we converse, and having him ignore it in public forums but admit it in private, was infuriatingly frustrating and I gave up. Perhaps that's my failing, but it is one that has raised it's head only once, with him, and I'm not the only one it's happened with (HE mentioned that the 'ignore' button was created in large part because of him, so he knows full well how he is perceived, no matter what his motive).
His clearly stated intention is rabble rousing and jabbing the sleeping sheeple, and I'm tired of the insulting prodding, especially since I'm a newtboy not a sheeple. I have read where he posted that, and I have seen that from him, but for some reason it seems you are telling me that if I say so I'm somehow making his point... that I'm (like ALL others) 'a sleeping idiot that believes only lies and shit, all my ideas are shit, and now that I disagreed with him I'm also a piece of shit'? Sorry, I don't understand that. Perhaps you were referring to a new point he made that I have not read.
My responses in this thread were NOT to Chingy himself (is this who people mean when talking about Choggie?)...but to others commenting about him. I agree, it is becoming a spectacle rather than substance...I feel like that was also the case with most of the threads he took over with walls of ranting anger. I do feel some responsibility for furthering that by engaging him, which is why I tried to ignore him, and things just went downhill from there fast! Now I can't ignore him if I want to read others' comments nearly anywhere on the sift because it seems he's there, everywhere, picking fights and then complaining he's bullied and being posted about instead of the video topic...and here I am doing it too.
F*CK!
The sift was such a nice place for discussion 6 months ago, with all points of view being well respected if not agreed with and few if any trolls beyond QM, and he was fairly respectful. What the hell happened?

@newtboy
fair enough my man.
personally i find the ignore button an un-necessary appendage.it serves no purpose other than to keep my own personal echo chamber free from dissenting voices.

no fun in that at all.

and as you stated.you still see his comments when someone quotes him.so why bother?

while i am reluctant to speak for @chingalera ,allow me to back up my argument in regards to how ya'all are making his case.

i shall channel choggie and attempt to translate his verbal perusings in order to make my case:

QUOTE:"I revel in the destruction of formulaic redundancy, especially when the phenomena occurs from time to time on the sift when a small contingent of back-patters load the place with atheism=great, Christians, etc. (insert faith-based philosophies) =shit, and most political offerings in the form of republicans/conservatives=shit, democrats/liberals=my-shit-doesn't-stink-like-theirs videos. "

TRANSLATION: i detest know-it-all's and will go on the offensive to show them the errors of their ways.

QUOTE:"Also a frequent and predictable phenomena, that a single down-vote, tinctured with an alternative perspective in comments, has the gang come spilling from the douche-works like cockroaches to offer their smarmy, childish two-cents, in order to make themselves feeeeel good. Hate this shit. It shows a lack of a certain social evolution from which I instinctively recoil."

TRANSLATION:it only takes that ONE downvote for other like-minded know-it-alls to come out of the woodwork to add their own smug opinion to belittle a person with a different perspective.i find this a form of bullying and it appalls me.

QUOTE:"As to some ' deliberate affectation designed to make me appear intellectual'
You might want to check your own understanding of intellectual versus one's perception of self, I tend not to place much credence in the concept, overrated and ultimately soulless when used to assert one's own importance or place the herd over some one else.
Intelligence in the grand schemata, does not necessarily connote wisdom."

TRANSLATION: i dont know everything and neither do you.

QUOTE:"Quite simply, when I see atheists deride another belief system with childish and derogatory banter like a gang of hyena stealing meat I treat them like a pack of feral creatures and similarly, I tend to shit on people's assumptions of how the world would be a better place if everyone thought the way "I" do regarding politics.

TRANSLATION: i hate bullies and will call them out every time.

QUOTE:"It's fucking tired and boring and makes the place to myself, look like a very untalented graffiti artist used sub-par aerosols to deface a shrine or temple.

TRANSLATION:i am alone but am fully un-impressed with your boring and unoriginal group-think.

@newtboy
so i guess it all comes down to perception and intent.
how you perceive ching and discern his intent.
though he is incredibly verbose and practices the art of flowery language he has been quite clear on his intentions.

let us examine the responses on this thread shall we?
a number here actually discussed openly chings intentions as if he was not part of this thread.

by discerning his intent and then engaging in a group discussion on that assumption has made chings argument.you guys are behaving exactly as ching accuses you all of being guilty of.

i do not have a problem with @chingalera
but nor do i have a problem with you or @VoodooV or @ChaosEngine.(or anybody else for that matter)

but this has become spectacle rather than substance.
now maybe ching bears some responsibility but that burden is not his alone.
you all bear some responsibility as well....
as do i now..

SONOFA........

