>> ^Yogi:
Not a Ginger Fan?

that's becuase gingers have no soul

>> ^fjules:
Some ginger girls may be hot but I feel for the men...


Yeah, some were hot. Hmmm....(weighs scales) hot readhead? No soul. Hot redhead...no soul....

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Ion positively entertaining shows hits favorites Criminal Minds Ghost Whisperer' to 'spammers have no soul, banned, redacted' - edited by rasch187

Tags for this video have been changed from 'spam redacted' to 'banned, redacted, spammers have no soul' - edited by rasch187

I'm not going to get into what the purpose of the government is, but I do think that art is important and should be encouraged. Without art, cultures have no soul.

aww, c'mon, sing along, you know the words.

Chim Chiminey,
Chim Chiminey,
Chim Chim Cher-ee



In reply to this comment by kymbos:
Upvote, but there's only so much of this I can take. I got about 3 minutes in, and I'm quite proud of that.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'spammers have no soul, banned, redacted' to 'banned, redacted' - edited by burdturgler

Tags for this video have been changed from 'search engine marketing, seo, sem, pay per click, cost per click, cpc, ppc' to 'spammers have no soul, banned, redacted' - edited by rasch187

Great lecture.

As I watch, he mentioned justice. Justice as an end, not a vague concept masked by laws, or crimes, or talking points.

As to the soul, it probably can't be proved. To prove it would spoil the game.

I believe that I've been here before, and I think there is a good chance I'll come back again, but I have nothing to support that belief.

The existence of the soul is almost irrelevant, really, in human terms, in the sense that we must interact with one another here and now.

We do not need souls to weigh our actions against the future, and to consider how our actions today will impact the lives of billions of people tomorrow, people who are not yet born, not yet in wombs.

If we were as smart as we thought we were, we would weigh our actions against centuries.

The soul. The beginning and the end. Forever and the void.

When I was conceived, I don't know if my parents were doing it missionary style in the front seat, or doggy style in the back seat, yet here I am just the same.

I am an imperfect poet, living in an imperfect world, with imperfect people, and wherever I can, I will try to make it better than it was.

I will strive to 'progress.'

And soul or no soul, I choose that path of my own free will, with the hopes that, if I'm right, the world will be a better place the next time I'm here.

"keep your eyes real empty"...

because you have no soul.

<robot cries>

omg. It's not a PR stunt people. Stop being such conspiracy theorists. 3DR hasn't done anything in years, so them closing would be the same as them remaining open--it makes no difference. I just want to stop hearing about DNF, and anything G.Broussard or S.Miller have to say.

That company is just not relevant anymore, and nobody cares about their once-great hero, Duke Nukem. He's now just as irrelevant as his creators. He has no soul. He has no unique, appealing notability or individuality that make him stand out from every other FPS character. He's just a masculine stereotype that nobody is interested in anymore.

There was a time when his archetype had its place in gaming, but these days, gamers demand more. There's nothing interesting about anything 3DR has shown about DNF to this point. Nothing groundbreaking or innovative at all. It feels like every other soulless FPS with no purpose other than gratuitous violence.

I, for one, am not sad to see it go, and have had no anticipation for its arrival since it was very first announced. I just wish the douchebag talking heads at 3DR would stfu and stay the fuck out of the media.

Let it go already.

>> ^Fletch:
>> ^charliem:
Shes way smarter than she lets on.
She is actually a constitutional lawyer herself, after watching the vids of her argue law against billo' and call him out for being the idiot that he is, you can tell shes just pushing the party line in this one.
Pretty sad really.

You've got to be joking. "Just pushing the party line" alone, if that's all she's doing, speaks to her intelligence, imvho. Bush graduated from Yale, ffs. Maybe he's smarter than he lets on, too.


Intelligent shills with no souls to mention, still go home with a paycheck

Ha. I love this, people follow Misean view of economics without realizing that at it's cores it is against all statism and democracy as a whole. How would you like to be ruled over corporations and business interests?

You make an assumption here that is false. Businesses get the ruling over us when they are able to enforce the rule of law over us. When we are free to choose what we want when we want it, the consumer is in power.

On the other end of the spectrum, the labor side (means of production). There will always be a fight between the business owners and the workers. When there are many workers, the companies will be able to force lower wages, and vice versa, that is just the way it goes. I think one of the modern success stories of free markets and interesting self regulatory bodies that emerge are the labor unions. They were able to strike out their claims more effectively and nimbly than any government regulation.

