search results matching tag: the ugly truth

» channel: motorsports

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (7)     Sift Talk (1)     Blogs (1)     Comments (22)   

Mordhaus (Member Profile)

University in Norway responds to Will Ferrell

University in Norway responds to Will Ferrell

What Do Cynical People Really Want?

newtboy says...

The irony is palpable.
This hyper cynical assessment of cynicism and cynics is some serious Jr high psychology in video form.

I'm clearly a cynic.
I had a decent childhood, with minor neglect but nothing that hurt me, just taught me to enjoy solitude. Like others, I've suffered loss of loved ones, both by death and choice, more often than I deemed fair. Like mom used to say," who told you life was supposed to be fair?" There's no secret hurt I'm brooding over.
I do have worldly experience, I traveled more by 18 than most do in their lifetime, studied at some excellent schools (and some horrific ones) for over a decade after high school, I have plenty of love and kindness in my life, more than I want or think I deserve sometimes. I've been happily married to the same woman for 21 years.
I thought this video was a slap in the face to honest cynics...dismissive of our valid, empirical evidence of how fucked things are, how crappy humanity is, and how little chance there is of solving our problems before it's too late, and infantalizing us as irrational babies lashing out because we've been hurt. Maybe we just refuse to pull the wool over our own eyes because we much prefer ugly truth to beautiful lies.
Edit: also, there's the idea that if you always expect the worst, you're never disappointed.

*rant over

Pancreatic Cancer Patient Hassled at Hospital Over Marijuana

BSR says...

The only reason you hate bullies and liars is because you believe you have no other options. That makes you a hater and no different than that which you hate.

Anger is only hate if that's what you want it to be. You have a choice of what to do with the energy that anger creates. You make it destructive or productive.

Nothing is better than love. It leads straight to hell. It will be the ONLY thing to get you out.

He subjected himself to the abuse. He could have just said, knock yourself out fellows. Just close the door behind you. But instead he chose to waste his short remaining time on the clowns.

Are you still looking for the ugly truth? How do you expect to find it if you don't make yourself vulnerable? If you don't trust?

If you love someone or someone loves you, all your defenses have already been penetrated. Pretty slick, eh?

EDIT:

I hope you're writing all this down. There are a lot people that need help. That's where your talent comes in.

newtboy said:

Perhaps, but in this instance it's my hatred of bullies and liars.
Being angry isn't a waste of time, it's one of the best motivators there is for humans....yes, better at motivating than love.

I dunno, he was recording them for a reason, and what group isn't going to jump at helping a dying cancer patient address the draconian disrespect and abuse of power he was subjected to? Over an anonymous accusation.

A love of cynicism IS me. If there were awards for cynicism, I would be famous. Blind acceptance isn't a positive or intelligent trait. It takes bravery to open your eyes and admit the ugly truth, especially when admitting it contradicts the willingly blind masses, much more bravery than going along with the crowd pretending everything's fine.

Pancreatic Cancer Patient Hassled at Hospital Over Marijuana

newtboy says...

Perhaps, but in this instance it's my hatred of bullies and liars.
Being angry isn't a waste of time, it's one of the best motivators there is for humans....yes, better at motivating than love.

I dunno, he was recording them for a reason, and what group isn't going to jump at helping a dying cancer patient address the draconian disrespect and abuse of power he was subjected to? Over an anonymous accusation.

A love of cynicism IS me. If there were awards for cynicism, I would be famous. Blind acceptance isn't a positive or intelligent trait. It takes bravery to open your eyes and admit the ugly truth, especially when admitting it contradicts the willingly blind masses, much more bravery than going along with the crowd pretending everything's fine.

BSR said:

I think your love for cynicism is taking years off your life. Now these two cops have made you angrier than you were before. In fact, I think you let them waste your time.

Your "hope" is only dust. You are more powerful than this. I know you know that. I've seen it.

As far as your love of cynicism, it doesn't serve you. You're braver than this.

I could have just let this go, but I admire your talent. Something I lack.

collegehumor-kinda racist? try diet racism!

enoch says...

