No transformers mention... wtf...

The correct term for this kinda guy is not doofus, but douchebag.

thanks for the upvote, imstellar. But I don't know if I'm an advocate of capitalism. I've voted for socialist party candidates here in the US, even. Not sure what I'm an advocate of today though..

I enjoyed this video but the lecturer asked the TED people if they were liberal/conservative on social issues only. Why? What about economic issues? For me the economic issues of the world are far, far more important than social ones. I simply don't believe any of the great conflicts of the world were fought over social issues. Please refer to Jared Diamond's book "Collapse"..

I also found it surprising that left-wingers are supposedly anti-group and anti-loyalty. This flies in the face of pro-socialism and pro-democracy left-wing movements. Socialism and democracy are largely positive words amongst the left-wing, and both require pro-group and pro-loyalty thinking, much more so than the "every man for himself" capitalist right-wing views. It's the Republicans who are trying to "drown the government in the bathtub" in the hopes that individual Americans, each a capitalist maverick, will benefit society through their own greed. It's the Republicans who are the Destroyers here, dismantling the New Deal, and crushing government benefits, and cheering on globalization and capitalism.

Meanwhile, socialism and democracy are all about majority rule. Groups of people. Huge masses of people. Socialism and democracy were revolutionary concepts in the past, but today they are often seen as obsolete. Please refer to the book "It Didn't Happen Here: Why Socialism failed in the US".

And in a democracy, even if your team loses the election, you must remain loyal to the nation due to the force of the law. You must pay taxes to wars you oppose for example. In a more capitalist society, taxes might be almost entirely abolished, and if you don't support a war, you wouldn't pay for it. Heck, the military would be non-existent, replaced by mercenary groups..

And are American liberals really more tolerant than the conservatives? If so, in what ways? Most American liberals are highly critical of the non-Western world, usually citing human rights issues ("human rights" having been formulated almost entirely by Westerners by the way). Roughly 80% of the world does not exist in the West and they are all condemned regularly in Western liberal circles, from what I've seen. Meanwhile, Western right-wingers condemn the non-Westerners for other reasons, namely economic ones. "The world isn't capitalist enough, not rich enough, not smart enough. Too lazy." Simply put, most Westerners are "Western Supremacists", regardless of liberal or conservative affiliation.

Here's more food for thought. America, the most capitalist (and supposedly the most right-wing) of the white Western nations, is also the MOST diverse racially and culturally (but perhaps the LEAST politically diverse.. there are only TWO parties.) Meanwhile, northern Europe countries, the most socialist, and supposedly the most left-wing, are also the LEAST diverse racially and culturally, but appear to be far more politically diverse (far more parties in parliamentary systems). Which region of the world is more "open", knowing this?

I don't know where I stand on violence for political change. Over the years I've come to believe that much of the Bush administration are criminals, and that few, if any of them, will be punished for their serious crimes. Claims that the administration is full of criminals is incredibly popular amongst this website, and somewhat popular in the public at large. In fact, saying Bush is a criminal himself isn't going to be very offensive in the country at large, I feel. Most will agree that Bush will go unpunished for all of this, not seeing a day in prison.

This all leads to a weird situation where people are saying violence is not the answer to the crimes of the Bush administration, while at the same time believing violence is obviously required for police and law to be maintained. Criminals can only be punished through violence. Law can only be maintained through violence. There's nothing controversial about this.

It's really frustrating to think that so many criminals in the White House will exit their careers there without a single ounce of punishment. In fact, nearly all of them will probably go on to make large sums of money in the business world. So, they will be rewarded for their crimes.. by us, the consumers.

So, to sum up, this is what people often think. 1. Bush = Criminal. 2. Violence is required to punish crime. 3. BUT, violence against Bush... NO.

It's just not consistent. Now.. violence against Bush being suicidal, therefore impossible. That's logical. But saying violence against a criminal Bush is just entirely wrong, no matter what... that just makes no sense unless you believe police officers should be removed from every society on earth. Then and only then is such a belief consistent and logical.

And please don't confuse the word "violence" with "murder" "killing" "explosions" or what not. The police use violence, aka "the force of the law", to keep order on a daily basis. It's totally necessary.

This sounds ridiculous, but (although again, if Bush is in fact a criminal, then it is perfectly reasonable) I personally hope Bush is apprehended by some group of people and punished severely for his crimes at some point in the future. At the very least a life term in some kind of prison. Preferably apprehended by agents of the government, but if not, that's OK too.

I took a Women in Media class and this game was featured for one of the lectures. It was odd, the teacher suggested the game had a massive female player base, which left me totally baffled. It just seems so unlikely. It's sci-fi. There are no people in the game, just lifeless machines. Not a single woman in the classroom had even heard of the game, and none had played it. I think she got her statistics mixed up or something. She must've meant WoW or Second Life or something.

Anyway... for the space MMO we've all been waiting for, I think Jumpgate Evolution is where to look. Joystick-centric gameplay with plenty of sweet Star Wars style action. Yum!

lol i thought about makin somethin like this for my audio for video class.

In 2015... the United States of America is renamed the United States of Obama.

larry david is in the background

laughed tilled i cried LOL

Scott Kurtz of PVP!!! Cool!

I took a few criminal justice courses in college. 30% of all black men in the country are either in prison, going to prison, or have been in prison. In Washington, DC, 50% of all black men have or will have a criminal background. The likelihood of a black man stealing a white woman's purse in an elevator is far, far higher than if it were a white man. I'm surprised so many comments state that there is little to no racial bias going on in such situations, considering the gigantic gap in criminality between whites and blacks.

Simply put, if whites and blacks had identical, or even remotely similar criminality rates, then, and only then, would I possibly believe that white women had identical "purse defending" behavior around both groups of men.
Until that day, I'm not buying it. (This Scientific American article on Buried Prejudice is pretty good: http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=buried-prejudice-the-bigot-in-your-brain&print=true)

I also thought it was clear that the video is an angry, and yes, racist response to racism the creator feels exists. That's kinda the point. What goes around comes around.

FYI, one of the speakers in the video is from ANSWER, which is a Communist front of some kind, last I heard. Not saying this invalidates everything in the video, though.

WTF! Mike Wallace is a crook.

>> ^schmawy:
I'm saw this in the theater, and I can't be the only one who saw it as an open criticism of the current administration's policies in the TWAT (The War Against Terror).


In the bonus features for the Blu-Ray I saw of this, there was some mention about something like this. I forgot the specifics though. The composer (Hans Zimmer?) said something about the song being connected to modern day politics and economics.

I saw this guy in the documentary for the "Children of Men" movie.