yeop,
i turned a simple boob moment into a total train wreck.
cuz when i decide to go stupid,i dont fuck around.

In reply to this comment by Boise_Lib:
I'm too angry to say anything.
*promote


two promotes in one day?
i am truly blessed.
thanks bud.
and i hear ya.
after my earlier train wreck i stumble on this video.
talk about heartbreaking.
so i am off to see my lady friend and attempt to put today past me.
you rock man.

Do you think kids who watch sesame street are surfing the Internets by themselves ? or choosing which videos in the kids channel to watch ?

I do not, i figure kids are guided by their parents while on video sift, if a child is capable of wondering around videosift coherently they must be old enough to view a sheep get a little rowdy.

I agree though, that kids channel is a train wreck of a channel.

Comment #1: Oh, so THAT'S Father Albert. When the scandal broke, the whole thing sounded like a freakin' TRAIN WRECK.

Comment #2: As always, Henry says it best: http://videosift.com/video/Henry-Rollins-Letter-to-Ann-Coulter

Three words for you ---

Terrorist Fist Jab.

Don't be silly, qm. This is how it is. You have to have a thick skin. It is ugly out there. She got upset because Rove made a SPECULATION that she might be running.

She is a train wreck. I know someone who knew her in high school, and she says she was mean, mean, mean even then.

Give it up. The truth is just coming to light.


>> ^quantumushroom:

Palin is thin-skinned? She's been media-assassinated by cowards from the moment McLame anounced her as running mate.
She should run; can't do any worse than the kenyan kenyanesque hawaiian.

It's like a train wreck. I can't stop myself from looking away, and LMAO.

If you actually think he's a a sexist, you need your head examined. Does he make stereotypical jokes about women? Yes. Blacks? Yes. Men? Yes. Whites? Yes. He's not a racist, and he's not a sexist. The reason he's going after Palin and Bachmann is because they're up in the GOP polls, and they have TERRIBLE ideas. Have you not seen interviews of Palin especially? She's a train wreck, and that shouldn't be a debatable topic. This is coming from someone who would consider voting for a GOP candidate next year, but there's no way I'd consider either of them, and it has absolutely nothing to do with the fact they're females. Their ideas are terrible, and even when they're called on things they say that are clearly wrong, they stand by it proudly. Utterly ridiculous.

And I'm sorry, but those who take the bible that literally are sexists. "Make me a sandwich" is just as sexist as "Make me a sandwich, because god said so". Get mad all you want, but he's right on that. The only thing I didn't appreciate is he's equating every religious person as that crazy when they're not.

Now, to address your point about sexism historically as related to religion, I don't care, and I don't think it's relevant. It is a part of fundamentalist christianity (and many other religions) to tell women they need to be submissive to their husbands or males in society today. Nevermind historically what they did. They're doing it now. Period.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

To Bill Maher, and anyone on the Sift who thinks he has ever had a 'point' in his life... A pile of bull$#!+ wouldn't want to watch 1 second of this show because it would be afraid of getting crap on itself.
Really, BM? Really? You want to sit there and lecture people of faith about tolerance and mysoginy when you yourself are the worst mysoginist on the planet when it comes to Palin, Bachman, or any other conservative female? This twit takes the word 'sleazebucket' to a whole new low. What a lying, hypocritical specimen.
In other words - a typical neolib.
And factually ignorant to boot in regard to religion. Waste of breath to get into it, but ascribing 'mysoginy' to only religions is a typical neolib attempt to apply the time-honored tradition of retroactive standards. Mysogyny wasn't some sort of Christian invention. Nor was it even 'refined' by Christians. It was just the cold, hard, ugly, unfair way HUMANS existed for thousands of years. Women were on the short end of the stick in any facet of ancient life you want to name. But neolibs just love to sniff their noses at past problems and pretend that they only existed in the Christian world. Just ignore the fact that Christians have been (and remain) some of the strongest, most effective, transitional, and heartfelt movers of WOMENS rights, positive race relations, and yes even fair treatment for gays too.
And I notice the videosift hasn't posted the video of BM and his gay neolib buddies having a nice little joke about how they want to rape Rick Santorum and Michelle Bachman.
"Tolerance". PTUI! Maher is the last person on the face of the planet with any moral authority to talk about issues relating to tolerance.

I actually watched the entire 13 minute version of this. Like watching a train wreck.

This guy is such a frigging victim. And clueless as to how he behaves exactly as he complains about in others.

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

Thanks so much for reporting this. I managed to get a screenshot and have taken care of it. At first I thought I took care of it a couple of months ago when I wrote this:

*****,

I have disabled the takeover code from ****. Can you please make sure this does not appear on VideoSift again.

The results are a train wreck on our front page - shrinking our actual content down and basically making the site unsuable. There are not even any frequency caps. Poor execution, and our visitors are pissed. http://wtf.videosift.com/talk/OK-Ok-Ok

****,

Your takeover reskinning is breaking our site again. I thought we cleared this up last time and these would not appear again. (see history) Please see the attached screenshot. I have removed all **** media from VideoSift until you can reassure me these won't show up again.

circular logic at it's best.
one mans brilliant attempt to rationalize his own sense of persecution.
highlighting hitler and the third reich and the horrors of world war 2 while ignoring the fact that the tactic used had been used for thousands of years....by the church.
how do you get people,whole communities...nations...to go out and murder/slaughter other people?
by demonizing them.
and nothing compares to the power of demonizing another culture than religion,but for the past century this has been due to nationalism.love of country and not so much love of god,but this has been a fairly new enterprise when put in historical context.in the past it was the church whipping its religious flock into a murderous froth.
in regards to germany,demonizing the jewish people is more understandable when we look at what happened to germany after world war 1.what happened to their economy and political and social structure..they were RIPE with fear and uncertainty..which hitler exploited to his radical benefit.

key word:fear

religion uses this emotion like a bully in the pulpit.yet this emotion is antithetical to what jesus taught,but fear will always be the best tool to control and manipulate the masses.the church dons the mantle of false authority and instills fear in order to subjugate and enslave.
saint patrick is given credit for clearing ireland of "serpents".yet when you realize that "serpents" represents "pagans" i.e:actual human beings and that tens of thousands were murdered and slaughtered for not leaving when given the chance,one can only come up with a more apt word:attempted genocide.
think on that the next time your enjoying a pint of green beer.

i always wonder how a true follower of christ reconciles putting on a uniform,picking up a gun and shooting another human being.america's current military has become more and more christian based.with evangelicals joining in such groups as "warriors for christ".while i am fully aware of passages in the bible that not only condone acts of war,but demand it,i do not recall jesus ever once stating that killing your fellow man is a godly and righteous thing to do.

this is hypocrisy incarnate and,in my opinion,one of the very powerful points atheists point to and with good reason.religious historical slaughtering aside,this is happening NOW.
radicalized fundamentalist islamic people being manipulated into jihad by those who pretend to have the authority of god.
fundamentalist christians taking up a "crusade" against the warriors of allah.
as if 1500 years of murder,rape and slaughter were not enough to teach both of these easily manipulated people in to the continued killing of each other.
these people are being deceived by those who wish to dominate using the very scripture these poor souls have deemed holy writ.

another good example is how a small and fringe political ideological group called the "neo-conservatives"(formerly known as neo-liberal) hi-jacked the evangelical religious folk in the late 70's and it was the LEADERS of that evangelical movement that sacrificed their own parishoners to the wolves.
jerry falwell,baker,swaggert,roberts.
all of them used their authority and charisma to convince their followers the righteousness of this radical political ideology.
war,empire,domination,dismissal of the poor and weak.
all put into biblical terms which the faithful bought.hook..line and sinker.

i could go on but suffice to say atheists have a few really strong points when it comes to the hypocrisy of religion and it always amazes me how many religious folk are totally unaware of their own hypocrisy and circular logic.accusing others of this or that while being totally unaware they are doing the exact same thing...very much like this man in the video.
cherry picking certain sound-bytes while ignoring historical context does not an argument make...
quite the opposite.

i am going to upvote this just so we can see this train wreck of logic exposed for what it is:a rationalization.

OMFG. Doesn't she realize that she only gets media attention because people love watching shit like her? There's a reason we all slow down to look at car accidents, train wrecks, explosions, debris, destruction.

Note to all who hope to serve in a political office: if any of the previous words apply to you, just fucking stop trying.

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

No, you're going on the guest list. We need to discover your political views - you're so opaque.
>> ^blankfist:

Lol. I'd love to laugh mercilessly at listen to that train wreck gift of brilliance. Nah, just playing. Sounds awesome.

Lol. I'd love to laugh mercilessly at listen to that train wreck gift of brilliance. Nah, just playing. Sounds awesome.

I understand that there has been an attempt to ban shinyblurry. I don't understand that. What has he done? State his opinion? As has everyone else here?

Isn't that censorship, to ban someone for a point of view?

I agree with him, I don't like the personal beatdown that immediately follows when someone like him makes his comments.

What I don't understand is why these kind of comments aren't just ignored, like trolling is ignored. Granted, trolls don't tend to believe what they post, but so what? It's effectively the same thing.

To a rational person -- which includes rational religious people -- shinyblurry's comments are egregiously annoying, internally inconsistent, and mindblowingly clueless. So what? Why the need to point out the obvious to someone who will never ever understand what you are saying?

This whole comment thread was completely predictable, as soon as shiny made his first comment that ignored the basic point of Hitchens eloquent summation of death bed conversions. I told myself I wasn't going to come back and watch it all unfold, but I am drawn to train wrecks like everyone else. Rubbernecking the disaster.

He should not be banned, though. To ban him for his opinion goes against everything that the Sift stands for, or I thought stood for.

In my opinion, of course. In my opinion.

Part of the scientific method is not overstating the implications of your results, and simply stating what your results find. Through out the video he talks about alot more than just NatGeo doing shitty experiments, which is the ONLY thing his results indicate. Sloppy science.

That may be so, but here are fourteen hundred engineers/architects who believe the official story does an insufficient job scientifically proving it's "facts".

I'm not sure that all of those engineers believed that the WTC were brought down with explosives. They signed a petition demanding a more thorough investigation. How do you know that many of them aren't backing this petition because they believe a more thorough investigation could reveal improper building standards, faults in construction or over looked safety concerns with respect to building skyscrapers that the original investigation overlooked. This is common with any type of disaster involving a man made structure, ie plane crashes, train wrecks, building/bridge collapses, sunken boats....

Even if every single one of the 1400 or so engineers who signed the petition believed it was definitely explosives, thats still means very little. More than 200 000 people graduated with engineer degrees in the US during 2005 ALONE. When you consider how many graduate in India, China, Europe, and the rest of the world, 1400 is an abysmally small faction, easily less than 1 in 1000. If 999 biologist told me life on earth has evolved from a single ancestor for every one biologist that told me it was magic, I know which theory I would lend more credence to.