It's not autotune on Shanias channel, i would dare to say zero correction (listen to the end of lines where her compulsory "yeahs" are, no autotune can follow those..) On the backup singer channel, could be or she is just one of those incredibly "flat" singers that have the ability to not use even a slightest vibrato (meaning, very very good backup singer, almost too good technique.. ) But it's totally flat, meaning, autotune can be used. But you or i can not hear the difference unless we hear that channel separated, in the mix not a chance in hell you can say without doubt for one way or the other..

Even i don't really like her or the music, she is quite good singer in the first place, doesn't actually need any correction but i'm 100% sure all of her albums since 2000 have been autotuned but then it's more detailed, programmed over time to sound natural perfection (each phrase is done seperately, there are deliberate out-off-tune bits etc. which happens on every record, yes, even those metal ones you listen cause of originality. Especially metal albums these days are the most heavily touched and processed after "Britney" department..)

On-the-fly auto tuning has serious drawbacks compared to off-line auto tuning. Basically, "live" autotunes are Kanye West type super duper obvious ones. In this clip, main vocals are definitely real.

Nothing happens in a vacuum and only a fool expects any human to hang up his beliefs entirely when doing a job, but the left is so used to the Kenyawaiian's everyday overstepping his authority, they worry others in the Oval Office may do so. 'President Cain' cannot by himself repeal anything.

And DOMA is not unconstitutional.

>> ^bareboards2:

Oh, I heard it. And I snorted in disbelief and derision.
Didn't you just hear him say that he would reinstate DADT? So his religious viewpoint is not divorced from his potential actions as a president. DOMA would not be repealed under his watch, and that is failing on constitutional grounds already.
So yeah. We heard it. We laughed.
>> ^quantumushroom:
BTW did anyone but me listen to the end of the vid when Cain stated his personal beliefs are overridden by the limiting powers of the Constitution?

Oh, I heard it. And I snorted in disbelief and derision.

Didn't you just hear him say that he would reinstate DADT? So his religious viewpoint is not divorced from his potential actions as a president. DOMA would not be repealed under his watch, and that is failing on constitutional grounds already.

So yeah. We heard it. We laughed.

>> ^quantumushroom:

BTW did anyone but me listen to the end of the vid when Cain stated his personal beliefs are overridden by the limiting powers of the Constitution?

Why in the fuck should loving someone of the same sex be something that needs to be "cured"?

Ask the future parents who will have the option to choose their fetus' sexual preference, as well as height, disease-resistance and skin tone.

Steering? They're not steering the election. But they're happy to ride shotgun and yank the wheel off the road when the candidates make the "gay agenda" a "problem" that they will use their presidential powers to "cure".

For now, 'Politigays' have too much power for their numbers. There are more than twice the number of left-handed Americans than Gay Americans, but who is demanding Left-Handed History be taught in schools (just left wing history)?

BTW did anyone but me listen to the end of the vid when Cain stated his personal beliefs are overridden by the limiting powers of the Constitution?





>> ^SuperChikan:

>> ^quantumushroom:
The Gay is likely genetic, but that means in a few decades it can be "cured". And 4% of the population has no business steering an entire election.
Cain, unlike Obama, seems to understand the Constitution limits presidential power. Good on him.

Why in the fuck should loving someone of the same sex be something that needs to be "cured"?
Steering? They're not steering the election. But they're happy to ride shotgun and yank the wheel off the road when the candidates make the "gay agenda" a "problem" that they will use their presidential powers to "cure".

@ponceleon, I think Randi was speaking mainly of professional psychics, and perhaps other woo purveyors. If you listen to the end of the speech, he does mention how a great many amateurs have applied for the prize. Though I think the million dollar prize offer has finally been retired, or is about to be anyway.

Also, James Randi does indeed rock.

>> ^ShakaUVM:
Fedquip said, "Watch the video again, this conversation never happened, the cop never told the driver it was a taser, never said he wasnt going to "play this game"..and I dont see any jumping around?"
Yeah, that was exactly what I picked up on in this video. It's interesting because we get to immediately see a cop's recollection of an event, and shows how cops lie under oath -- or even to themselves. Cops can and do flip out with little provocation, and then lie about it to save their asses, but our courts always take a cop's testimony over a citizen's. It's a really messed up situation.
I was in the car where a Texas Ranger threatened to arrest my dad and hold him overnight because my dad didn't want to provide his SSN (when we called to complain, they said, yeah, that guy has been having some mental problems...). I thought we were about a hair's breadth from being shot, all of us.
Personally, I had a cop pull me over while doing 65, and then lie about it under oath saying I was doing 87 (I had been, but earlier, not anywhere near where he pulled me over). I even found evidence showing that he contradicted his testimony under oath with his sworn statement from the scene, and the judge (who lives in a nowhere town and gets paid from issuing false tickets) ignored the perjury that I caught him in and upheld the ticket anyway.
Cops taser people waay to easily these days. They think that because it's non-lethal, it's okay to taser people in situations where shooting or beating them would be inappropriate. Of course, it hurts as much as getting hit with a nightclub, but they don't seem to consider that, do they?
His hands out of sight had nothing to do with him being tasered. Listen to the end of the tape -- the cop tasered him because he was "jumping around".


Um, yeah, you were still speeding - it doesn't matter if you were pulling into a parking lot when he pulled you over. He still caught you going almost NINETY miles an hour - and you think that you DON'T deserve a ticket?
They don't have to pull you over the instant you were caught, ya know...

The other Crysis video that was on the top 15 with the crates was a lot more interesting I think. Or atleast it was easier to listen to. That ending wasn't really worth it either, the 50 barrel explosion was more interesting.

Fedquip said, "Watch the video again, this conversation never happened, the cop never told the driver it was a taser, never said he wasnt going to "play this game"..and I dont see any jumping around?"

Yeah, that was exactly what I picked up on in this video. It's interesting because we get to immediately see a cop's recollection of an event, and shows how cops lie under oath -- or even to themselves. Cops can and do flip out with little provocation, and then lie about it to save their asses, but our courts always take a cop's testimony over a citizen's. It's a really messed up situation.

I was in the car where a Texas Ranger threatened to arrest my dad and hold him overnight because my dad didn't want to provide his SSN (when we called to complain, they said, yeah, that guy has been having some mental problems...). I thought we were about a hair's breadth from being shot, all of us.

Personally, I had a cop pull me over while doing 65, and then lie about it under oath saying I was doing 87 (I had been, but earlier, not anywhere near where he pulled me over). I even found evidence showing that he contradicted his testimony under oath with his sworn statement from the scene, and the judge (who lives in a nowhere town and gets paid from issuing false tickets) ignored the perjury that I caught him in and upheld the ticket anyway.

Cops taser people waay to easily these days. They think that because it's non-lethal, it's okay to taser people in situations where shooting or beating them would be inappropriate. Of course, it hurts as much as getting hit with a nightclub, but they don't seem to consider that, do they?

His hands out of sight had nothing to do with him being tasered. Listen to the end of the tape -- the cop tasered him because he was "jumping around".

I agree with what alot of people have said, notably megafly, viewer_999 and Payback.

This is one of those setups where I suspect the director is *hoping* for general ignorance but tough for him, he still doesn't get it and there are people clearly listening by the end (even in a congested area where there isn't an obvious place to congregrate and listen - maybe next to that pillar).

I'm sorry people weren't genuflecting en masse but let's face facts, people have lives and might not have time built into their journeys to take in some live music.