In the end it is the brutality and survivability of any entity that decides how long it remains and how soon it is washed away to be forgotten; social entities of human thought's conjuring included. Such is all. Earth included. In your life time? Not likely. But your country? More relevant; same pattern.

EDIT: Downvoting is social brutality and survivability via public dissent.

Early on here on the VS I was posting many offerings from an artist on YT who calls himself/herself readymade777-This user's handle comes from Duchamp's concept of 'life as art' , using video snippets from Prelinger, other YT videos, all moving media. Incidentally, the monkey-robot majority ignored most of these offerings...(choggie=submitter=no votes)Passion, conviction, accusatory banter.... the 'troll' label follows.

Too much truth, meaning, seasoned with urgency and a few expletives=trolll on the Internet. Dissenting opinions? Troll.
Overtly nicey-nice, brown-nosing insincerity, and pointing out fallacy or the short-comings of someone who is indefensible???....This shit makes you friends.

The internet is for pussies.

Just as a dissenting opinion, I have to say I'm really not a fan of Peart. Yeah, he's an incredible technician, but for me he lacks the groove of Bonham or Buddy Rich.

OTOH, Rushs music bores me to tears (I hate that vocalist) so maybe I'd enjoy him more with a different band.

I think it's also just that we're in the midst of great technological and sociological change.and it's due to the internet mostly.

if you lived in a small conservative town pre-internet, It was far more likely that you'd either never say anything, or succumb to peer pressure when it comes to voicing any dissent. Any views of alternative thinking always came from someone outside that town, so it was easier to dismiss or ignore. But when the internet puts you in touch with everyone else on the planet and it's far harder to deny thinking that runs contrary to how you think or at the very least, harder to drown it out.

We're also on the verge of some huge changes like medical technology getting better and better. Instead of relying "old wives tales" to cure what ails you. We're on the verge of massive transportation changes...the slow death of the internal combustion engine, we're not that far away from cars that will drive themselves. We also have to think more about the environment.

It's a time of HUGE change, and the people who are in power don't always like change. Even people who are not in power can often get distraught and upset at change.

@A10anis

I'd like to call anyone who gives a rat's ass's attention to someone who is most assuredly intelligent (an aspect highly over-rated in most humans), passionate in his/her convictions like any zealot or fan, with reasonable critical-thinking skills who's just as kool-aid drunk on what a person so-indoctrinated may be able to "think" is "going-down" as any crack-head or Cleveland Browns fan.

"Put up, or shut up." That's rich. You see what happens in a 3rd-rate video blog when a voice of dissent rears her fucking head, right? Hey, can go and fuck myself all up in the ass without lubrication, on CCTV!

I think he overestimates the power the Pope has over American Catholics.

In the particular instance of Iraq, the Pope neither initiated violence nor did he tell anyone else to do so. In fact, "In 2003, he once again opposed a war in Iraq and appealed to U.S. President George W. Bush to refrain from going to war." It didn't persuade Bush and I doubt it would have persuaded the general Catholic population of military personnel to go AWOL even if he had expressed his dissent more emphatically.

@skinnydaddy1
seriously dude?

redirect? are you even aware of the meaning of that term?
i have been very clear on my position.
i was just addressing your apparent cognitive dissonance which you just solidified in your last comment.

so i gather you are going to stick with your SECOND position and have decided to abandon your FIRST position.

ok..fine.
this is starting to bore me anyways.

1.what war crimes did he show?
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/16731-bradley-mannings-legal-duty-to-expose-war-crimes

http://pakistan.shafaqna.com/shafaq/item/10102-bradley-manning-exposed-us-%E2%80%98war-crimes%E2%80%99.html

2.what corruption did he show?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/22/iraq-war-logs-military-leaks

3.what did he do that made him your hero?
already answered.multiple times.

4.For there to be whistleblower should there not be something wrong that he has knowledge of?
see:links above

5.He stated he did not like what was being done in the United States citizens names. What exactly? And what gave him the right to claim anything in my name? anyone's name?

again,see:links above.
your consequent follow up questions deal with a subjective morality.the answer will be different for everyone and manning has already explained quite clearly his reasons.

i presume those reasons are not adequate for you and you would have chosen a different path and hold manning in contempt.
it appears you put your oath above all else.
even at the detriment of others.

on this we fundamentally disagree.

6.You and the rest of your little group keep saying the same thing and yet never manager to answer a single question. What makes him a hero?

me and my little group like to "read".

i suggest you do the same.

i am now done with this.i can already see where this is going.your desire to be "right" will over-power your ability to listen to dissenting voices contradicting your internal narrative.

any and all new information with be dealt with as somehow being inherently "wrong" for the simple fact of being in conflict with your opinion.
which will devolve any productive discussion into a quagmire of red herrings and straw man arguments.

and all of it predicated on the assumption that i wish to change your mind in regards to this particular incident.

which of course i dont.
because i dont really care what you think.

your ignorance is obvious.
your arguments are flimsy and disjointed and in direct conflict with each other.
but most of all....
you are boring.

