ooooh beiber. poor beiber.

did i tell you that i had zero interest in beiber and just figured hes another drivel making pop star who will wash up in a sea of drugs and vomit and tabloids in a few years.. hi ho.

and then for some reason i watched some interview with him. he's a nice boy. his music sucks, i suppose. and sure, his hair is silly, but i think thats the style for preteen boys. and he's probably not the SMARTEST teenager ever. but i've decided that his heart is good. and his soul is still intact. he gives ridiculous amounts of money and time away and seemed genuinely humbled and grateful for the his experiences. which is surely very wise.

i wish we would all exercise a little more common decency. and give this kid a break.

i hope he stays kind and good hearted and generous, anyway. good luck beiber.

and thanks for sharing, its always fascinating to me when crowds encounter public figures and bad behavior ensues. (whether its adoration or contempt, its still generally bad behavior)
In reply to this comment by eric3579:
Figured you want to see this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aaeaqye-cRw&feature=player_embedded

edit

well maybe not

I realize one can't read the tone of my post, but I was being facetious about hating him. I hate him as much as I hate the Nissan Cube - I would never pay for one, I don't understand why anyone likes them and I think the person who designed it should be smacked upside the head but I wouldn't have them all dumped into the middle of the ocean.

That said, worked hard and earned his fame?

He is a mass marketed tool of the recording industry. He won a genetic lottery that makes him physically appealing to preteen girls and has a decent voice. He had the luck to be accidentally seen on YouTube by a marketing executive who arranged for him to sing with Usher one week later. He is a naive teenager being blindly led down a path of fame and riches by people who know how to sell things much more than they know music.

He doesn't deserve to be in the same sentence as The Barenaked Ladies, who seriously worked hard as independent musicians, or Jim Carey, who was/is a comic genius. They are great Canadian entertainers, Justin Bieber is not.>> ^doogle:

>> ^Skeeve:
"I don't know if you seen it but..."
There are so many reasons to hate Justin Bieber - I'm choosing to hate him for his bad grammar and for giving a bad name to us Canadians.

Canadians' extreme modesty pushes us to dislike success and fame of Canadians on top. So they go elsewhere for their fame & success, while Canada pushes them out. Barenaked Ladies, Alanis Morrissette, Jim Carrey, etc.
I'm not at all into Bieber's music, but the kid's got a good head on his shoulders and he's worked hard and earned his fame.
You don't have to like him. But you don't have to hate him either. Or listen to his music. Or watch a video aptly titled "Justin Bieber Walks Into Glass Door"

(BTW, the US CDC says that one of the major factors in teen, and preteen smoking is being from a low socioeconomic status. In effect, you are fining the most vulnerable in a society. The government is hardly being a white knight by taking from the poor, and giving to the not so poor. It is more of a tragedy (or a Shakespearean comedy!) than a victory.)

I'm curious to know how this has affected the creditability of the pediatrician, etc that stated she was a child just based on what they seen in the video. Granted, the pic of her did look like she was a preteen, but still...you'd think a prosecutor team would at least ensure some verification rather than "expert testimony" stating "Oh yeah...I've seen plenty of kids. Thats totally a kid."

Which is fine, I suppose, if there is some sort of repercussion when you're proven wrong...and these folks were obviously proven very very wrong.

>> ^jwray:

LOL, somebody stole an idea from Léon.


Yeah, not so much. I'd considered the similarity, but it really comes down to the minor issue of a preteen girl in a movie with guns, which isn't much of a similarity, let alone a "stolen idea."

Matilda in Leon is completely different and in a completely different type of story than is Hit Girl in Kick-Ass.

What the fuck, man? That's sick. And this is a roast of Kulpims, not your priest's confessional. Keep it on target.
>> ^rottenseed:
I find preteen girls sexually attractive. I enjoy touching them inappropriately.

Stockholm Syndrome makes her my daughter. It makes all of them my daughters. And I resent your implication that I kidnapped them and put them in the basement. I don't have a basement.
>> ^rottenseed:
Preteen daughter? Don't you have to have sex in order to have a preteen daughter? I don't think that girl you kidnapped at the park and locked in your mother's basement can be considered your "daughter".

Preteen daughter? Don't you have to have sex in order to have a preteen daughter? I don't think that girl you kidnapped at the park and locked in your mother's basement can be considered your "daughter". >> ^thinker247:
Having a roast without you is like having any other party without you. It's fun, exciting, and nobody's preteen daughter ends up with semen in her asshole.
Speaking of which, since when did the parole board say you could have your computer privileges again?
>> ^rottenseed:
Seriousl
y didn't know there was a roast. Sorry to have let you down, since none of you are remotely funny. Let me know next time...having a roast without me is like having a hooker without getting to pummel her over the back of her head with a giant black rubber dildo at the end of your "date"; sure it's fun in theory, but at the end you're just left unsatisfied. Plus how else are you going to fill her nose with your joy goo without having to pay for it?

Having a roast without you is like having any other party without you. It's fun, exciting, and nobody's preteen daughter ends up with semen in her asshole.

Speaking of which, since when did the parole board say you could have your computer privileges again?

