Your video, Primitive Bow and Arrow, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 42 Badge!

No Bob, they are not doing their jobs, they have stated that they will not even consider anybody that he submits for the position.
Nobody's asking them to greenlight whatever clown Obama decides to send their way, as Warren said, they can vote to refuse that nomination if they wish.
They're stonewalling so they can wrap this up and put a bow on it for the next Republican president. