>> ^Fletch:

Embedding disabled.


Thanks! Should be fixed now.

1951 – 1963, the top tax bracket was 91%

what we have is socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor

Thanks for the quality, blutruth!

In reply to this comment by blutruth:
*quality entertainer!

Pedobear or also Pædobear aka Roy Harms (born January 45th, 1951 at your mom's house) is one of the more famous and long running 4chan memes. He actually originated from 2channel (2ちゃんねる, ni channeru, 2ch for short), Japanese Internet forum, where he was called Kuma (クマー), literally "Bear". Some argue the Japanese omitted the "Pedo-" prefix to avoid redundancy since most anything churned out in Japan is assumed to promote pedophilia.

(From encyclopedia dramatica.)

>> ^Truckchase:

This looks great; not being at all familiar with the comic series I have to ask (to anyone who might know) if there is any connection here between this and 28 Days Later? Between 1:30 and 2:30 it looks very, very similar. (not that it's a bad thing!)


The beginning of both stories: the "waking up in the hospital" idea, is an homage to "Day of the Triffids", the 1951 John Wyndham novel and 1962 film of the same title.

Make sure to say it just like that when one of your friends says, "I couldn't watch the show because from the very start they ripped off '28 Days Later'." And be sure to "make quote marks", "in the air", "with your hands". That will really make them feel like a "dumb, asshole".

And of course, you can compare to the comic (and upvote) here: http://videosift.com/video/The-Walking-Dead-Motion-Comic

QM, as a conservative, wouldn't you agree that too much is being spent on foreign wars?

Even with all the inevitable Dept. of Defense waste? No. The first priority of any nation is to defend itself from invaders. If you took all the money we spend on defense, redirected it for "social services" and scrap the military, China would quickly move in. I think liberals have a tendency to forget that it's our nuke-carrying submarines circling the globe that keep monsters like China in check and everyone honest.

Unfortunately, America has no choice but to be the world's policeman, we've been cast in that role, and a Ron Paul-style return of all our Armed Forces around the world would mean absolute chaos. Think of how many rogue nations there are now, still acting like dicks WITH our military everywhere.

You won't believe this, but "spending (on national security) as a share of the national economy has actually decreased sharply in recent decades and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan brought only relatively minor increases. In 1951, with overall government spending less than half what it is today, the defense budget was nearly twice its 2009 level. (9% to 4.7%). In other words, military spending as a percentage of all governmental spending is today only one-fourth what it was sixty years ago.

"In 1968, due to Vietnam, military spending rose to 9.8%. That number (of defense spending as a percentage of GDP) came down after the conclusion of the war in Southeast Asia, and sank to a modern low of 3% under Bill Clinton, a level criticized by many military planners as irresponsibly low. Defense spending has increased steadily since then (to an estimated 4.7% this year) under the pressures of the War on Terror. The defense budget nevertheless remains historically low far below its levels under Eisenhower, say, or Kennedy, or Reagan (6%). In explaining the outrageous increase in federal, state and local spending, its obvious that defense and international entanglements had nothing to do with it."

Wood Chipper and Friends are complaining that "no one is doing anything" to help "the poor."

"A book "The Complete Idiots Guide to Economics" written in 2003 cites the U.S. Government budget as reporting that entitlements make up approximately 65 percent of our budget, distributed as follows:
Social Security: 23%
Medicare: 12%
Medicaid: 7%
Other Means-tested entitlements: 6%
Mandatory payments (pensions, etc.): 6%
Net interest on debt: 11%

In 2005, Senator Judd Gregg, then Chairman of the Senate Budget Committee stated that "Mandatory entitlement spending now represents a whopping 55 percent of all federal spending. If left on its current path, that could jump to more than 60 percent in 10 years. That will force us to cut out other necessary expenditures or raise taxes and weaken our economy." Source: The Hill newspaper, Washington DC."

Believe what you like, but there are the facts. Defense spending is a drop in the bucket compared to entitlements aka health, education, welfare. And while military tech has much improved, you don't see a doubling of quality in our govt. schools and you SURE as hell aren't going to see quantum leaps of innovation and efficiency in health care by letting the government run it.

