>> ^brycewi19:

I'm just sayin', if I had that much dream dust on me I would use a bit more imagination on Adriana Lima's outfit.


This was my problem with Inception. You two are stuck in a dream world so you make a bunch of skyscrapers that look like they should be on earth? Fuck that shit...you'd go absolutely NUTTY with it.

Saying you are aware that real-world markets aren't flawless, and that making them less flawed is a Good Thing™ doesn't make you a nutty free marketeer, it makes you a socialist liberal.

Nutty free marketeers would lambast you for even slightly implying that the action of privately owned companies could be impeding the proper function of markets, and call for you to be burned at the stake for saying increased regulation of companies could actually smooth the function of the market...

Shows right-wing tactics are everywhere. By claiming a conspiracy that foreign puppet groups are hijacking the Canadian process she then goes on to claim that her non-profit being funded by pipeline is a conspiracy theory. The same manner in which the government and right-wingers dismiss leftist groups who claim being infiltrated by provocateurs as "nutty" and "conspiracy; when it happens all the time.

She doesn't even seem serious - she laughs and recites the same three lines that were bold and underlined in her pre-interview hot-sheet. It's like arguing with a fundamentalist.

>> ^Boise_Lib:

>> ^shuac:
Could we please have a generation of tweens that are not stupid, just one, is that to too much to ask for.
Well, I expect tweens to be kinda stupid but I've been kidding myself about the average Videosifter's ability to write correctly, which is, I believe, symptomatic of intelligence. Oh well.

I was curious to see if you ever made a mistake while writing English.
Took 30 seconds to find this gem.
>> ^shuac:
I'd just like to say that I have no opinion about this video. I am apathetic like you read about.



LOL! That's what I get for trying to use an idiom, a very new idiom, granted, but an idiom nonetheless. Some idioms only work when you say them aloud and this is one of them.

I'm going to come off as a bit nutty typing this all out but nutty is a label I'm ok with.

When people say "like you read about" they're being emphatic and pointed. For instance, I might say, "I'm fuckin' cold like you read about." People who've taken the time to write books and articles about tundra wasteland and life above the arctic circle typically don't spend that time on the page writing about how warm it is. When someone takes the time to read such a book or article, they walk away knowing something about chilly weather. It typically only works with extreme states: extreme cold, extreme heat, or in my case extreme apathy. So what I'm really saying with "like you read about" is an attempt to express solidarity with the writer of such books/articles.

Capice? I'm not surprised you may not have heard about it but all these sayings had to come from somewhere, no?

Without context, I admit, it reads kind of wrong. Oh well. I forgive you, Boise.

well, she's gone nutty.

Thanks for the quality ... nuts and balls.

In reply to this comment by Tingles:
*quality

Nuts on Balls.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

People don't seem to know how to communicate these days. Her running up to your door, yelling her piece and then running away is pretty common run-of-the-mill nutty neighbour behaviour.

I'd write her a polite letter and lay everything out.

Being the biggest backers doesn't mean it's being done for religious purposes.

I'm not debating some see it that way. You also have a bunch of people who didn't, too.

Where in that link did Tony Blair was quoted saying this was part of a Christian struggle?! It's loosely about believing it's a good versus evil thing. It's not about killing Muslims because Muslims are evil, or demoralizing Muslim culture to make room for Christian culture.. If you believe it was about killing Muslims, or advancing the interests of Christianity at the expense of Islam, you need your head examined. At no point was Blair ever on a Christian Crusade.

A VERY small group of evangelical Christian soldiers doesn't make the case.

Now, about Obama and Christianity. You do realize Obama at this point pretty much goes to church because it's a political liability if he doesn't. He quite possibly is the least religious president to ever be in office.

He is not intentionally trying to kill Civilians. #1. The statistics you sited are skewed concerning civilian casualties, although I'm not dismissing civilian casualties. Significant civilian casualties have been a mainstay in military action since WWII on all sides, after a brief reprieve in WWI and other wars leading up to it. You do the best you can to limit them while achieving your objectives. The reality is you won't achieve anything if you try to avoid any civilian casualties.

With that said, the article is discussing Predator drone casualties only, which is a small fraction of total casualties. And even then, you have a dispute on statistics, and I agree the US military is not going to give an unbiased number either. However, it's very difficult to tell what the accurate number is at this point.

See the above about civilian casualties as collateral damage. It would be difficult to achieve anything if the primary focus was to avoid them instead of achieving objectives.

