Daaaaaaaamn! I ain't been "You're the wizard stoned" in AGES!

Every now and then, I get a little misty-eye'd for the days of yore when ultra-high-grade pot wasn't available at every corner store.

I recall the days of lurking narcs in city parks; being out in the middle of a drought; going to a head shop to buy a bong then getting kicked out 'cuz I asked for it wrong (the magic word was "Tobacco", not "pot", you twat!)

The pot was stemmy, the sellers seedy, and I didn't care because I was hella needy.

But once a year, just 'fore November, would come the time I most remember because it was in those shortening days when I'd hear a rumor of Purple Haze, Ghost Train OG -- I'd be stoned for DAYS! Finally, the good stuff came from coastal plots, a plethora of the finest pots; time to dance and restore my stash: shit, I might even score some HASH!

My friends would come by and we'd all get high, never aware of time passing us by. We laughed, we munched, we floated along with hits from the joints and pulls from the bong. We never imagined dabs or wax, we were satisfied with bud: nothing wrong with those facts.

Now I buy an a gram or two -- Dirty Girl; Gorilla Glue -- and satisfied that my wife's in bed, I once again become a Head. I remember all those days gone by when there was no greater goal than just getting high. I recall them fondly -- if somewhat hazy -- and know that life without pot is just a little too crazy.

sooo..are we laughing at someone who has serious mental issues? -_-

Ahh.. saddly videosift descriptive leaves out the important stuff. She is recovering from anesthetic with serious side effects.

Too early, too early. We go fetal today, tomorrow we laugh at all the hacks within the bubble like Operative K who have lost touch with reality.

Incorrect, he said we laugh because the jokes are a little bit true.

And if there are protected species, then there are no jokes left at the expense of other people, even self deprecating ones... That's the upside of equality, everyone get's grazed by jokes at some point in time. You can either choose to have the thinnest skin on the planet and a persecution complex the size of the Titanic or be a part of the human race and accept that at some point in time, there will be a joke where you or someone just like you is the butt...

THIS is why you can't do rape jokes. Society is NOT mature or sensitive enough to know what to do with the subject matter. The anonymity of the internet is no excuse. This is what lurks underneath, internet or no internet. It does not lurk under all, or even most, but some and some is enough. Joking about it reduces its absolute prohibitive status and trivialises the severity of the impact it has on victims and families of all involved.

It is this absolute prohibition that is at stake here. Murder can be joked about because there is an underlying suspicion that we could all do it given the right provocations. Rape however does not have the same situationalist concept. It is not something we secretly want to do when we are frustrated. It is not something we wish on our loved ones to shut them up. It is not something to that is idly fantasized about in the same way that battery and murder are. Therefore, the "comedy" around it has no common ground except for the horror of the experience itself which relies on a victims experience being imagined in the minds of others. We may laugh out of shock but that is all there is, shock. Taboo makes us uncomfortable and we laugh when confronted with it if the circumstances are right and a comedy club instantiates such circumstances. The only comedy, as in laughter from shared premises taken to an unexpected extreme, to come from rape 'comedy' are jokes about 'rape comedy' itself.

You could totally be right VoodooV.

And if that's the case, this is the sort of thing that might increase the chances of that happening. The bullied often become bullies - as they try to prove they aren't the weak/different ones.

This video makes fun of an 11 year old kid, without his consent, in arguably a pretty cruel way. That's the definition of bullying, online or otherwise, While we laugh virally at his expense. Not cool, I say.

>> ^PlayhousePals:

>> ^Boise_Lib:
Paul looks stoned.

... Ringo look pissed off


And we laugh.

I can't see this video here but last night we laughed our heads off watching it on Comedy Central in Canada. Hilarious!

Nothing happens in a vacuum and only a fool expects any human to hang up his beliefs entirely when doing a job, but the left is so used to the Kenyawaiian's everyday overstepping his authority, they worry others in the Oval Office may do so. 'President Cain' cannot by himself repeal anything.

And DOMA is not unconstitutional.

>> ^bareboards2:

Oh, I heard it. And I snorted in disbelief and derision.
Didn't you just hear him say that he would reinstate DADT? So his religious viewpoint is not divorced from his potential actions as a president. DOMA would not be repealed under his watch, and that is failing on constitutional grounds already.
So yeah. We heard it. We laughed.
>> ^quantumushroom:
BTW did anyone but me listen to the end of the vid when Cain stated his personal beliefs are overridden by the limiting powers of the Constitution?

Oh, I heard it. And I snorted in disbelief and derision.

Didn't you just hear him say that he would reinstate DADT? So his religious viewpoint is not divorced from his potential actions as a president. DOMA would not be repealed under his watch, and that is failing on constitutional grounds already.

So yeah. We heard it. We laughed.

>> ^quantumushroom:

BTW did anyone but me listen to the end of the vid when Cain stated his personal beliefs are overridden by the limiting powers of the Constitution?

Fake indeed, but very nice as well. As well I'm sure this was staged. They wouldn't just rip the dress off some random person lol. And IMHO it has nothing to do with 'this is how they treat women' but rather that sexuality is a much more open subject in much of the world than in the US thanks to our Puritanical roots and the religious right that has their paws on just about everything in this country. Someone mentioned the 'wardrobe malfunction' from a few years ago and how people in this country were in an uproar because their childred would be scared from getting a .2 second glimpse and some womans ugly nipple. Being the type of person who has friends all over the world, most of them outside the US had no idea what the big deal was. I myself found it rather funny watching the people on the news talking about their frail children catching a glimpse of someones nipple, never seeming to realize that those same children have nipples themselves.