For Kucinich & Friends we could spend 99% of the annual budget on entitlements and they would, and STILL never be happy. It's straight up fking bullsht that so many people have to have their hard-earned sht stolen by a thugverment and handed to people that don't give a sht, don't try and don't care. Yes, some of them need help, but what about the guy that can do the same as you, only he chooses to fk off? Why should you have to pay for his indolence? Do you really think it's just "the rich' getting soaked? Take a look at your paystub. The feds take a nice chuck out of your ass every week or two weeks, even if you're flipping burgers.

mootie writes At least some of that goes towards HELPING people instead of KILLING them.

We spent massive treasure and blood removing a tyrant from Iraq and giving 30 million Iraqis a chance to govern themselves. Doesn't that HELP them?

Liberalism starts with a negative premise, then gets even angrier that the impossible can't be solved with huge sums of money. It's like jumping down a hole and hanging from the bar of weights you're trying to lift while dangling.

Trailer for "Bedtime for Bonzo" starring Ronald Reagan!

http://www.videosift.com/video/Bedtime-For-Bonzo-Original-Trailer-1951

>> ^jdbates:
I think this proves lucas has no talent, almost a total ripoff. P.s. The only reason star wars was a hit was because of his editors, they saved that movie! George lucas was gonna leave it total crap(like the prequels).


yeah.... about that... directed by Steven Spielberg ...

No need to apologize for great posts! The Sift is all about exchanging ideas and learning about new stuff! Oh, and bacon and getting drunk on a Monday.

Cheers!

In reply to this comment by enoch:
In reply to this comment by ponceleon:
^


well,
there is a bit more to it than that.
"wicca" is an amalgamation of celtic,galic and druidic practices which were considered "pagan" which means (of the village),they were fairly small groups of villagers in northern europe who had to become very secretive with the advent of the papacy and the holy seat,which wielded immense influence and power before the reformation.remember the inquisition went on for centuries,and many pagans were killed for their beliefs and practices.
however it should be interesting to note how much of pagan rituals and practices made it into the christian theosophy:
christmas,easter,st patricks day..there are numerous examples,and all are derived from pagan,even the sacred geomancy you find in churches come from pagan symbols.
now "wicca" on the other hand was revealed by gardenier in 1951 and made its way into the americas via england,and draws almost all of its knowledge and practices from a myriad of celtic,galic and druidic texts and rituals,beliefs.
gardenier was ex-communicated for his revealing of so-called "secrets".
but "wicca" does have a fairly loose set of practices compared to old-world traditional paganism.
now..your definition is more in line with the semetic triad,and how the canonize "holy" text.there is more than one author,but it was by council,325 a.d nicea,and then in 1605 a.d concerning the bible,and its "holy" text.
which to me is a far better attempt than say joeseph smith and his magic hat,or L ron hubbard and his dianetics.
religions,all 4500 of them,range from the sublime,surreal to the absurd.
i..myself..enjoy poking fun sometimes at that absurdity.

just realized you were making a statement,and not asking a question per se'.
my bad..shame to delete this answer tho..
so im not gonna =P
till next time bud.
namaste

In reply to this comment by ponceleon:
^

To me I'm not sure there is any "real" wiccan, like so-called druids, it is composed mostly of hippies wanting to rebel against "established" religions. Their "texts" are just written by self-styled religious "leaders" who basically pick and choose from whatever sounds cool to them.

Then again, isn't all religion like this? When you think about it, some guy (and in rare cases girl) just decides God wants it a certain way, writes a "holy" text and viola! New religion is born.


well,
there is a bit more to it than that.
"wicca" is an amalgamation of celtic,galic and druidic practices which were considered "pagan" which means (of the village),they were fairly small groups of villagers in northern europe who had to become very secretive with the advent of the papacy and the holy seat,which wielded immense influence and power before the reformation.remember the inquisition went on for centuries,and many pagans were killed for their beliefs and practices.
however it should be interesting to note how much of pagan rituals and practices made it into the christian theosophy:
christmas,easter,st patricks day..there are numerous examples,and all are derived from pagan,even the sacred geomancy you find in churches come from pagan symbols.
now "wicca" on the other hand was revealed by gardenier in 1951 and made its way into the americas via england,and draws almost all of its knowledge and practices from a myriad of celtic,galic and druidic texts and rituals,beliefs.
gardenier was ex-communicated for his revealing of so-called "secrets".
but "wicca" does have a fairly loose set of practices compared to old-world traditional paganism.
now..your definition is more in line with the semetic triad,and how the canonize "holy" text.there is more than one author,but it was by council,325 a.d nicea,and then in 1605 a.d concerning the bible,and its "holy" text.
which to me is a far better attempt than say joeseph smith and his magic hat,or L ron hubbard and his dianetics.
religions,all 4500 of them,range from the sublime,surreal to the absurd.
i..myself..enjoy poking fun sometimes at that absurdity.

