He is a misogynist.

How exactly did Ann get "owned" in this video, anyway?

You say Tomato, I say anti-semitism.

http://www.foreskinman.com/no2panel20.htm

I want to punch this guy in the face for being so bad at video games

Reminds me of Cruachan

I was secretly afraid that Casey would turn out to be just as big a prick as Ritchard obviously is.

I'm very happy he seems like a pretty reasonable kid, especially everything he's gone through.

The video clip could use a little less Lifetime Channel music though.

>> ^ravioli:

Please explain, I'm curious...


Basically, it's better to just manufacture new plastic bottles than to recycle them. Takes less energy / costs less. Recycled plastics have a limited market, and the "lack of landfill" issue is a myth, if you're living in America.

The materials for plastics come from parts of the petroleum spectrum that can't really be used for anything else, so if you hear people talking about how plastics are going to cause us to run out of gas, do us all a favor and laugh at them.

It's a different situation for aluminum cans, though.

Don't take my word (or anyone else's word) for it though. Do your own research and make up your own mind - just make sure to include both hippie sources and non-hippie sources in your research.

>> ^ravioli:

It would feel good to get that kind of reaction every time you do a good deed!


What good deed?

Recycling plastic is a pointless waste of time.

>> ^Drachen_Jager:

"Violence doesn't solve anything." is one of the dumbest sentences ever uttered.
Violence has settled more disputes in the history of mankind than all other forces combined.


Heh, yeah, it's not called "The Last Argument of Kings" for nothing.

All the adults condemning Casey's retaliation are completely insane. Any adult who'd been punched several times would have been exonerated in any court of law for tossing the guy on his noggin and walking away.

I worked in the video game industry for several years. It's not as bad as everyone makes it out to be. It is a business, but I still really enjoyed it.

My most well known mod was done entirely on my own... CustomTF. Labor of love that became the biggest mod for Quake, but I couldn't have done it without my experience in the industry.

The next time some wussy tells you that "Violence is never the answer", show them this video.

Sometimes, a kid needs to get his ass kicked to learn a valuable lesson.

Casey was acting in self-defense, and would have gotten off in any reasonable court of law. Why should we hold our kids to different standards (that they can *never* fight, even in self-defense) that we don't hold to adults?

Yes, I'm sure that an anti-free market author will give us a fair opinion on Reagan.

Good show, Videosift.

Serious voice is serious.

But really - these companies need to pay for any damage they cause. This is simple liability.

That said, natural gas really does make a lot of sense from an energy perspective, and fracking is how you get a lot of natural gas. If they can afford to pay people $100k for their gas rights, they can pay to fix a busted well.


Also, protip: Home Depot will test your well water for you, for free. Obviously, don't trust testing done by someone with an agenda.

>> ^sirex:

>> ^ShakaUVM:

Olbermann should take his own fucking advice on "vitriolic rhetoric", but that would require a higher level of cognitive function than he's capable of. He's an amazing fucking hypocrite.


I can only guess you missed the "i apologise for and repudiate any act or anything in my past that may have even inadvertantly encouraged violence".
....and i'm guessing that you missed it because you didn't watch it.

I watched the whole thing. I'm not directly talking about inciting people to violence, but using vitriolic words to create an "atmosphere of hate" that has him so up in arms. Olbermann is one of the angriest guys on television, so hearing these words come out of his mouth against vitriol was especially amusing to me.

The comment above me, for example, shows Sarah Palin brewing a hot cup of tea, which indicates they're unaware or uncaring the worst hatred and vitriol these days comes from people like Olbermann or Matthews, not weepy bastards like Glenn Beck.

This from the guy that spews hatred and nominates people for the "Worst Person in the World?"

I'd love to see him take responsibility for the shooting, but he's too stupid to see that he's as guilty of inciting violence as anybody was for this shooting. (Not that anyone actually was - the shooter wasn't incited by anyone.)

Olbermann should take his own fucking advice on "vitriolic rhetoric", but that would require a higher level of cognitive function than he's capable of. He's an amazing fucking hypocrite.

Yeah, while I understand why creationists like ID (as a stealth attack), it confuses me that they'd subscribe to a theory that is wholly incompatible with creationism.

In reply to this comment by NetRunner:
>> ^ShakaUVM:

Wonderfully interesting, but it actually makes the case for ID instead of evolution. Think about it -- the code has a teleological goal set to make clocks. As the machines evolve, they will always eventually end up as people (sorry, clocks) even though the underlying processes appear to be random.

Not that you're really around anymore to respond to me, but you're hitting on a point that really confuses me about the people who seem upset about and/or opposed to the theory of evolution.

That is to say, there's nothing about evolution that's incompatible with the idea of having a divine designer, provided you're willing to concede exactly the ground you do -- that the Designer didn't draw up the blueprint for human beings specifically, so much as the Designer drew up a universe with natural laws that inevitably lead to something like us coming about.

To some degree I understand creationism more than I do "intelligent design". Creationism is clearly based on some desire to interpret Biblical texts as some sort of literal, historical account of how things came to be as they are. I don't understand what niche "intelligent design" fills, either from the POV of scientific reasoning (e.g. does it provide for better prediction of any phenomena?), nor from a theological one, especially since it's supposedly not a theological artifice.

To someone like me, it seems like its only purpose is to try to create political pretext for teaching students religion in science classrooms.