It's just another reason why I am constantly aggravated with Christianity these days. You could likely trace a great deal of sexual crime, use of pornography and objectivity of women in this country to the fact that we are all so very sexually repressed compared to most other nations. Really we laugh about how repressed Muslims are, but we are just barely a step above them.

>> ^residue:

yea, yea dude and then blankfist was all like "But seriously, joedirt came in here and fucked shit up, didn't he?"
>> ^blankfist:
>> ^residue:
aah, those were the days, weren't they? nostalgia
>> ^rottenseed:
>> ^blankfist:
But seriously, joedirt came in here and fucked shit up, didn't he?

hell yea he did...he was all like "dumb cunt" and we were like "aaaaaahhhh sheeeeeeeiiiiiiiit. it's about to go doowwwwwwwwwn"


Yeah, but then dag came in here all like "we gotta banninate" and joedirt was all like "I can't reply because I was banninated" and it was all like King's Speech up in this bitch.



Remember when the platform was sliding into the fire pit and I said "Goodbye" and you were like "No way!" And then I was all "We pretended we were going to murder you?" That was great!

Sorry, I'm just getting a serious Portal vibe here. How about this:

Well here we are again,
It’s always such a pleasure,
Remember when you tried to kill me fuck shit up twice?
Oh, how we laughed and laughed,
Except I wasn’t laughing,
Under the circumstances I’ve been shockingly nice.

(Sorry for the length of this response...)

He wants to be President, and? You imply he is a worse choice than say, the current President (Who has left open a facility to torture, predominately, Muslims,) or the President/s before him (a President who used a degree to fight two wars without batting an eye as to why.) I would hope you can admit he would have been FAR better than Obama or Bush…

So Paul has an issue with property rights and the government telling you what to do? Thoreau also had problems with that line of thought. I think the greater part of their argument, that he fails to articulate, is that---when a government takes power, it always takes more power in time. And when it has the power, it finds a way to abuse it. We see that has happened.

Oh, and I am so glad that the law in 1964 protects minorities... except that the wealthy and white have found 1 million loopholes around it with other laws... Blacks commit a crime? More punishment and jail time than a white. Blacks need a job? No, go away... How about, blacks need welfare? Sure, so long as you don't make anything of yourself. WE STILL HAVE JIM CROW LAWS IN THIS COUNTRY. GET OVER IT. ONLY SOCIETY AT LARGE CAN FIX THIS PROBLEM. AND WE WON’T, BECAUSE WE DON’T WANT TO.

So glad that the useless law does something ineffectively... Oh, and go to certain bars in PA as a black man, and lets see how far the patrons let you go before removing you. Glad that a law will protect your rights as your being stabbed to death--then protects him as the white, racist judge laughs and acquits his friends.

I also think the problem; we don’t ask, what is the principle behind Paul’s actions? Racism? No... Nor greed (The reason pot is illegal, for example.) It is relying on humanity to do the right thing. Unfortunately, as so often the case, Humanity is horrible (See Rome, genocide, and religion)--and we blame Paul for being naive; and he is. But so are we. Instead of holding accountability to the sign holders we laugh at Paul’s ignorance. Instead of blaming the murderer, or rapist, we blame the politicians who have not put laws out there to "protect us.”

Kind of like--"Well, she was wearing slutty clothes so we should blame her for being raped!" I know, I know, that is a far-fetched comparison, but it still fits to some degree. Both people do not deserve to be attacked for their statements (One who was making a statement by dressing physically attractive, and the other one who makes a statement verbally with good intentions.) But, as is the case, people do punish both in society.

I think Paul would be better off being a liar so he could actually get elected--because, though people may do it unintentionally, they elect the bad guy because the good guy always loses. But then, if he did become a winner through deception, he would just be another in a mold of thousands.

The funny part is that in matters such as this, Paul would have no sway in the agenda; he would only have a say in matters of Liberal agendas (Close Gitmo, stop wars, debt, cut down the drug war, end the Patriot Act., etc.) So even if you did elect him, Netrunner, you would get the best of both worlds. No gold standard, but most of your agenda would be fulfilled… Of course, Liberals suck at thinking logically (Even the part of me that is liberal, and there is quite a bit, has this problem.)

Speaking of society, here is my example…
http://videosift.com/video/The-new-Olympic-sport-Cunt-Punching

Rush laughs about Japan,
We laugh about Rush.

What's the difference, really?

Didn't realize this could be a video aimed at the mentally challenged such as down syndrome. I just thought it may be a horribly executed sex-ed video from days gone past. Now that it's mentioned and I think back (don't feel the need to re-watch), I realize that this may be exactly what it is.

As to Honkytonk's comment above - it was funny when it was just a poorly executed video - but becomes unfunny once you realize she actually is "challenged". I don't know why that is though. In fact, it shouldn't be funny at all - it must be the absurdness of the content when we view it out of context.

I don't think the up-votes are from people laughing at a how-to clip aimed at challenged children. I think we laugh because we assume it's aimed at regular intelligenced people made by less intelligent people (in this case, the film-makers).

I'll just choose not to vote on this one...