@transmorpher

you seem a smart sort.
so i am curious how you reconcile your own biases and prejudices that the rest of us struggle with on a constant basis?

humans,taken as a whole,are pretty fucking dumb and tend to adhere to social constructs that appeals to our inherent tribalism.this is why we are so easily manipulated by:nationalistic pride,religion and yes..racism.

this is why i found this video so delicious.
overt racism is something that is so transparent that we can all recognize and despise its deplorable and divisive nature.

but we all struggle with our own biases,and prejudices,and this video reveals that ugly truth in such a glorious fashion,because it exposes our hypocrisy and reveals and uncomfortable truth about our own prejudices.

it is funny,because it is true.
uncomfortably true.

so your comment came across as sanctimonious moralizing to me,but i want to give you the benefit of the doubt and ask how YOU reconciled your own,very human... prejudices.

because i struggle with mine on a daily basis.

Real Time with Bill Maher: New Rule – Tax the Churches

shinyblurry says...

"Doing these things as a prelude to proselytizing means they aren't altruistic..."

Altruism isn't the right word. When people help others to their hurt, that is called agape love, a word the Christian community has owned for 2000 years. You're right of course, that more than a few churches out there are always trying to figure out how to get more members, more money etc. But that isn't all the churches, or even nearly so. For instance the churches in this community dont care who goes where; they all work together and no one is taking the credit for it. This is just one counter example to the broad brush strokes you're painting here.

I think you need a little more nuance here too, newtboy; for instance, would you say it is wrong for atheists to do good deeds in the name of atheism? Or, for the red cross to air commercials showing their accomplishments so they could raise more money to expand their mission in the world?

"And yet, here you are calling attention to yourself (and them), so you proved your statement wrong by stating it publicly. Oops! ;-)"

I didn't mention what I do newtboy, but I have no problem calling attention to the righteous who glorify God through their lives.

"Churches are for profit institutions.."

The church according to the bible is a non-profit organization. Whether churches in America reflect that or not is another question entirely. I know for my church, and almost any other church, you can request to see how the church spends its money year by year. None of the churches I have dealings with are making "profits"

"Once again I would ask, why do you question your god's clear wish that I (and others) not believe in him..."

Jesus Christ died for our sins, yours and mine. God already demonstrated His love for us while we were sinners, now the only question is, will you reciprocate? The insanity of the question posed to Stephan Fry, ie what would you say to God, is exposed by the answer "How dare you!" by Stephan. It seems that people believe God is a man who needs to explain Himself, who has something to hide. Yet, Stephan and every other human being have a lot to hide; the brutal and ugly truth of how we have all lived our lives here.

It's easy for a man to say to people who know nothing about him that he will shake his fist at God when they meet. Yet, what will he do when all of his lawless deeds are exposed and the secrets he has kept from everyone are brought to light? All the fight will go out of him immediately, this I guarantee you. Yet, this in itself is still ridiculous, considering that even merely being in Gods presence is enough to make the most hardened sinner fall to his knees and weep uncontrollably. But people won't be weeping because God loves them on that day, they will be weeping and gnashing their teeth after being confronted by the fact that they have missed the boat for eternity.

"Shirley.."

My name isn't Sherlock..

"Doing 100 good deeds and one incredibly evil deed makes one evil. No church in history has ever reached that level of goodness. Churches are evil. I hope that clears things up."

I'm glad you understand what I have been trying to explain to the sift for years; a relative goodness is no goodness at all. If you set fire to someones home, and then built 27 orphanages, would people call you good? Why is it then that people think that all of our good deeds should cause God to forgive us for a single sin? This is the reason Jesus died for us, because we can't earn Gods forgiveness and our good deeds can't erase our bad ones. Could you ever go to court and say "your honor, although I commited this crime I have done over 1000 hours of community service in my lifetime, so please dismiss the case; will that ever happen? That wouldn't be justice, and if God threw out our case without true justice, He wouldn't be a just judge.

What would I say about churches who have done evil? These are institutions; the true church is the body of Christ, of which every born again believer is a member of. That is what is happening in my community, is that no one cares about the institution of the church; they are just being the church. The reward is simply this, to serve God honorably by living a sacrificial life predicated on sacrificial love.

newtboy said:

stuff

NetRunner (Member Profile)

LukinStone says...

Well said, sir.


In reply to this comment by NetRunner:
I'd say that rape and abortion are important topics in their own right, but there's certainly some truth to what you're saying.

The thing is, as a general rule, I get trolled by Paul supporters, not vice versa. I've been posting here for over 5 years now, and almost all of it has been political videos. I'm an unapologetic liberal. I campaigned for Obama in 2008, both online and offline, and will be doing so again this year.

