>> ^acidSpine:

Hmmm does anyone remember the very first trailer ages ago. I swear he turned gay after a car accident in that one. I wonder if they changed it cause it was offensive or something.


Getting kinda sick of people taking offense at movies. It's a movie get over it. Besides everyone knows car accidents make you gay...if you're hit from behind. ZING!

And it was then that Nyarlathotep came out of Egypt. Who he was, none could tell, but he was of the old native blood and looked like a Pharaoh. The fellahin knelt when they saw him, yet could not say why. He said he had risen up out of the blackness of twenty-seven centuries, and that he had heard messages from places not on this planet. Into the lands of civilisation came Nyarlathotep, swarthy, slender, and sinister, always buying strange instruments of glass and metal and combining them into instruments yet stranger. He spoke much of the sciences - of electricity and psychology - and gave exhibitions of power which sent his spectators away speechless, yet which swelled his fame to exceeding magnitude. Men advised one another to see Nyarlathotep, and shuddered. And where Nyarlathotep went, rest vanished; for the small hours were rent with the screams of a nightmare.

-- Howard Phillips Lovecraft, "Nyarlathotep"

"I help those who help themselves" - Zoidberg Jesus.
"Hey look, it's that guy you are." - Phillip J. Fry.
"I'm not a minor, you dumbass, you see a shovel in my hand?" - Eric Theodore Cartman

Tags for this video have been changed from 'so you think you can dance' to 'so you think you can dance, phillip chbeeb' - edited by kronosposeidon

>> ^Dignant_Pink:

jesus, phillip seymour hoffman is an underrated actor. i've never seen him have a bad performance, but for some reason i feel like he's not among the acting elite. the guy's amazing in every role he does.


PSH has been awesome for several years now. But he's no longer underrated.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000450/awards

jesus, phillip seymour hoffman is an underrated actor. i've never seen him have a bad performance, but for some reason i feel like he's not among the acting elite. the guy's amazing in every role he does.

>> ^brycewi19:

The man is a stand-up comedic genius.
And I don't throw that term around loosely.
Off the top of my head --> Bill Hicks, Andy Kaufman, Mitch Hedberg, Stephen Wright, Emo Phillips, and Dave Chappelle.


I don't know if I would throw Hedberg in with those guys. He was bombed out of his mind 99.999% of the time. I was at the State Theatre and watched that dude perform. A cup of vodka in one hand, a cup of orange juice in the other, his parents were in the audience and he kept forgetting his lines Couldn't come back on stage after someone heckled him. Funny guy but not a genius.

The man is a stand-up comedic genius.

And I don't throw that term around loosely.

Off the top of my head --> Bill Hicks, Andy Kaufman, Mitch Hedberg, Stephen Wright, Emo Phillips, and Dave Chappelle.

...so does Phillip Glass

>> ^Stormsinger:
::shudder::
So you want to force all those Sarah Palin types (you know, the ones that can't even -name- a magazine or newspaper, or find a polling booth without a personal guide) to cast votes on issues they can't even name, much less spell?
God save us. If you don't know what the issues are, you have no imposing your ignorance on the rest of the country...stay home on election day. Please!
I actually -would- support a literacy (or civics) test for voting, except that the people who make and administer the test will change, and sooner or later we'd end up with bigots and ideologists in charge. (If you doubt that, remember how our current Supreme Court tossed out nearly 100 years of precedent to give the speech of CEOs a virtually infinite megaphone.) Putting such control in those hands is even worse than being ruled by the opinions of morons.
You would also get all those disaffected folks who are reasonable, but don't really think anything will ever change. Forcing everyone to vote would probably not have a polarizing effect, it would more likely have a normalizing effect. If you want to work, or drive, send you kids to public school, get social security, or food stamps, then you should have to fulfill your social obligation, and take half a day every two years and vote. I fail to see how that is so scary.

>> ^Enzoblue:
Ok, I understand the room for corruption in a literacy test, but can someone explain to me what would be wrong with a test that made sure people where competent enough to know what the heck they were voting for and aren't just taking the side of the very last smooth talker that got them riled? I know there's tons of room for talk here, but I'm having a hard time being against a sheeple filter.

http://www.videosift.com/video/Wisdom-of-the-Crowds

::shudder::

So you want to force all those Sarah Palin types (you know, the ones that can't even -name- a magazine or newspaper, or find a polling booth without a personal guide) to cast votes on issues they can't even name, much less spell?

God save us. If you don't know what the issues are, you have no imposing your ignorance on the rest of the country...stay home on election day. Please!

I actually -would- support a literacy (or civics) test for voting, except that the people who make and administer the test will change, and sooner or later we'd end up with bigots and ideologists in charge. (If you doubt that, remember how our current Supreme Court tossed out nearly 100 years of precedent to give the speech of CEOs a virtually infinite megaphone.) Putting such control in those hands is even worse than being ruled by the opinions of morons.

>> ^dgandhi:
The unwashed masses in the US are equal part moderate/conservative, it just sounds good to the anti-democrat folks who are sure that it's stupid(read black or immigrant) voters that keep them out of power. Such a test will likely have no effect on elections unless it is used to unequally disenfranchise.
I suggest, instead, that we do the opposite, institute a fine(say $100) for NOT voting. Both parties clam to be the representatives of the "silent majority", let's see who's bluffing.>> ^Enzoblue:
Ok, I understand the room for corruption in a literacy test, but can someone explain to me what would be wrong with a test that made sure people where competent enough to know what the heck they were voting for and aren't just taking the side of the very last smooth talker that got them riled? I know there's tons of room for talk here, but I'm having a hard time being against a sheeple filter.

The unwashed masses in the US are equal part moderate/conservative, it just sounds good to the anti-democrat folks who are sure that it's stupid(read black or immigrant) voters that keep them out of power. Such a test will likely have no effect on elections unless it is used to unequally disenfranchise.

I suggest, instead, that we do the opposite, institute a fine(say $100) for NOT voting. Both parties clam to be the representatives of the "silent majority", let's see who's bluffing.>> ^Enzoblue:
Ok, I understand the room for corruption in a literacy test, but can someone explain to me what would be wrong with a test that made sure people where competent enough to know what the heck they were voting for and aren't just taking the side of the very last smooth talker that got them riled? I know there's tons of room for talk here, but I'm having a hard time being against a sheeple filter.

Dear Kevin Phillips,

How'd that little experiment work out for you, Dr. Frankenstein?

Sincerely,

The Country You Loved And Fucked.

This video has been declared a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof declared by gwiz665.