just realized you were making a statement,and not asking a question per se'.
my bad..shame to delete this answer tho..
so im not gonna =P
till next time bud.
namaste

>> ^Enzoblue:
>> ^Bidouleroux:
This is pretty much exactly like religion vs. atheism, with religion being of course smoking.

Anti-smoking is by far the more religious. Smoking is blamed for a host of sundry afflictions with scientific support that no one has the courage to challenge. People want it to be evil and that's what they get. No serious scientist would do any unbiased research, because if he found anything remotely pro-smoking the political fallout would ruin his career overnight.
Our surgeon general states that 70% of lung cancer victims got it from smoking, but lung cancer continues to rise with nary a blip - even though smokers per capita have fallen under 25% and have been there for a decade. If you want me to support this claim with data, sorry I can't. Neither the CDC or the ALA, or any other site I could find, will release any data cross referencing lung cancer victims and smokers. You can easily find how much carcinogens a black single mother of 2 will inhale in a 12x12 room with one smoker, but a table lookup of smokers v lung cancer victims will get you a 404 error. Try it.
That's religion. People needing an evil, ignoring the facts, suppressing the research of facts, all holding hands and attacking with fervor.
P.S.
My lungs get a clean bill of health every year, even though I've been smoking for over 20 years, simply because I've never tell the doctors I smoke. Ask your smoking friends to try that, it'll give them a chuckle.


You obviously didn't look very hard for data then. With almost zero effort I just came accross this in a high-profile peer-reviewed medical journal. There are hundreds of studies comparing mortality rates between smokers and non-smokers with data going back 100 years. I just want to point out the data in that study was from 1951-2001. In "survival rates from age 35" the difference in survival rates between smokers and non-smokers increases to about 20% difference by age 70. That is, you are looking at about 20% of all non-smokers being dead and 40% of all smokers dead. You can always look at the graphs for much more information than I can type here, but it's all very damning.

"But cancer continues to rise!" I hear in a myriad of different "X does or doesn't cause cancer" topics. What you mean to say is cancer diagnoses have continued to rise. 50 years ago we knew a fraction of what we know now about cancer. This is just one example of why statistics is a profession. There's so much to it I can't begin to describe it here.

1. Comedy - 12937 votes received (comedy)
2. 1stTube: the best clips of television - 8753 votes received (1sttube)
3. Music - 5314 votes received (music)
4. British Invasion - 4904 votes received (british)
5. Animation - 2811 votes received (animation)
6. Cinema - 2771 votes received (cinema)
7. VideoSift's Archive of Vintage Classics - 2482 votes received (vintage)
8. Matt Groening & Friends Appreciation - 2442 votes received (woohoo)
9. Rock & Roll - 2164 votes received (rocknroll)
10. Late Night - 1951 votes received (latenight)

Tags for this video have been changed from 'momeraths, jabberwocky, lewis carroll' to 'momeraths, jabberwocky, lewis carroll, 1951, 50s' - edited by jonny

-Duel in the Sun (1946)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0038499/
-Land of the Pharaohs (1955)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0048283/
-East of Eden (1955)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0048028/
-The Tales of Hoffman (1951)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0044103/
-Citizen Kane (1941)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0033467/
-The Public Enemy (1931)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0022286/
-The Scarface (1932)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0023427/
-The War of the Worlds (1953)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0046534/
-The Searchers (1956)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0049730/
-El Paso (1949)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0041332/
-The Red Shoes (1948)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0040725/

>> ^gwiz665:
I don't get it...

It’s a scene from The Day The Earth Stood Still. That was the phrase Helen had to say to Gort to keep him from destroying the earth (should anything happen to Klaatu). Deano also has a good summary in the comments here (spoilers!)