Yeah, and a Democrat shot up a GOP basketball practice after Kathy Griffin {or insert whatever left-leaning public persona you want} made negative / seemingly "violent" comments about Trump / Republicans.

The common thread isn't that trivial nonsense like this video "incited" those people to violence. The common thread is that unhinged idiots that can't differentiate between fiction and reality sometimes do crazy / terrible / violent stuff. The fault lies with said unhinged idiots, not any external entity that they claim influenced them (Trump, Kathy Griffin, Grand Theft Auto / Doom video games, Ozzy Osbourne, whatever).

I've been a fan of Randi since he was the executioner in the Alice Cooper shows in the early 70s. But I couldn't watch a minute of this crap. The host is a perfect blend of every TV/Internet/video/pop culture cliche. He makes Kathy Griffin seem tolerable.

Sounds more like Kathy Griffin to me.

Post it and I'll upvote it. Get rid of that Dread Red P!

In reply to this comment by Phreezdryd:
Kathy Griffin responds: http://youtu.be/YtBBE4Qvh44

Kathy Griffin responds: http://youtu.be/YtBBE4Qvh44

Kathy Griffin lampooning Sarah Palin is not enough to make me watch Glee.

Hi, alien_concept,

Thanks for the upvote on this:
http://videosift.com/video/Kathy-Griffin-s-Message-to-Justin-Bieber

I've killed it because I found something else I want to post.

HA! Now I see it's already up on the sift. Oh well, live and learn.

Later

>> ^kymbos:

I'm on Firefox with an adblocker, living in Oz. Go figure.


Feh, ah well. That'll teach me, anyway.

I was watching that show right up until Kathy Griffin came out, went "Fuck this shit" and went to bed.

That doesn't exactly come through clearly in the description. I looks like either you meant it tongue-in-cheek and didn't bother with an emoticon, or you post videos to call your "buds" closed-minded bigots. Either way, assuming good faith, I've upvoted it. >> ^bareboards2:

QM and I are buds -- we just disagree.
I posted this vid in response to his comments about gays at http://videosift.com/video/Kathy-Griffin-meets-Michelle-Bachman
n-on-a-escalator -- his worst comment is at 8 downvotes and counting.
Besides, how is accurately describing QM's attitude towards gays a "put down"? The way he discusses gays and how they are not due their equal rights is the "put down."
If anything, I devoutly wish that QM will see this vid and change his mind, not go away. Who could look at these guys and think anything other than -- "how nice, how loving, what a sweet couple"? @quantumushroom, is there any chance this might begin to sway your feelings towards gay couples?
And we are buds, aren't we, QM?

>> ^messenger:
Nice video, but unimpressed by using it to put down another member. I like having QM around. It makes my comfortable little bubble of reality a little more real.

>> ^quantumushroom:
Notice how people in our "free" society may reject Christianity, but not homosexuality?


You've said a lot of incredibly stupid things on the sift, but this has to be in the top five.

You have every right to reject homosexuality. Nobody is trying to make you or your children into homosexuals.

On the other hand, Christians are definitely trying to make me and my children into Christians. But I wouldn't dream of passing a law saying two Christians couldn't marry.

It is the legal treatment of homosexuals as second-class citizens that we seek to end. We seek the freedom for everybody to pursue their own happiness where it does not infringe on the rights of others.

QM and I are buds -- we just disagree.

I posted this vid in response to his comments about gays at http://videosift.com/video/Kathy-Griffin-meets-Michelle-Bachmann-on-a-escalator -- his worst comment is at 8 downvotes and counting.

Besides, how is accurately describing QM's attitude towards gays a "put down"? The way he discusses gays and how they are not due their equal rights is the "put down."

If anything, I devoutly wish that QM will see this vid and change his mind, not go away. Who could look at these guys and think anything other than -- "how nice, how loving, what a sweet couple"? @quantumushroom, is there any chance this might begin to sway your feelings towards gay couples?

And we are buds, aren't we, QM?



>> ^messenger:

Nice video, but unimpressed by using it to put down another member. I like having QM around. It makes my comfortable little bubble of reality a little more real.

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

>> ^quantumushroom:

I don't understand your deal with numbers, QM. If only 4% of folks are gay does that mean they get reduced rights and privileges?
It depends on what homosexuality is. If being gay is a "choice" then it's behavioral, and behavior of all kinds is regulated. If homosexuality is purely genetic, the question remains whether or not it's a defect. As a clue, if a "homosexual gene" is discovered, how many prospective parents would switch it "off" in their unborn baby? My guess would be 99.99%.


You sir disturb me on a quiet Sunday morning.

Ah yes, the "unbiased" brain story. http://rockinconservative.com/2011/04/12/a-tale-of-two-brains/

I"m too lazy to formulate my own words at this time, so I found someone with words that match my sentiments:

I believe people have rights to legally designate in contract law who can visit them in hospitals, who can be named as insurance beneficiaries and the raft of other considerations sought for gay and lesbian couples. Call the arrangement civil unions if you wish.

But that's not the same as defining any union a marriage.

My fear — based on secular, more than religious precepts — is that watering down marriage could eventually rob society of the stabilizing and other beneficial effects of an institution now relentlessly under attack. Perhaps this argument is too ethereal to be grasped or accepted in an age of radical individualism. But it's an argument that is understood by plenty of Americans willing to state it, although it puts them in danger of being painted as haters.

--Dennis Byrne


Where I disagree with Byrne is that this nightmare world is wrought by "radical individualism". It's the herd, the mob, the petty tyrants, behind these farcical ideas.


>> ^bareboards2:

“Using data from MRI scans, researchers at the University College London found that self-described liberals have a larger anterior Cingulate Cortex – a gray matter of the brain associated with understanding complexity. Meanwhile, self-described conservatives are more likely to have a larger Amygdala, an almond shaped area that is associated with fear and anxiety.”
So @<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/quantumushroom" title="member since June 22nd, 2006" class="profilelink">quantumushroom, next time you feel a strongly conservative stance coming on, you might consider teasing out what is irrational fear versus a well-founded fear. And maybe, just maybe, try some critical and thoughtful analysis of the situation.
You know, like, considering science.
Why ARE you so afraid of gays and lesbians? And please don't say you aren't -- every time you trot out that 4% number, you are broadcasting "fear of the other."

"Yeah, what's with the obsession with numbers, qm? Are you trying to use facts or data or something? You know that don't work on us feelings."

Who doubts a blind person's "humanity?" Do you still want them driving city buses?


>> ^bareboards2:

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/quantumushroom" title="member since June 22nd, 2006" class="profilelink">quantumushroom
http://videosift.com/video/QM-here-is-an-example-of-true-love-for-you

Here you go, Q-Baby.
(@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/calmlyintoit" title="member since July 29th, 2009" class="profilelink">calmlyintoit, I would add -- Q's obsession with numbers? the logical extension is that gays' and lesbians' humanity is on a percentage basis, also.)