hehehehe... nice avatar.

This video [ http://videosift.com/video/Rush-Sure-is-Funny ] is a dupe of my dead video [ http://politics.videosift.com/video/Rush-Limbaugh-fans-look-and-act-as-you-would-expect ]. Sifty won't let me dupe it because I submitted the original.

What happened?

In reply to this comment by GoodAttorney:
The circle jerk here is unbearable to anyone with independence of thought. I hereby submit my resignation. God help you guys. The overall idea to this site is good, but the rules are ethnocentric and xenophobic and engender a hierarchy that breeds shit. I won't be joining the crazy dance.

I tried it but the problem persists. I'm sure it must firefox problem, because I just updated a few days ago and I've had other random glitches on other sites as well. Submitting through the link in the unsifted tab is just as easy as through the pup-up menu, so it's not really a big deal. Thanks for your help.

In reply to this comment by lucky760:
Hmm. ^That does sound like a Firefox issue (or some other kind that's not a server issue) because it seems to be working for everyone else. Try deleting all your videosift cookies and doing a hard reload.

Get out of my subconscious, flea bag!

In reply to this comment by schmawy:
Because *quality would have felt weird.

In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
*promote

Thought you might enjoy this Utah themed photoshop feature at SomethingAwful: http://www.somethingawful.com/d/comedy-goldmine/utah-reckless-miscarriage.php?page=1

Thanks

In reply to this comment by Fusionaut:
*promote

So..... because 25 people died in the seventies, vaccines should not be mass produced and distributed by the government?

You must admit that as arguments go, this is pretty weak sauce, not to mention a fairly dull-witted position for a professional doctor to take. The problem is that he does not approach medical issues with the mind of a doctor, but rather with the mind of a partisan politician, conforming to a strict set of anti-government principals that are indifferent to the general well being of the public.

In reply to this comment by GeeSussFreeK:
That he doesn't oppose them, but being as they can cause harm potentially, they are best left to be negotiated by a doctor and the patient. The third party of the government isn't really needed as the side affects of certain medicines can endanger life and limb. And more over, just like pot and drugs, I should have a right over my body which includes what I don't want in it.

Personally, I'm all vaccinated, but a government crack down on putting stuff in me would be a pretty extreme thing. Though, maybe I missed your point entirely.

In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
How so?

In reply to this comment by GeeSussFreeK:
This is also relivant

In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
>> ^Crosswords:
>> ^BoneyD:
Who was the Republican? Ron Paul?

Ron Paul would never vote for government run/backed anything.

Not exactly true, but he would never of voted for this. Let us not forget he is Dr. Paul and not Esq. Paul, as a tried and true doctor, his words should carry a bit more weight than his lawyer and lobbyist counterparts.


If Ron Paul's opposition to vaccines is not enough to convince you that he is a quack, then nothing will.

How so?

In reply to this comment by GeeSussFreeK:
This is also relivant

In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
>> ^Crosswords:
>> ^BoneyD:
Who was the Republican? Ron Paul?

Ron Paul would never vote for government run/backed anything.

Not exactly true, but he would never of voted for this. Let us not forget he is Dr. Paul and not Esq. Paul, as a tried and true doctor, his words should carry a bit more weight than his lawyer and lobbyist counterparts.


If Ron Paul's opposition to vaccines is not enough to convince you that he is a quack, then nothing will.

That's one nice looking color combo you've got going on there. I'm going to have to make that permanent on my member page.

I guess I misunderstood you. I thought you were trying to make the point that consumerism was an effective form of democracy. I earnestly concede your point that businesses without business go out of business, though I wouldn't call it 'bringing down' which is a term that implies deliberate intent.

Corporations do care about small towns. Walmart is famous for setting up shop in small towns and putting local businesses out of business. In many places, Walmart is the only shopping option. When a business as large as Walmart comes to town, they can usually strongarm local governments into tax breaks and beneficial infrastructure projects. I only know of one case where Walmart was prevented from building a store, and that was in the small town of Los Angeles. I sure hope you are right about Walmart, but I only see people becoming more dependent on Walmart as they ravage the underclass.

Democratic government is people power by definition, even when the government you elect fails to stand up to powerful financial interests. I too am disillusioned about the current state of our state, but what gives me hope is that more and more people are becoming aware of these problems through increased access to information and technology.

Despite my screenname, I don't believe things are getting worse. I believe things have always been bad, and that it is only our increased access to information and communication that gives us the perception that things are getting worse. This new awareness (potentially) gives us the opportunity to diagnose problems and (hopefully) fix them. I believe the shift in the electorate from Bush towards Obama is evidence of this, and whether or not his administration has the power to make the changes they promised, he will at least make it easier for the next president.

This is why I see hope in darkness, and the will for change in our dystopian present.

Of course you can respond. I don't want a concession I haven't earned.