>> ^rottenseed:
Seriously didn't know there was a roast. Sorry to have let you down, since none of you are remotely funny. Let me know next time...having a roast without me is like having a hooker without getting to pummel her over the back of her head with a giant black rubber dildo at the end of your "date"; sure it's fun in theory, but at the end you're just left unsatisfied. Plus how else are you going to fill her nose with your joy goo without having to pay for it?

Of course blankfist goes straight for the gay jokes. It's the only thing he does go straight for, except when he goes back home for the holidays and needs to assure his parents that Rodrigo is only his friend. His parents still can't figure out why all of blankfist's friends wear assless chaps to a dinner party.

Enough of that loser. On to the other losers!

I see our first comment was from schmawy, also known as CP420's sock puppet. I would say something else, but I'd probably edit it later, and then he'd discard this post.

Alright, who's next? Oh, that's right. DFT, the Real American Zero.

What can we say about DFT that hasn't already been said by numerous preteen girls in a court of law?

I don't want to say DFT is a pedophile, but I've heard he lives by the motto of poor African children on a dirt playground, "If there's no grass on the field, play ball."

Oh, but enough about that homosexual masturbator. On to the Norwegian nobody, the Scandinavian Scatmuncher, the Christian VII of Coprophagia, Herr Rasch187!

Please hold your applause...he doesn't deserve it.

Seriously, the guy hunts and kills animals for sport. And you don't even want to know what he does while he's waiting for the latest victim to arrive in his sights. Let's just say Ned Beatty took him off his Facebook.

And what's with the haircut, Herr Doogie? Are you trying to run for President of the Neil Patrick Harris fan club? He heads the Rock and Roll channel, but he looks like he should head the Rickroll channel, instead.

What am I forgetting? I could swear there was something else. Oh yeah! He wants to see BLANKFIST NAKED!

...

Luckily he only wants to see BF naked when he becomes a celebrity, so...yeah. *empty stare* I guess there's always Monica Belluci.

What I find quite hilarious is that he claims to have a terrible memory throughout his interview, yet he can recite the theme to Fraggle Rock at a moment's notice. Bad memory, yet remembers the theme to a stoner classic? Someone's been raiding kulpim's stash!

But seriously, anybody who is a fan of Bob Dylan is cool in my book. So congratulations, Herr Rasch!

(Alright, I was going to make an outro here, but I'm tired of this. If I wanted to make jokes for a crowd that probably won't understand or appreciate them, I'd go back to Roast IX and fuck karkarlee again.)

Goodnight!

When I read that 33% over 50 years I was surprised.

Then I found this:
People who visit this site are likely to visit these sites as well:
cracked.com I thought you were older?
supermodellinks.com Hehe, that's a little strange?
topxml.com Web development, how progressive!
thepeopleimage.com "Thousands of artistic pictures of teens and preteens" Well, maybe you're artsy
babble.com I KNEW you were mature.
militaryphotos.net Brings back memories, doesn't it?
****nudism.net So maybe videosift is a collection of nudists?
rka**.com Adult content?
heaven-******.com More adult content?
**-models.com ...
*******supermodels.com World view, crushed.
**dir.com Anger, setting in.
Those censored are so because they were rated badly on WOT - Web of Trust.

Foxnews.com and MSN.com are "catering to a more educated group". Enuff said.

Agreed on it needs to be legalized at least off of schedule 1 so we can regulate rather than pretend we can make it go away like we do now. Can't even do many types of research now since we can't "distribute" so can't do controlled studies.

On your second point, Snap right back at ya In "MEMORY, ATTENTION, AND COGNITIVE FUNCTION" as you put it there's a small catch involved. Similar to the way the risk of psychotic disorders is badly overstated (almost nothing to a hair over almost nothing) this is overstated and badly as well. The effects are mostly WHILE intoxicated, for casual use that doesn't extend much if at all past that. You wouldn't know that from the scare stories though. I'll offer you some sources for further research if you'd care to follow up on it and a decent source for a bunch more.

"The results of our meta-analytic study failed to reveal a substantial, systematic effect of long-term, regular cannabis consumption on the neurocognitive functioning of users who were not acutely intoxicated. For six of the eight neurocognitive ability areas that were surveyed. the confidence intervals for the average effect sizes across studies overlapped zero in each instance, indicating that the effect size could not be distinguished from zero. The two exceptions were in the domains of learning and forgetting."

Source: Grant, Igor, et al., "Non-Acute (Residual) Neurocognitive Effects Of Cannabis Use: A Meta-Analytic Study," Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society (Cambridge University Press: July 2003), 9, p. 686.

"In conclusion, our meta-analysis of studies that have attempted to address the question of longer term neurocognitive disturbance in moderate and heavy cannabis users has failed to demonstrate a substantial, systematic, and detrimental effect of cannabis use on neuropsychological performance. It was surprising to find such few and small effects given that most of the potential biases inherent in our analyses actually increased the likelihood of finding a cannabis effect."

Source: Grant, Igor, et al., "Non-Acute (Residual) Neurocognitive Effects Of Cannabis Use: A Meta-Analytic Study," Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society (Cambridge University Press: July 2003), 9, p. 687.

