Now replace all the mentions of "Obama" with "Trump", in this video.

"Trump" bringing class and dignity to the White House, "Trump" inspiring people all across the globe, "Trump" connecting with kids when visiting schools, etc.

Yeah... does not compute...

He's still got a week to pardon Snowden.

C'mon Obama... do it. If for no other reason than it will piss Trump off so much.

@ChaosEngine -- don't you think Putin would love for him to be pardoned? Let DT do it....

Jimmy carters moment is when he realized that Obama's now a worst president and not him.

He could have been a great president, lifting up his people with encouragement instead he just help them create divisions towards the rich and whites VS black and put people more welfare instead of creating jobs.

Don't hold your breath waiting for fascists to do good things. If the nigger prince were capable of moral human behaviour, he'd already have pardoned the hundreds of thousands of innocent people he kidnapped and falsely imprisoned for drug offences.

@dag What is the policy on allowing the n- word, used as a pejorative rather than an historical sense, on the Sift?

Ad hominen attacks can lead to being banned, either temporarily to cool off or permanently if lessons aren't learned.

An attack against all black people, to me, is pretty egregious behavior.

As Homeland Security says, if you see something, say something.

I am saying something.

how very stasi of you BB2

@ChaosEngine
never going to happen.
the obama administration has been waging war against whistleblowers for 8 years.prosecuting more whistleblowers using the archaic "espionage act of 1917" to pursue and prosecute more whistleblowers than any other president in americas history COMBINED.

unless there is a massive public outcry to force the executive branch to pardon snowden,it is never going to happen.

but as long as we are making a wishlist to the fairy godmother of shit-that-is-never-going-to-happen,let me add to that list:

1.repeal the NDAA of 2017,which is an addon to the NDAA of 2012,which is a simply continuation of the MCA of 2006 (look em up folks,those "rights" you claim to have are really mere suggestion due to these abominations.

2.pursue and indict ALL wall street players who knowingly engaged in fraud and collapsed the global economy.strip them of all begotten gains to pay back the american people,and throw them in the most vile of maximum prisons (hopefully with a bunkmate nicknamed 'anal destroyer").

3.recind ALL expanded powers that the bush administration enacted (thanks to neocons addington and woo) and which the obama administration actually expanded even further,and NOW trump will be executive over the most powerful executive branch in american history .(this would be a nice one eh?).

4.have the DEA and ATF actually honor obamas original statement that his administration would not pursue federal law in regards to marijuana,mandated by referendums by the citizens of those states (to which he had promptly disregarded,and raided local dispenseries).

5.reduce americas prison population(2.4 million,largest on the planet) by pardoning the non-violent drug offenders,and disallowing companies like nike and apple to abuse prison labor (slave labor).

6.stop the practice of military intervention at the behest of corporations to exploit the poorest and most vulnerable.

7.stop the practice of regime change at the behest..oh this is becoming familiar...corporations wishing to exploit the poorest and most vulnerable for their resources.

8.and could we possibly,maybe..stop with targeted drone strikes? a.k.a "assassinations". how a constitutional law professor reconciles his law pedigree with his "value target tuesday" i.e:murder just boggles my mind.

man,i should stop.my wishlist is becoming to long..and depressing.

i voted this video up because i will not ignore that obama did some good,and even some great things during his presidency,but i also will not ignore his very disturbing failures.

and there are a LOT of disturbing failures.

so i will sit and hold hands and sing kumbaya as we all remember our very smart president,but let us not forget..this very same president expanded an executive branch that trump will be taking over the reigns very soon.

and on that note,i have to give him a failing grade.

@enoch

The Stasi worked in secrecy. I am in the open. And I left it to dag.

We have a pretty good community here. Unlike reddit. Unlike 4chan. Unlike places that allow "free speech" that drives out people who can't stomach despicable behavior. And we have it because we have community standards and a benevolent dictator with a light touch and a willingness to step in.

I'll speak up for this community. I think it is worth it.

It is the Nazis and the KKK who used derogatory language to demean and marginalize huge swaths of the population.

Are you going to call out the person who is acting like a Nazi/KKK member? Since you were so quick to call out me?

Or are you going to stand by and let it pass. Do nothing. Say nothing. Act as if what was said was nothing.

