Many thanks!!!

In reply to this comment by jwray:
*promote

Good satire relates to current political movements

Hi jwray. Once again, apologies for my abruptness.
I guess the point I was trying to make is this.
I'm sure those women sincerely, heartfelted-ly believe everything they are saying. The problem is, this is what O'Reilly is completely intent on exploiting them for.

There's a much bigger picture here that I hope nobody misses...this is the beginning of the Republican onslaught to divide the democratic party. I foresee a long summer of this sort of crap, because the Republicans are expert at this. (A Karl Rove tactic, and simply the old school 'divide and conquer' tactic...)These women don't really figure into the big picture, any more than the Gay marriage issue does, they are just pawns in that they keep the focus off of the real fight...McCain verses Obama.
And people react to them and waste energy worrying about what kind of power this kind of thinking holds, which, frankly, only empowers this kind of thinking further.

I appreciate and respect your opinion, sorry about the confusion. Hey, and I am not demanding you agree with me, just telling you how I see it...

These women aren't the issue. Don't let your focus be swayed. Democratic defeat of McCain is the issue.


In reply to this comment by jwray:
debating someone's statement != validating them
believing someone believes what she says != validating her

How can you know they didn't believe what they said?
I take every debate seriously.

In reply to this comment by critttter:
^jwray, are you always so gullible?
(edit) I owe you an explanation on this comment - I thought you were actually taking these two even slightly seriously. On second read I see that you weren't actually validating them by considering their extremely misguided opinions. Apologies.

^jwray, are you always so gullible?
(edit) I owe you an explanation on this comment - I thought you were actually taking these two even slightly seriously. On second read I see that you weren't actually validating them by considering their extremely misguided opinions. Apologies.

This is marked as long, even though it's only about 7:30. Might get more views if you unmark it. Nice vid btw.

http://www.videosift.com/video/Worst-Political-Ads-In-America-Awards

you might like
http://science.videosift.com/talk/Watch-James-Burke-Live-on-the-Web

nah, lithuanian police academy. seriously. real thing.

In reply to this comment by jwray:
lol Counter-Strike?

In reply to this comment by MINK:
today i shot a glock, sig, smith and wesson, and a heckler and koch mp5
thought you'd like that.

Thanks for the promote jwray!

In reply to this comment by jwray:
*promote

thanks for the headsup, j.

back to back
great way to start the day.

http://www.videosift.com/video/How-Mercury-Causes-Neurodegeneration-Brain-Damage#comment-394810

Thanks for the note, I've fixed it up now.

In reply to this comment by jwray:
*dead

Thanks

In reply to this comment by jwray:
*promote

Can you believe this shit?

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/04/17/steph-hannity-audio/

Ha! I meant only to kid about the audience not knowing the difference between a dictionary and an encyclopedia. I fear on the line between humor and tragic reality, I have treaded too close to the latter.

In reply to this comment by jwray:
Network News: is the dumb content created to cater to the dumb audience, or is the dumb audience the result of the dumb content?

Both. And it's a recursive race-to-the-bottom if you try to oversimplify things so much that 99% of the audience can understand it without even bothering to look up a word up in a dictionary.

Drop by and give this speech a view, I think it's quite good:
http://www.videosift.com/video/Ralph-Naders-Philadelphia-Campaign-Speech-Is-Comprehensive

Hey man how about posting the rest of that Robin Williams Broadway standup? That shit's hilarious!