Reading the comments, my fear is that the outrage people are feeling is being framed in the wrong context. If we don't get the proper handle on this, all that outrage is going to fall on deaf ears. The people who are at the root of this are going to sense that we don't understand what's going on and dismiss all protests as irrelevant.

This is certainly not an issue of "evil government" or "power hungry institutions". This is an issue that involves people. People that are just like you and me. In fact, the ones who are responsible for the monster that's been created ARE people with the same motivations and rational capacity as you and I.

"We have met the enemy, and he is us." - Pogo

We are almost all guilty of making personal, selfish, idealistic and altruistic choices with blinders on to the larger impact of our choices. We all have a frustrating capacity for focusing on small picture goals and ignoring the big picture results. How many of us work for industries that have horrible environmental and social impact? Do you ever take into account the contribution you make to those disasters? Or are you comfortable in the belief that one person, "you", making fried chicken isn't responsible for the agregious level of child obesity in your country? Or you satisfied that building servers for BP doesn't in any way make you culpable for the massive negative impact of the industry as a whole?

We want to frame the ills of our societies in terms of villains which we can name...and even put a face on. But in the large chain of decisions that must be made and actions that must be taken, there is almost never one individual with the power to change the course of events. If one is ever identified, that person is almost certainly a scape goat, selected by popular consent for the very purpose of putting a face to the atrocities.

Governments and corporations are collections of individuals with the same strengths, weaknesses and short sightedness that we all posses.

So this problem arises from a troubling mentality that's very common in all orginzations. The tendency to view our individual actions and contributions as discrete from the larger result of the group. A small minded focus on results over impact.

This issue needs to be addressed in those terms, the troubling realization that good people with good intentions lost sight of the bigger picture. Only then will our protests ring true to the people involved.

And understand what's being discussed here also. This is not about personal invasion of privacy. That's certainly not how the architects of this see it. This is not the local police wire tapping "you". This is about a massive collection of data that could never be utilized effectively in those terms. It's complete historical data that exists for the purpose of analyzing as a whole, to learn the patterns that signify the actions of people who would do you harm. It is at the point such patterns are identified that investigation at an individual level, within that data, would begin. Perhaps that's why the people who created and manage this system don't feel it's a threat to you. Because they have no interest in you and didn't design the system for you...assuming you're not a terrorist.

But the danger that WE know is real, that they've lost sight of, is a matter of degrees. What happens when the definition of "enemy" begins to slip? What happens when, over time, all dissent is viewed as disruptive to the security of the country?

That's the big picture and that's the danger. Make sure you're protesting the right thing, if you want to be heard.

@dystopianfuture
i respect your position. especially against the flow.

But I fail to find any semblances of checks and balances in our government, or respect for things like probable cause, or the requirement to obtain a warrant. There are just too many easy work-arounds. (see "exigent circumstances").

Recent history is pretty clear that after 9-11 the "security" industry in this country blew the fuck up. Giant, powerful, and rich.

So, thousands of independent contractors in the security industry, being paid billions and now putting contractual money back into the coffers of the bought and paid for. Which side does that new industry and those billions of dollars support? And are these independents and shadow entities following the rule of law? Perhaps, but I think not.

Instead they have little to do but snoop, preserve and justify their positions, collect their money and maintain the iron-fisted approach of this country when it comes to dissent.

and, very rarely does the government grant itself sweeping new powers. It prefers to do so incrementally....little by little. the frog is in the water.

@bcglorf
thanks man.
that was a most excellent reply.

then we are in a fundamental disagreement on the practices of monsanto.
i was under the understanding that percy had been targeted by monsanto because of cross pollination coming from his neighbors farm.which then found its way into his crop.

monsanto claimed the genetic markers gave them property rights and that percy was liable.

maybe i misunderstood.

and most documentaries are trying to make a point and by its very nature will be biased.so i agree with your point there but i cannot agree that monsanto is somehow some benevolent multi-national corporation who has not enacted and used with extreme prejudice an army of lawyers to silence and intimidate those who would speak out against them.

they make scientology look like a bunch of bed wetters.

i guess my main problem,politics and corruption aside,is that we are talking about a basic necessity:food.

you cannot patent life.
if you change the fundamental nature of that life there should be open and transparent study and discussion.
in both of these cases the public is left in the dark and any questions or dissent is met with legal papers.

i mean.who besides a corporation would develop a "suicide gene"?

i am not saying this is a simple issue but the situation does deserve some serious scrutiny.

anyways.thanks for the great response my friend.