Let me be me. Let dag be dag. And you be the person you want to be.

I'm happy with me. Hell, I'm proud of me.

@bareboards2
pure and utter sophistry.

and i resent the fact that you slyly attempt to imply that i will just sit back and remain silent to injustice.

when i feel quite confident my records on this site prove the exact opposite.i have vociferously and aggressively taken on those who would bully,berate and belittle anyone who would voice their opinion.

i believe i have come to YOUR defense on more than one occasion.

what i found disturbing in your comment and maybe i should clarify is this "As Homeland Security says, if you see something, say something."

this is LITERALLY what was posted on almost every open venue in east germany.

and for you to tacitly excuse this statement by dismissively stating that "the stasi operated in secret".as somehow being evidence of your own righteousness belies an ignorance of just how oppressive and fearful those people were living in those conditions.

so you are morally superior because you openly called to out,and i quote "benevolent dictator with a light touch",and did not do so in private?
THIS is your justification?
THIS is the evidence you present to me to...what? exactly?

if you truly feel that you have somehow struck a blow for justice and taken a stand for moral integrity,then i submit that you have no clue what free speech really entales,nor do you understand the implications when we,as a community,start calling in the big daddy in the sky every time someone writes an offensive potty/racist or bigoted word.

and just LOOK how you consumed @gorillaman 's comment.
you made no reference to his salient point,but rather focused on ONE thing:nigger prince.

now was this appropriate?
taken singularly i would have to agree with you.
no..it is not appropriate.

but when we take our understandings of @gorillaman,who has been a contributing sifter for over 10 years,and consider his humor..which is dark and incredibly dry (like sahara dry),then with this context added to the mix,we can conclude that he was probably making a joke...you are certainly within your rights to find that joke in poor taste,and with this community,you are also within your rights (and even encouraged) to take @gorillaman to task for his poor taste.

but instead you called for big daddy in the sky to bring the hammer of justice down,and punish this dirt potty mouthed racist.his crime?
racist verbiage.

no consideration of who was writing it.
no consideration of his history on this site,which you openly admitted is a community.
you just..focused..on..the..word.

and then you preen like a peacock thinking somehow you have struck a blow of righteousness?

please sister.....you accomplished nothing except to put dag in an awkward position,and came across as a self righteous moralizer.

when you simply could have done what other sifters here actually DID.
you downvote his comment.
and if you felt so inclined,and it appears you ARE so inclined,directly call @gorillaman out for his poor choice of verbiage.

look BB,
i actually find you to be a sweetheart,with a huuuuge propensity for empathy and compassion,but every time i engage with you my sphincter tightens up like it is preparing for a colonoscopy.there is this ever-present apprehension that my words will not be taken with humanity that they are written,or the open honesty i am trying to convey.

i am sure that if we were actually sitting in a cafe,sipping that delicious coffee you guys are so proud of, i would not experience this anxiety when engaging with you,but it seems EVERY time i disagree with something you post,or an opinion i may take issue with,i offend you in some manner.

you ..and i am sure this is not done on purpose..make it incredibly difficult to disagree with something you post,because i always feel i have hurt your feelings somehow.

real or imagined...i am just being honest here.i always approach any interaction with you as if i am walking on eggshells,underlined with landmines.

i am simply disagreeing with you here.
calling for a ban on gorillaman because of a joke made in poor taste,while simultaneously disregarding his contributions to this site,and taking his personality into consideration,is simply an over-zealous reaction and in no way deserves the attention of dag.

because if gorillaman deserves to be banned for an offensive phrase,than i should be banned as well.

free speech is just that...free.
of course we are free to ridicule that speech.
yaaay free speech!

@enoch

Here's the deal, my friend.

The internet does not come with a tone of voice. You might consider that the way you read my words are not the way they are said in my head (cue to your cafe analogy.)

And I can't read tone of voice either. I supply it. And I have bodily reactions to you, too, my friend.

We both do this because both of us are a bit difficult, and both of us are supplying tone of voice that makes the words on the page different.

I'm not going to apologize for what I wrote. I meant what I said. Every word. And there is nothing wrong with what I wrote. You didn't like it for your own reasons, but there is nothing intrinsically wrong with anything I said.