Does all this add up to terrorism? No, for several reasons:

1. It isn't intentional, not any part of the objective in conducting them. Terrorist acts are specific explicit targeting of civilians. Often, the more civilians you kill, the better when you're a terrorist.
2. You sited bombings in Tripoli. Part of the objectives in that raid is to topple the oppressive regime in Libya, is it not? And yes, I completely accept that we're not just there for that. Libya has oil resources, etc. we're interested in, but it doesn't change the fact that part of the reason we're there is to free the Libyan people from an oppressive regime. It's pretty silly to site an operation that inadvertently killed civilians to achieve a better life for the Libyan people at large.

Extreme progressives are critical of Obama for many of the things you're siting. Obama isn't an extreme progressive, socialist, communist, etc. as much as QM and WP would love for you to believe. He's a moderate politician who leans to the left. If that's the indictment, I don't think anyone would disagree he's not the most liberal progressive politician since FDR. He's not. To say however he isn't progressive at all is not true either. Honestly, as much oil as there is in Libya, it's not worth military action. There's a bit of idealist progressivism to conduct air strikes against Libya.

And again, I fail to see how that's relevant to the debate of the religion of this guy. He is a Christian, there's no doubt about it. Granted, he's got a warped Christian ideology, but it is Christian. You can't say someone isn't Christian just because you don't agree with their interpretation.

>> ^marbles:

>> ^heropsycho:
The war on terror isn't being waged based on an overt Christian ideology. There's the difference. There are plenty of Muslims in the US military who see no problem fighting radical Islam. Not sure how you missed that, but it's pretty obvious. This guy performed terrorist acts because of his warped Christian ideology.
My second point is wtf does Obama and Progressivism have to do with any of this? Short answer: it doesn't. And yes, this guy is clearly a Christian of the super-nutty variety. Every religion, and even atheists, have their nuts. Why is this so shocking to anyone?
>> ^marbles:
>> ^heropsycho:
1. How so?
2. WTF does that have to do with anything in this video?!
>> ^marbles:
The war against terror is largely a "Christian" crusade and yet I don't see you guys up in arms about it.
Any "progressive" that supports Obama or the Democrat Party is about as much progressive as Breivik is Christian.


1. Christian war hawks bombing and invading Muslim countries. Do some research.
2. Does this video not suggest Breivik is a Christian terrorist?


And as far as the war on terror as a Christian crusade, you have:
-Conservative Christians as the biggest backers of the Iraq war (link)
-Pentagon officials that see the "war on terror" as a religious war between Judeo-Christian civilization and Satan, with Islam of course cast in the latter role (link)
-President Bush using Biblical prophesy to justify the war in Iraq (link)
-Prime Minister Tony Blair viewing his decisions to go to war in Iraq and Kosovo as part of a "Christian battle" (link)

-US Military trying to convert Arabs to Christianity (link)(link)
These examples are just the surface, they don't even really delve into the Zionist components of the wars.

As for your second point--short answer: it has everything to do with it. It exposes your own hypocritical POV. (along with many other's)
Obama is a self professed Christian. He indiscriminately kills civilians with military drones (some estimates put the civilian death rate at 90%, the other 10% are just suspects executed without due process)(link)
Is this not terrorism?
Is Obama not a Christian terrorist?
There is ongoing torture of uncharged suspects, many who are innocent civilians, many who we know are innocent civilians. (link)(link)(link)(link)
Just recently, NATO bombing runs in Tripoli would last for several hours, hitting civilian targets and killing innocents. (link)(link)
Is this not terrorism that is fully supported by Obama and progressives?

>> ^heropsycho:

The war on terror isn't being waged based on an overt Christian ideology. There's the difference. There are plenty of Muslims in the US military who see no problem fighting radical Islam. Not sure how you missed that, but it's pretty obvious. This guy performed terrorist acts because of his warped Christian ideology.
My second point is wtf does Obama and Progressivism have to do with any of this? Short answer: it doesn't. And yes, this guy is clearly a Christian of the super-nutty variety. Every religion, and even atheists, have their nuts. Why is this so shocking to anyone?
>> ^marbles:
>> ^heropsycho:
1. How so?
2. WTF does that have to do with anything in this video?!
>> ^marbles:
The war against terror is largely a "Christian" crusade and yet I don't see you guys up in arms about it.
Any "progressive" that supports Obama or the Democrat Party is about as much progressive as Breivik is Christian.


1. Christian war hawks bombing and invading Muslim countries. Do some research.
2. Does this video not suggest Breivik is a Christian terrorist?




And as far as the war on terror as a Christian crusade, you have:

-Conservative Christians as the biggest backers of the Iraq war (link)

-Pentagon officials that see the "war on terror" as a religious war between Judeo-Christian civilization and Satan, with Islam of course cast in the latter role (link)

-President Bush using Biblical prophesy to justify the war in Iraq (link)

-Prime Minister Tony Blair viewing his decisions to go to war in Iraq and Kosovo as part of a "Christian battle" (link)

-US Military trying to convert Arabs to Christianity (link)(link)

These examples are just the surface, they don't even really delve into the Zionist components of the wars.