"Nevertheless, when considering all 15 studies (i.e., those that met both strict and more relaxed criteria) we only noted that regular cannabis users performed worse on memory tests, but that the magnitude of the effect was very small. The small magnitude of effect sizes from observations of chronic users of cannabis suggests that cannabis compounds, if found to have therapeutic value, should have a good margin of safety from a neurocognitive standpoint under the more limited conditions of exposure that would likely obtain in a medical setting."

Source: Grant, Igor, et al., "Non-Acute (Residual) Neurocognitive Effects Of Cannabis Use: A Meta-Analytic Study," Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society (Cambridge University Press: July 2003), 9, pp. 687-8.

A Johns Hopkins study published in May 1999, examined marijuana's effects on cognition on 1,318 participants over a 15 year period. Researchers reported "no significant differences in cognitive decline between heavy users, light users, and nonusers of cannabis." They also found "no male-female differences in cognitive decline in relation to cannabis use." "These results ... seem to provide strong evidence of the absence of a long-term residual effect of cannabis use on cognition," they concluded.

Source: Constantine G. Lyketsos, Elizabeth Garrett, Kung-Yee Liang, and James C. Anthony. (1999). "Cannabis Use and Cognitive Decline in Persons under 65 Years of Age," American Journal of Epidemiology, Vol. 149, No. 9.

"Current marijuana use had a negative effect on global IQ score only in subjects who smoked 5 or more joints per week. A negative effect was not observed among subjects who had previously been heavy users but were no longer using the substance. We conclude that marijuana does not have a long-term negative impact on global intelligence. Whether the absence of a residual marijuana effect would also be evident in more specific cognitive domains such as memory and attention remains to be ascertained."

Source: Fried, Peter, Barbara Watkinson, Deborah James, and Robert Gray, "Current and former marijuana use: preliminary findings of a longitudinal study of effects on IQ in young adults," Canadian Medical Association Journal, April 2, 2002, 166(7), p. 887.

# "Although the heavy current users experienced a decrease in IQ score, their scores were still above average at the young adult assessment (mean 105.1). If we had not assessed preteen IQ, these subjects would have appeared to be functioning normally. Only with knowledge of the change in IQ score does the negative impact of current heavy use become apparent."

Source: Fried, Peter, Barbara Watkinson, Deborah James, and Robert Gray, "Current and former marijuana use: preliminary findings of a longitudinal study of effects on IQ in young adults," Canadian Medical Association Journal, April 2, 2002, 166(7), p. 890.

Source for those and more, lots of sourced detail which includes perspective rather than tossing bold claims out without that perspective, can be found at the following. Yes, it includes both the good and the bad and the root site for that page covers medical marijuana and other drugs as well.http://www.drugwarfacts.org/marijuan.htm

The problem in part is that people use pot (and other drugs) sometimes to hide from life or to make themselves feel better about their failures and we try to assume the pot caused the problem rather than the problem caused them to find a way to make themselves feel better, in this case with pot. Association doesn't automatically mean cause and effect. It's not brain food, but it's not all that dangerous in casual use either. Even with heavy use function tends to drift back to the baseline with time, you just have to quit abusing. Better to look for the reasons for abuse than to blame the substance which isn't all that dangerous or toxic in itself.

That was painful. I've seen preteens on YouTube with better editing skills.

No, I did get that part MGR, and as I was trying to indicate, a parent could simply remove their child from this whole sphere of influence by refusing to sign the permission slip in the first place, thus keeping them out of the health center.

Ultimately this might be bad, as it would then remove their access to the other services as well, but I still maintain that doctor-patient confidentiality is a key part of the strategy in getting kids to seek proper protection for themselves... because trust me when I say this: not every little girl is capable of talking about sex with their parents. This goes for women of all ages, not just 11 year olds, its just one of those topics a good many kids would prefer to avoid discussing with their parents... and at risk teens and preteens certainly aren't going to seek a doctor's advice if they know they will get 'narc-ed on'.

Ahhh, here we go. Thanks hon, I haven't had a good rant all day.

I disagree w/ him. I understand the concern, but you can't legislate parenting.
Oddly enough some think it's weird that I'll let my kids play SC 2, StarWars Battlefront, or Halo,but I will not let them watch preteen Disney and Nick shows. I personally hate Disney's material shallow message that it offers kids.
They (speaking of my kids) are not socially impressed or desensitized to real life violence in any way from videogames, because to them they're not real. They never resort to violence to settle disputes.
Instead my kids are easily influenced by the lying and scheming ways of say "Drake and Josh" and other shows of the like and they aren't allow to watch popular "pre-teen" shows.

It's only when you understand your child's temperment, where they are strong and where they can be influenced is where and when you censure. A responsible parent does this.

It's the irresponsible parents out there that stay so busy that they have no time with their children... No time to really know and influence them morally. When their children have a problem or gets into trouble, entertainment media is "to blame". Bullshit.

No, folks like Jack Thompson although well-meaning, just can't think he can have a law passed to change that. [Ok, off soapbox.]

Oh, and Farhad.... I would love to watch my son slay you at Halo