I will say that you have supplied a context to gorillaman that he could have supplied himself with the sarcasm button. He didn't do that. So was he kidding? I don't know.

You assume that anyone who reads his post has the extensive knowledge of his motives and personality. Newcomers won't. And here is an embarrassing admission -- although I too have been on this site for ten years, I don't have a sense of who gorillaman is. Sorry, gorillaman. I just haven't been paying attention to you. This is a character flaw on my part, also, since you seem intent on listing my flaws. I am pretty much in my head, and until there have been repeated interactions, I don't really take in people. I am selfish that way.

About the Homeland Security remark. Gorillaman was given the benefit of the doubt for his motives, he was given context. I assumed that I would be accorded the same gift.

So let me give context.

I am repulsed by the term Homeland Security. I was repulsed the first time I heard it, I am repulsed every time I hear it.

So when I take on racism, homophobia, sexism, xenophoabia, or any garden variety hatred, I invoke Homeland Security to protect us from what is the real threat. Not scary brown skinned people. But the people amongst us who truly are a threat to our way of life.

My mistake -- and it was a mistake -- was to assume that people get the connection. Because of context. Which of course isn't good enough.

I like my jab at the concept of Homeland Security. But it obviously isn't working. I'll have to rework it, make it clear. give it context.

Because I agree with you there, my friend. Homeland Security evokes the Third Reich and it turns my stomach. Every time.

What @gorillaman said was wrong and hopefully he would apologize.


However according what you said below you are not for free speech? Is that a good thing?

Does that not make you more like the Nazi, KKK and the left or Right who demean swaths of people?

In an open society you have to be able to tolerate the good, bad and ugly other wise we end up with political correctness and Social Justice Warriors.

This has become more layered than a baklava....we're now talking about one group's intolerance for another group's intolerance of the first group's intolerance.
It's like a Russian nesting doll of intolerance!

Intolerance is a virtue.

With all love and respect to my friends in this thread, I wasn't joking and I don't apologise. Barack Obama is a subhuman nigger and he should be strung up to die like a nigger.

When you participate in the sort of widespread oppression and generalised evil that he has, both as an individual and a member of an unabashedly fascist government; when you, say, lock free people in cages because you don't approve of the things they choose to put in their own bodies; when you commit those crimes against humanity, you lose any claim you might have had to be considered a part of our species.

So he's a nigger - as you would expect him to be, plebiscite systems won't elect human beings while humanity is in the extreme minority in every country in the world.

The fact that you're all less concerned with the hundreds of thousands of real lives this megalomaniacal nazi turd-demon has destroyed (what a guy) than you are with a little name-calling, speaks to the total moral degeneracy of today's faux-progressive orthodoxy.

@enoch, you seem to be under the impression that you or I or anyone else has some kind of right to say whatever the fuck we feel like saying on the sift.

We don't. This isn't some public forum, it's a privately run website and @dag or @lucky760 have the right to decide if they don't want @gorillaman calling Obama a "nigger prince".

The sad thing is, I mostly agree with his post, but that one stupid epithet undermined his whole point and made him look like an ignorant fool.

And yeah, I'll fucking say it, calling Obama a "nigger" offends me, and not in some sensitive snowflake way. It should fucking offend you too, and frankly, I have no problem whatsoever with either dag (in his Siftler guise) or us as a community deciding that that's not cool and we don't want it here.

Free speech is not absolute, and anyone who thinks it is is deluding themselves. There are well-documented limits to free speech (yelling "fire" in a public theatre, joking about bombs at airports). Once you accept that something is not absolute, you then simply have to argue the degree to which limits apply (same as gun control, if you accept that civilians can't have nukes, then you're already in favour of gun control, you're just arguing over the extent).

Ok. Thank you for clarifying.
I feel you have now invited action against you by moderators AND verbal retaliation from fellow sifters.
You are welcome to your opinion, as disgusting as many may find it, but you are NOT welcome to use blatant racist hate speech when explaining your theories, not here. The rules on that subject are clear, and you have blatantly, repeatedly, and unapologetically violated them.
I do give you props for standing behind your words, that's far more adult than hiding from them and pretending you didn't mean it or were just joking.

Btw, calling you out on your inappropriate actions in no way equates to condoning Obama's inappropriate actions.