Can you imagine how many people have come at me with the "Paul is the only choice" crap over the years? I think if I asked siftbot to count, his head would explode.

I'm glad you're starting to reconsider supporting him. I'm sorry if it took the connection with white supremacists thing to do it. I'd have rather just pointed out that his policies are bad, or that he can't deliver what he's promising, but most Paul supporters don't seem to even hear conventional arguments like that anymore.

Lately it seems I'm being trolled by Paul supporters who get hostile with me just because I refuse to accept that Ron Paul is our lord and savior as an article of faith. I've seen Paul and his followers go from being generally respectful towards liberals, to saying we're evil monsters, and repeating all the bullshit lies coming out of the general Republican wurlitzer.

I figure if Paulites are going to tell the worst lies they can about me, the least I can do is tell them the ugly truth about what it is they believe in.

I always try to steer the comment threads on the videos towards fruitful conversations, and away from some tit for tat trading of insults. These are inflammatory accusations, but they also happen to be true ones, and ones worth discussing in detail. Turns out, all this stuff is utterly consistent with Paul's core philosophy, which is really the issue I want to raise with people. It isn't that Paul is a flawed vessel for his philosophy, it's that the philosophy itself is poison.

In reply to this comment by artician:
At some point you must know you're just trolling to generate hate for a guy you don't believe in. I don't necessarily believe in him as much as I used to either, but this is silly, and is the exact same childish game that has brought political discourse to the level of the grade-school special-needs-mentality that's pandered around by the mainstream media.


artician (Member Profile)

NetRunner says...

I'd say that rape and abortion are important topics in their own right, but there's certainly some truth to what you're saying.

The thing is, as a general rule, I get trolled by Paul supporters, not vice versa. I've been posting here for over 5 years now, and almost all of it has been political videos. I'm an unapologetic liberal. I campaigned for Obama in 2008, both online and offline, and will be doing so again this year.

Can you imagine how many people have come at me with the "Paul is the only choice" crap over the years? I think if I asked siftbot to count, his head would explode.

I'm glad you're starting to reconsider supporting him. I'm sorry if it took the connection with white supremacists thing to do it. I'd have rather just pointed out that his policies are bad, or that he can't deliver what he's promising, but most Paul supporters don't seem to even hear conventional arguments like that anymore.

Lately it seems I'm being trolled by Paul supporters who get hostile with me just because I refuse to accept that Ron Paul is our lord and savior as an article of faith. I've seen Paul and his followers go from being generally respectful towards liberals, to saying we're evil monsters, and repeating all the bullshit lies coming out of the general Republican wurlitzer.

I figure if Paulites are going to tell the worst lies they can about me, the least I can do is tell them the ugly truth about what it is they believe in.

I always try to steer the comment threads on the videos towards fruitful conversations, and away from some tit for tat trading of insults. These are inflammatory accusations, but they also happen to be true ones, and ones worth discussing in detail. Turns out, all this stuff is utterly consistent with Paul's core philosophy, which is really the issue I want to raise with people. It isn't that Paul is a flawed vessel for his philosophy, it's that the philosophy itself is poison.

In reply to this comment by artician:
At some point you must know you're just trolling to generate hate for a guy you don't believe in. I don't necessarily believe in him as much as I used to either, but this is silly, and is the exact same childish game that has brought political discourse to the level of the grade-school special-needs-mentality that's pandered around by the mainstream media.

9/11: The "Official" Conspiracy Theory

Duckman33 says...

>> ^bcglorf:

>> ^Duckman33:
I've dug plenty deep. I already know that people were trying to warn of the attacks coming, that's old news. So then why lie about it in a press conference? You know, that part where we were lied to by Condie Rice, etc. When they knew fair and well they had conceived that very scenario?
President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and other White House officials have consistently denied knowing about the 9/11 plot or receiving information that (or even imagining that) commercial aircraft could be used as weapons. For example, Bush said repeatedly there were no warnings of any kind ... “Never in anybody’s thought process ... about how to protect America did we ever think the evil doers would fly not one but four commercial aircraft into precious US targets ... never.”
White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said that “the President did not – not – receive information about the use of airplanes as missiles by suicide bombers ... Until this attack took place, I think it’s fair to say that no one envisioned that as a possibility.”
Then National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice said: “I don’t think that anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon, that they would try to use an airplane as a missile ... even in retrospect there was nothing to suggest that.”