The failure of Circuit City (or any of the others on your list) has had no meaningful impact on reducing corporate abuse. Circuit City was replace by Best Buy, which treats its employees worse than its predecessor. So in this case, 'wallet democracy' has actually made things worse.

This is because "wallet democracy" isn't based on intelligence, wisdom, morality or any kind of desire for social justice, it's based on convenient location, ad campaigns, low prices and blue light specials. These out-of-whack priorities have no real chance at achieving anything positive, and usually end up doing the opposite, by empowering the worst offenders, like Wal*Mart. I've not shopped in a Wal*Mart in over a decade, but still they thrive, despite my furious wallet. I guess the people have spoken, and working class dignity is an inferior candidate to low low prices.

'State's Rights' is another favorite corporate think tank meme, for the simple and obvious reason that corporations would rather face small enemies than large ones. Corporations have vast resources that they can use to bribe desperate states, to pit states against each other, and to punish states that don't toe the line, among other things.

I don't see local politicians being any less susceptible to lobbying; or local voters being any less susceptible to expensive ad campaigns, in fact, small town folk might be more suceptible to the glitz and glamor of corporate favor than their seasoned national counterparts. A few of the larger metropolitan areas might be organized enough to make a stand, but I can't see it realistically living up to your expectations.

Beyond all that, do you ever use the local control you already have?

-Have you ever attended a city council meeting?
-Do you research your local candidates in any depth?
-Do you know the names of local politicians, state senators, state congressmen, local judges and/or city council members?

Anyway, I like the old Clinton quote that goes something like 'there is nothing wrong with America that can't be fixed by what is right with America'. For better or for worse, our country is 'our' country, and as long as it remains our country, we have the ability to change it. It's easy to feel down about our country, because we are getting our asses kicked by a very small, but wealthy and powerful segment of our population. If enough of us can figure this out, and are mad enough to do something about it, we win. It's a big if.

(hahaha, nice dick joke)

Can you give me a meaningful example of consumers bringing down a corporation by "wallet voting"? Of course not, because it is a ridiculous notion. Consumerism doesn't challenge corporate power, it increases it. At best, consumerism has the power to stop Coca-Cola from marketing a new cola that tastes like ass. Consumerism doesn't build schools or bridges. Consumerism is reactive, not proactive.

In a democracy, the power rests in the hands of the people, by way of 1 person: 1 vote. It was a populist response to older forms of government based around wealth, power and nobility. It is a testament to the success of democracy that so many now can take it for granted. Government power is people power (read=your power). Limiting the power of government limits the power of the people, and if you are interested in stopping corrupt corporations, public government is the only thing big enough and powerful enough to get that done.

It is very true that our democracy has been subverted in many ways, but through democracy, we can change this. I agree with you that apathy is one of the big enemies here, but I see much reason for hope. With increased access to information, the public has become much more aware of corporate abuse, and has become much more politically involved. Despite what Obama may or may not do in his 4-8 years in office, I think it is significant that he was able to break through the corporate propaganda and win on a very pro-people platform.

Last point, one of the great red herrings in this debate is that of 'size'. Notions about 'big' or 'small' government are completely arbitrary and meant to distract you from the more important qualities that you wisely mentioned: efficiency and effectiveness.

Government should not be shoehorned into some arbitrary concept of big or small. Government should be just the right size in needs to be, to be both efficient and effective. Getting rid of valuable social services in order to make the government smaller only makes the it less efficient and less effective.

Democratic (not the party) government is people power. Without a strong government, there is nothing to stop corporations from taking over, which is why they are leading the charge to make government small.

Without democracy, individual consumers would powerless to make any kind of significant political changes, hence the push for 'individual liberty' at the expense of social liberty; and all that stuff about "markets self-regulating" is little more than a religious mantra, because there is no real world evidence that suggests such a thing is even remotely true.

The corporations have been very effective at drawing a wedge between the people and their government. They have actually fooled some of us into thinking things would get better if we were to give our power away. That's a mistake we only have to make once.



In reply to this comment by xxovercastxx:
I wonder what would happen if the government had less power? Seems to me that corporations get all their power by buying it from the government. If the government had no power to buy, would the corporations be effectively neutered?

I suppose the obvious counter-argument is that there would be nothing to keep them in check, but that's not true. The consumer would be (and always has been) the control. The problem, as always, is that the average Joe doesn't care. Very few people are willing to boycott an abusive company.

Whatever political ideology you subscribe to, I feel they will all be undone by apathetic citizens. Nothing will change unless the people change it.

In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
Have you ever honestly questioned your belief in capitalism?
[...snip...]

Nearly everything is pitch-corrected these days, not just the tone deaf Anthony Kiedis' of the world. It's too bad, because those slight imperfections can add a lot of beauty and humanity.

In reply to this comment by Payback:
Just jealous she doesn't require autotuning.