@dag, @lucky760, please read this thread.

@ChaosEngine
what the holy FUCK are you babbling about?

when did i EVER state,or make the argument that free speech meant free from consequences?

the only difference in BB's and my stance is that her reference to "see something,say something" was a tad disturbing to me and since she felt this was a community (which i agree with) then as a community we can all hold gorilla,or anyone to account for what they post.BB felt that calling down the "benevolent dictator" was the best path.

i disagreed with her is all.
but it certainly within her right to choose to do so.
i felt that an un-necessary way to address gorillas comment.

but hey,i am not easily offended.other people are.i am in no way agreeing with gorilla's "nigger prince",even for low brow comedy it is offensive.i was defending gorillas right to say it...and our right to go "what the fuck man,that is just wrong and offensive",and people did show their opinion by downvoting,and yes,even BB's tactic of calling the "benevolent dictator" can be considered appropriate (though i felt un-necessary).

dude,yer kinda talking out yer ass here.
but nice lecture,useless and pointless n regards to what i was saying,but still nice.

i am of the philosophy that if we are a community,then we can respond as a community,no need to call daddy to settle disputes.we can wear our big boy pants.

*edit: and oh for the love of JESUS @gorillaman!
way to flush my argument right down the fucking toilet.
i give up..sighs..i tried..i really really tried...
/bangs head against the wall

*politics

Adding video to channels (Politics) - requested by ant.

No Newt.

PC and SJW are groups that hinder free speech.

Do we really need to allow this kind of trash to post here?

I'm all for getting rid of him...in my experience people, or let's be more specific...racists don't change without a major event in their lives. And frankly, I'm not willing to wait for him to have one.

Yes Bob, but in a truly open society, you must also tolerate those who oppose it. As someone recently said, "You either allow every type of speech or you give up every type of speech". That includes sjw and pc speech.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Welp, here we go. I don't believe in forbidden words, but we do have a rule against hate speech - lest we turn into a Youtube comment thread.

There's a reason why VideoSift has at least slightly more intelligent commentary than Youtube - we do care about what you write here and always want you to consider that there are humans hanging on the ends of keyboards writing comments.

VideoSift is also akin to a club, a very loose one (we let anybody in) but we reserve the right to kick you out if you violate our rules.

Gman, although I would say you have contributed a great deal of controversial but worthwhile commentary to this community, the line has been crossed.

VideoSift is not your venue for free speech. We have rules and we live by them.

With much deliberation and consideration, I hereby ban Gorillaman from VideoSift. May Siftbot have mercy on your soul.

{insert brilliant segue back to video topic here}

Right now, I have two fondest Obama Administration memories that I think will stick with me in the future:

1) His original 2008 campaign and election. "Hope" and "Change" really resonated with me, and made him the first national political candidate that I got sort of actually enthusiastic about.

I am less enthusiastic about what he actually got *done*, but to be fair a lot of the blame for that goes to worthless obstructionist Congress. But not all. Still, Obama was (and remains) a smooth talkin' statesman that knew how to pitch "hope" and "change" in a way that made me believe he could deliver. Maybe I was just young and naive, but that had power.


2) "A few weeks ago, Dick Cheney says he thinks I’m the worst president of his lifetime. Which is interesting because I think Dick Cheney is the worst president of my lifetime."

C'mon, that right there is hi-larious!

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Also, just want to do a call back to seven years ago. You all voted me in as supreme chancellor. http://videosift.com/poll/Siftquisition-of-feature-Siftquisition#comment-725990

#neverforget

Maybe I need to clarify myself.

Yes to tolerate but no to accept it.

Are we in agreement? Odd very odd.

Yes. Tolerance is not acceptance. You may rail against it, but calling for pc and sjw speech to be illegal goes too far....just like they do.

We've never said you're not entitled to what you say, Bob. There are basic truths that are self-evident. I've heard that somewhere.

Snowden has not be on trial, or received any sentence. He cannot be pardoned.

Neither has Nixon, but he was absolutely pardoned...so it seems you're confused about prerequisites.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pardon_of_Richard_Nixon

Apparently he can, but I'm not a legal expert, so I'll defer to anyone who has the expertise.

Can the president grant immunity from prosecution? That would get around the guilt thing.

@makach