i could watch this show and nothing but for hours and hours and hours

fake. i could make CGI like that too.

they were playing one of their songs from the show Rock of Ages. saw this happen live. watching him get clotheslined by a set piece was the best part of the show.

let's keep solidifying those gender stereotypes kids...

ok sallyjune, let me see if i've got this straight:

all politicians are the same, and care not at all for america.
the news media is designed to keep us arguing over issues in black and white.
the news media's design is part of what keeps politicians in power.
all americans are guilty of being duped by said media.
all americans are guilty of allowing said politicians to keep power.
arguing over issues in black and white is what keeps politicians in power.

therefore:
stop arguing over issues the news media has told you to.
stop using money.
learn to farm or build things.
watch world change around you.

????

this is not so much offensive as just dumb. i could understand if your answer was to debate issues that DO matter such as the structure of the american news media or the electoral system in this country, or perhaps what it is in american culture that makes people so willing to give up their freedoms. this is not your answer though. your answer is actually the same as those you deem moronic. you want to stick your head in the sand and live your life simply to make life "comfortable and enjoyable for you and yours."

this is exactly how we got where we are in the first place. that is exactly what the news media and politicians require in order to keep people frightened and willing to give up their freedoms.

welcome to the majority.

i'm in the middle of reading this book right now, and i can tell you that the entire thing is written with an eye toward making the reader giggle as many times per page as possible. her footnoted asides are some of the best parts.

i'm pretty sure this was part of the premise of Michael Moore's "Sicko". glad to see Olbermann's paying attention now, anyway.

>> ^Morganth:
Hitchens makes an excellent argument against this straw man Jesus he's set up. "Take no care for the morrow" would be almost completely against what the biblical Jesus taught. Why would Jesus have healed countless sick people if he knew they were going to die anyways? The idea that metaphysical or spiritual is more important than physical or that the material world is evil is Greek philosophy, not a Biblical one.
Christianity is a faith that believes Jesus came to redeem all creation (the physical AND the spiritual). Christians don't think they're going to be just spirits floating around, but rather that they'll receive new bodies. Hitchens is just shaking his fist at a faith he made up.


1) the idea of the physical being inferior to the point of being "evil" is an Eastern religious/philosophical one, not Hellenic. Greek philosophy, if one takes Plato as representative of the entirety of that school, only held that perfection was not possible in the physical, but that is not a moral judgment. Ancient Hellenic religious traditions held that the gods were full of the same imperfections as humanity.

2) you would be hard-pressed to find a Christian dogma that holds that the dead are given new PHYSICAL bodies in the afterlife. if one takes their doctrine directly from the bible, hell is described as being a place away from the sight of god and without his grace, which is supposed to be eternal torment. being given a physical body in heaven would actually run contrary to christian teaching since it would allow for physical pleasures - which are generally deemed as base and even sinful on earth - in the afterlife.

which leads me to
3) presenting the miracles jesus is said to have performed in the healing of the sick as evidence for his divinity or the historicity of his person does not help your case a whit as that is one of the major points AGAINST his alleged divinity. it is a well-known problem in christian theology that while jesus taught that the earthly was base and that the afterlife he would create for all mankind was idyllic beyond description, he went to endless trouble to heal the sick and even went so far as resurrecting the dead. attempts to resolve this have only caused further arguments over the fate of lazarus after his resurrection and whether life of the soul after death would be granted, retroactively, to those who had lived before the time of jesus.

all of which is merely to say: sit down. your interpretation of christian doctrine of the afterlife is, at least, equally as made up. Hitchens merely has the edge on you of having his being scripturally correct.

>> ^Chaucer:
Keith Olberdumb is an uneducated fuck nut. His rants shows he does no research whatsoever. He just spews crap from his mount. At least do a little research.
http://www.texassecede.com/faq.htm


seriously? i have to hope you're trying to be ironic calling someone uneducated using grammar like that, not to mention the whole "fuck nut" thing.

also, that website talks about "bipartisan despots in washington" expanding debt and deficits and taking away citizens' rights as if it wasn't a former texas governor who was responsible for the last 8 years of that. very cute.

read "The Diamond Age" by Neal Stephenson for continuation of this story, and because it's an awesome book.

see this video for the continuation. nice, nice.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
I have no problem with a gay chick standing up in the MAP and saying that she thinks gay marriage is cool. Why? Because I'm not threatened by other people's opinions. By comparison, the neo-libs & gay lobbyists collapse into puddles of intolerance, fear, and hatred when someone says or does something they disagree with.


perhaps that's because a dissenting view of gay rights usually involves bigotry of some stripe or another? or perhaps that's just more gay propaganda, that equal rights means equal for everyone?

no joke, that bar is on 55th st and 9th ave in new york city. my dance company has a thing for their margaritas, which are huge. i have fallen, rather than walked, out of that place more times than i care to remember. true story.

also, that wig makes dan rather look at least 30 days younger.

this is another example of the "free speech" issue that came up in this video about evangelical groups proselytizing in the military. the problem that many of these religious groups seem to have is a lack of understanding of the difference between free speech for an individual, or group of individuals, and free speech for a religious institution.

to the best of my knowledge, every mormon in utah could go to california and campaign against prop 8 and that would not be a problem, but as soon as an institution like the mormon church involves itself and its money to back said effort it becomes a religious institution acting to directly influence the working of the state, which is not legal. this is why in both of these videos, and in many many other examples of religious groups attempting to have laws changed in america, members of these groups are always trying to paint themselves as committed individuals rather than members of a very large, organized, and well-funded institution.

i believe this is the case, though someone please correct me if i'm wrong.

*discard