I don't care about the buildings anymore, that's all been "debunked" for the most part.
Like I've said to you before, you can quote all you want from information you find on the interwebs, that doesn't make it any more or less true than anything I can Google and quote. There's a lot more to 9/11 than just the buildings coming down, there's a lot of lies, repeated lies in fact. A lot of denial and finger pointing. And a lot of convenient "failures of the system". Whether you like it or not, or want to admit it or not there is something fishy going on here. But hey, I'm just a crackpot, loonie conspiracy theorist. What do I know, right? I should be a good robot and always implicitly trust people that lie to me on a continual basis, that way I don't have to face an ugly truth, or facts, or think for myself.

Oh for heavens sakes, your acting like discovering that politicians spin things and choose their wording carefully and to their own benefit is a discovery you've made through some stroke of genius.
Politicians will use the truth to deceive and trick the public as long as it's in their own interest, and if it's better to lie they'll do that to. That's not news, it's not a conspiracy, it's common knowledge.
So you seem to accept that an Afghan leader was warning of a 'major attack'(no mention of airplanes, just a major attack) leading up to 9/11. You don't act like his assassination on the 10th of September was a surprise either. What is surprising is your quotes you throw out thinking that officials were unaware or lying about this. EVERY quote you gave specifically states there was no idea that civilian aircraft would be used as missiles in an attack. Remembering that politicians are deceitful monsters, you'll notice they do NOT deny having warnings of an impending Al Qaeda attack. In fact, multiple official reports, investigations, and even Bin Laden's own public statements all make it very clear there were warnings of pending attack from Bin Laden's organization. The only denial in your quotes is specifically to the method.
Sorry, your whole act depends on people being either ignorant of the facts or shocked that politicians might hedge and be dodgy in their answers on a massively political topic...


No I'm not, I'm questioning why they felt had to lie about this. That is all. Don't put words in my mouth, or even try to think you know what motivates me please.

So, if you think that collaborating to bend the truth to deceive and trick the public to achieve a common goal is not a conspiracy I suggest you read up on the definition of what a conspiracy is. Just because I use the word "conspiracy" does not mean I'm referring to some wild, far fetched and unbelievable scenario. That's not always what a conspiracy is, that's what the general public has come to think of what a conspiracy is due to people like you that apply the most extreme definition to the word. Just like a UFO is not necessarily an alien space craft. It's that due to society, and per-conceived notions, most people automatically think of alien space ships when someone refers to seeing a UFO.

Sorry, you're smug little, "I know all the facts, and you are delusional" act is a joke. Yeah, you are far more superior to us "conspiracy nuts".

Oh, where did I say anything about Bush being in bed with Bin Laden or planting explosives in the towers? Why is it that once someone talks about a conspiracy they are automatically "crazy"? Not all of us believe what the fringe is trying to sell, my friend. But we also don't believe what is being force fed down our throats either.

9/11: The "Official" Conspiracy Theory

bcglorf says...

>> ^Duckman33:

I've dug plenty deep. I already know that people were trying to warn of the attacks coming, that's old news. So then why lie about it in a press conference? You know, that part where we were lied to by Condie Rice, etc. When they knew fair and well they had conceived that very scenario?
President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and other White House officials have consistently denied knowing about the 9/11 plot or receiving information that (or even imagining that) commercial aircraft could be used as weapons. For example, Bush said repeatedly there were no warnings of any kind ... “Never in anybody’s thought process ... about how to protect America did we ever think the evil doers would fly not one but four commercial aircraft into precious US targets ... never.”
White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said that “the President did not – not – receive information about the use of airplanes as missiles by suicide bombers ... Until this attack took place, I think it’s fair to say that no one envisioned that as a possibility.”
Then National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice said: “I don’t think that anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon, that they would try to use an airplane as a missile ... even in retrospect there was nothing to suggest that.”

I don't care about the buildings anymore, that's all been "debunked" for the most part.
Like I've said to you before, you can quote all you want from information you find on the interwebs, that doesn't make it any more or less true than anything I can Google and quote. There's a lot more to 9/11 than just the buildings coming down, there's a lot of lies, repeated lies in fact. A lot of denial and finger pointing. And a lot of convenient "failures of the system". Whether you like it or not, or want to admit it or not there is something fishy going on here. But hey, I'm just a crackpot, loonie conspiracy theorist. What do I know, right? I should be a good robot and always implicitly trust people that lie to me on a continual basis, that way I don't have to face an ugly truth, or facts, or think for myself.