When the power is in the hands of the people, they have to recognize that their dollar is indeed power, and where they choose to invest it directly affects the world around them. It is a world where much more thought and responsibility has to be taken into account.

I realized that capitalism possess no soul and could not work unless we were all robots and did not care about the welfare of others.

Business is all about providing solutions for people directly. You aim is for consumer satisfaction. Who are these "others" to which your refer? If a company charges a fair market price for its product, it can pay its workers well, and his family can prosper as well, the consumer also gets his product at a reasonable price. It is the happy medium. It is when the government interferes with this that the unfairness is introduced. When we are forced to pay twice what a hair cut is worth because we need to make sure the barber is placed in a position in society that we wish to make the new minimum, you undermine the consumers right to evaluate what things are worth, and thus undermine the entire price structure. Things will begin to break down and inflation will result, lowering the buying power of everyone and thus returning this man to the same status of which you wished to lower him out of, and over-complicating things by placing a moral agenda on economics that all don't hold to.

The key to good governance and national economy is the mixture of both
This is dialectic reasoning to think you can mix to things that are fundamentally opposed to each other. Trying to merge two opposites is not wisdom. This is the idea of having your cake and eating it too. You can not have the powers of the market work if they are stifled in other areas. There ends up with a bubble of something eventually, and the market will always find that and exploit it until it bursts. The resent housing bubble is the greatest explained of poor government regulation. the The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 caused the housing bubble by not alowing banks to use their normal risk evaluation models when considering blacks and other minorities for loans. The result was the sub prime mess of today; enterprising capitalist's found a way to exploit poor government controls for economic redistribution of wealth and manged to make the poor, more poor, and the rich more rich...which is usually now much government "level the playing field" laws go.

I was assured a full....
You were assured something, but where they something you even wanted? Where they something you asked for? The main problem with this whole idea is the massive waste that goes on, communism is extremely ineffective. It provides things to those that provide nothing. It provides things to those who do not want those things. It essentially is the most unfair system one could make when trying to make something effective and efficient. This is why Soviets could launch objects into space, but could not provide soap or women's pantyhose to its people, there is no real model for determining the value of things OTHER than peoples demand for them. There is no government system you could make until after you have a pricing model for them, it hasn't been shown to be possible without massive inflation or more widespread enforcement of market strategies.

Central planning nearly always results in tyranny of the most extreme kind. Once the power is centralized, the ability to abuse that power becomes irrefutable as far as history is concerned. The idea of the philosopher king (or planners)lacks the merit or the understanding of human nature. People are greedy. To place the power of all our lives in the hands of the few only begs for the worst kinds of tragedy that the world have known. More over, the few that we ask to do it are no wiser on those things than ourselves. Do you think that the hundreds of people on capital hill know what the best course of action is on green energy? Do their one or 2 advisers? No they don't. The only thing they can do, is force it. Even if it isn't the most wise course of action.

Ha. I love this, people follow Misean view of economics without realizing that at it's cores it is against all statism and democracy as a whole. How would you like to be ruled over corporations and business interests?

In my early studies of economics I believed in Austrian economics, in the power of free unfettered capitalism to cure all ills, until I realized that capitalism possess no soul and could not work unless we were all robots and did not care about the welfare of others.

The key to good governance and national economy is the mixture of both, not the extremes of one over the other. There is a reason there is no Western nation that fully implements Austrian economics as national policies, it is wealth creationary but it is at odds with the welfare of the people under it.

Also why do people slam communism so much? You know I lived under communism, I could not buy much but I was assured a full higher education at the states expense, preventive health care (not the treatment based health care practiced in the west) and a job till the day I died. But it was also an extreme application with a concentrated politburo at its core.

This is why the best implementations favor mixed economies, look at Canada, high tax rates, national health care, controlled economy to an extent yet no bank failures, no bailout schemes and pretty well off financially... now if only Harper fucked off.

Michelle Malkin, the same person who went berserk because of the allegation that a scarf Rachel Ray wore in an ad, looked a bit like a kaffiyah when it didn't.

Chris must have been pissed by this Michelle quote “We knew Chris Matthews had no shame. Now we also know the king of TV ghouls has no souls.”

What about looking at George Bush's military service? Ha.