As for your second point--short answer: it has everything to do with it. It exposes your own hypocritical POV. (along with many other's)

Obama is a self professed Christian. He indiscriminately kills civilians with military drones (some estimates put the civilian death rate at 90%, the other 10% are just suspects executed without due process)(link)

Is this not terrorism?

Is Obama not a Christian terrorist?

There is ongoing torture of uncharged suspects, many who are innocent civilians, many who we know are innocent civilians. (link)(link)(link)(link)

Just recently, NATO bombing runs in Tripoli would last for several hours, hitting civilian targets and killing innocents. (link)(link)

Is this not terrorism that is fully supported by Obama and progressives?

>> ^heropsycho:

The war on terror isn't being waged based on an overt Christian ideology. There's the difference. There are plenty of Muslims in the US military who see no problem fighting radical Islam. Not sure how you missed that, but it's pretty obvious. This guy performed terrorist acts because of his warped Christian ideology.
My second point is wtf does Obama and Progressivism have to do with any of this? Short answer: it doesn't. And yes, this guy is clearly a Christian of the super-nutty variety. Every religion, and even atheists, have their nuts. Why is this so shocking to anyone?
>> ^marbles:
>> ^heropsycho:
1. How so?
2. WTF does that have to do with anything in this video?!
>> ^marbles:
The war against terror is largely a "Christian" crusade and yet I don't see you guys up in arms about it.
Any "progressive" that supports Obama or the Democrat Party is about as much progressive as Breivik is Christian.


1. Christian war hawks bombing and invading Muslim countries. Do some research.
2. Does this video not suggest Breivik is a Christian terrorist?



There's plenty of people who believe that it is. There are also plenty of people that support Israel because of a warped Christian ideology. Come on this isn't new.

The war on terror isn't being waged based on an overt Christian ideology. There's the difference. There are plenty of Muslims in the US military who see no problem fighting radical Islam. Not sure how you missed that, but it's pretty obvious. This guy performed terrorist acts because of his warped Christian ideology.

My second point is wtf does Obama and Progressivism have to do with any of this? Short answer: it doesn't. And yes, this guy is clearly a Christian of the super-nutty variety. Every religion, and even atheists, have their nuts. Why is this so shocking to anyone?

>> ^marbles:

>> ^heropsycho:
1. How so?
2. WTF does that have to do with anything in this video?!
>> ^marbles:
The war against terror is largely a "Christian" crusade and yet I don't see you guys up in arms about it.
Any "progressive" that supports Obama or the Democrat Party is about as much progressive as Breivik is Christian.


1. Christian war hawks bombing and invading Muslim countries. Do some research.
2. Does this video not suggest Breivik is a Christian terrorist?

>> ^longde:

I was answering your question in general. My point is that despite the validity of what he says in one video or another, his propensity to make outlandish statements cost him credibility in the long run.
I agree with alot of what this guy says. In the last repub primary, I thought he was a voice of reason in the debates. But I would hope he would never get elected or appointed to high office. His fringe views in many areas are unacceptable to me. Like my recent statement about the teabaggers, I think Mr. Paul is of the stripe who would kill our country to save it.>> ^blankfist:
>> ^longde:
I'm sure they do....long enough to hear enough nutty shit. Then they stop listening. >> ^blankfist:
Why won't people listen to this man?


I'm curious, because I hear comments like this a lot. What exactly is nutty about what he's saying here?



Specifics?

I was answering your question in general. My point is that despite the validity of what he says in one video or another, his propensity to make outlandish statements cost him credibility in the long run.

I agree with alot of what this guy says. In the last repub primary, I thought he was a voice of reason in the debates. But I would hope he would never get elected or appointed to high office. His fringe views in many areas are unacceptable to me. Like my recent statement about the teabaggers, I think Mr. Paul is of the stripe who would kill our country to save it.>> ^blankfist:
>> ^longde:
I'm sure they do....long enough to hear enough nutty shit. Then they stop listening. >> ^blankfist:
Why won't people listen to this man?


I'm curious, because I hear comments like this a lot. What exactly is nutty about what he's saying here?

>> ^longde:

I'm sure they do....long enough to hear enough nutty shit. Then they stop listening. >> ^blankfist:
Why won't people listen to this man?



I'm curious, because I hear comments like this a lot. What exactly is nutty about what he's saying here?

I'm sure they do....long enough to hear enough nutty shit. Then they stop listening. >> ^blankfist:
Why won't people listen to this man?