*promote *happy *like *yeah

Turds.

In reply to this comment by dag:
Cream always rises to the top. Or is it curds? I forget.

Definitely.

In reply to this comment by Lawdeedaw:
>> ^burdturgler:

I guarantee the cop in this situation felt like he was fighting for his life. More weight and in a police station or not, he was alone and the criminal definitely got the drop on him and was going for his gun, like you said. Scary situation.


So Fear would be a good channel? And I agree, he was shaken afterwards and you could see it. It is because everything turned out alright that I could breathe happily.

I guarantee the cop in this situation felt like he was fighting for his life. More weight and in a police station or not, he was alone and the criminal definitely got the drop on him and was going for his gun, like you said. Scary situation.

There's no comedy here. *nochannel *actionpack *law *fail
Not sure about the "crackhead" tag too. There's no context in this sift to suggest it.
I don't get the title either.

That was great. Loved Michelle's face and Obama's 'this is how you do it' expression at :21ish

And that's why I'm glad I saved these mushrooms.

That is blatantly racist speech. We don't have siftquisitions anymore, so take up your case with the admins.

In reply to this comment by bobknight33:
And you wonder why blacks are still call the n word.

"Answer" pages?

>> ^KnivesOut:

Hugging is fine.
"Just the tip" is right out.




*promote

>> ^NetRunner:

Heh, it's funny, I originally was going to say something along the lines of "this is silly / you obviously don't understand..." in my last comment but decided against it.
Again, I'll remind you that you came into this thread basically telling me that I shouldn't be making a fuss about this.
Now at least you're admitting there's a problem, but you're still hell bent on saying that blaming the people running the networks is off limits, as is suggesting any sort of regulation (e.g. it's false advertising to call Hannity "news"). I disagree with both of those assertions.
But the one solution you're supposedly okay with -- changing the minds of consumers -- was really what I was trying to do by posting the video and writing my comments saying "this is wrong".
At that stage, you got in my face, and have kept in it doggedly insisting I'm doing something wrong by saying they're doing something wrong!
Yes, I put the blame on the news organizations, because they're the ones doing it. Yes, consumers have the power to fix that with their own choices. Should my comment be "you stupid people out there are fucking up the news by still watching the news"?
I understand the entire mechanism you lay out. You don't seem to understand that I understand that, and have for a very long time. You don't seem to understand that it's not the only way the world has to work. It also won't ever change if you try to shout down the people who speak out and say "it doesn't have to be like this" by constantly saying "yes it does!"
Yes, I get that technically you're saying "well, maybe if you change human nature." But then you can't really change human nature. Especially if you go around telling anyone who tries that they just don't understand it's just the way the world is and you're not facing reality...


We just have a different take on it.

When I said "silly argument", I didn't mean that you were silly or that you didn't get it, I meant that I felt the argument was silly because I agree with almost everything that you're saying here. I'm not trying to get in your face. I guess I'm just a little cynical lately because I feel that the "problem" begins and ends with the consumer. There is a lot of corporate crap in the middle of that shit sandwich, but in the end it's the consumers eating it. They are the ones choosing to increase ratings and they are the ones who refuse to stop watching. I'm not trying to tell you not to make a fuss about anything. I'm just telling you how I see things.

I feel like I'm being misunderstood here. Try not to read that as "you are incapable of understanding", because that isn't what I'm saying.

I don't think you can "change the minds of consumers". I think most people just don't care. And yes, most of them are just oblivious. I randomly asked someone today (a statistical analyst) "Who is the Secretary of State" and their answer was "Rumsfeld". I also think that most people prefer to have "news" reflected back to them that confirms their views.

Forget it, I don't want to rehash my opinion . I just want you to know that I'm not saying "yes it does" have to be this way. "Yes, consumers have the power to fix that with their own choices." For me, that sums it up, in your own words.

Like I said, I'm not trying to win anything here, not trying to sway you or get in your face .. just telling you what I think and I apologize if you think I was getting in your face. I honestly believe we agree 99% of the way here .. but for me the balance of culpability leans towards the consumers not the broadcasters. In other words, I place more hope in people than I do corporations, and although I'm universally disappointed by both, more so by the people.

I'm sorry you took offense to what I had to say here. I never wanted that. I'm not trying to shout you down or tell you you don't understand reality, I'm telling you my opinion of how I perceive the reality of the situation. That's all. I'm going to just drop it because like I said, it's silly to argue with someone that I basically agree with.

It's interesting watching Shatner's mind work when he twists his wedding ring just before talking about his "wife" in the movie (11:36). I'm probably weird, but I just love stuff like that.

Oh .. and yeah, best Trek movie ever.

Congrats on the silver!

Have a silver star .. congrats!!

Prepare to be disappointed.