Oh for heavens sakes, your acting like discovering that politicians spin things and choose their wording carefully and to their own benefit is a discovery you've made through some stroke of genius.

Politicians will use the truth to deceive and trick the public as long as it's in their own interest, and if it's better to lie they'll do that to. That's not news, it's not a conspiracy, it's common knowledge.

So you seem to accept that an Afghan leader was warning of a 'major attack'(no mention of airplanes, just a major attack) leading up to 9/11. You don't act like his assassination on the 10th of September was a surprise either. What is surprising is your quotes you throw out thinking that officials were unaware or lying about this. EVERY quote you gave specifically states there was no idea that civilian aircraft would be used as missiles in an attack. Remembering that politicians are deceitful monsters, you'll notice they do NOT deny having warnings of an impending Al Qaeda attack. In fact, multiple official reports, investigations, and even Bin Laden's own public statements all make it very clear there were warnings of pending attack from Bin Laden's organization. The only denial in your quotes is specifically to the method.

Sorry, your whole act depends on people being either ignorant of the facts or shocked that politicians might hedge and be dodgy in their answers on a massively political topic...

9/11: The "Official" Conspiracy Theory

Duckman33 says...

I've dug plenty deep. I already know that people were trying to warn of the attacks coming, that's old news. So then why lie about it in a press conference? You know, that part where we were lied to by Condie Rice, etc. When they knew fair and well they had conceived that very scenario?

President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and other White House officials have consistently denied knowing about the 9/11 plot or receiving information that (or even imagining that) commercial aircraft could be used as weapons. For example, Bush said repeatedly there were no warnings of any kind ... “Never in anybody’s thought process ... about how to protect America did we ever think the evil doers would fly not one but four commercial aircraft into precious US targets ... never.”

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said that “the President did not – not – receive information about the use of airplanes as missiles by suicide bombers ... Until this attack took place, I think it’s fair to say that no one envisioned that as a possibility.”

Then National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice said: “I don’t think that anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon, that they would try to use an airplane as a missile ... even in retrospect there was nothing to suggest that.”


I don't care about the buildings anymore, that's all been "debunked" for the most part.

Like I've said to you before, you can quote all you want from information you find on the interwebs, that doesn't make it any more or less true than anything I can Google and quote. There's a lot more to 9/11 than just the buildings coming down, there's a lot of lies, repeated lies in fact. A lot of denial and finger pointing. And a lot of convenient "failures of the system". Whether you like it or not, or want to admit it or not there is something fishy going on here. But hey, I'm just a crackpot, loonie conspiracy theorist. What do I know, right? I should be a good robot and always implicitly trust people that lie to me on a continual basis, that way I don't have to face an ugly truth, or facts, or think for myself.

Firestorm - The Allied Bombing of Nazi Germany

bcglorf says...

^

I think there is some more middle ground necessary. This obviously and undeniably was an atrocity, on a grand scale. There is truth though in observing that in a war, you had better expect atrocities to be committed by not only your enemy, but your own side as well. It's a horrible thing to accept or expect, but it is simply an ugly truth of fighting a war.

If you agree that the Allies should have fought against the Nazi's, you have to take at least some degree of responsibility for the crimes the allies committed in prosecuting that war. It is beyond irresponsible to expect that a war can be prosecuted without horrific atrocities being committed, no war in history has ever managed to escape that pit. That doesn't mean we can't call those crimes out as such, it just means you can't completely distance yourself from them. Agreeing that the Allies should have fought the war is on some plane admitting that fighting and prosecuting that war was the lesser evil compared to not fighting.

Rachel Maddows about the un-debunkable lies on Fox

shuac says...

That bit about the census being used against Japanese Americans is true. The way this story is positioned, it sort of made it sound like 100% of the things the right says is completely made up. Many times, it obviously is. But that particular event...the census being used against Americans...is true.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_9066
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_American_internment (citations at the bottom of the page, if you distrust Wikipedia)

Lest anyone think I'm defending Ms. Bachman or Fox News, I'm most certainly not. I'm merely stating that that particular sound byte she uttered is true. I cannot help that.

This ugly truth serves us all best if we remember it...and that might be difficult hearing it embedded among the lies revealed by Rachel Maddow's story.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon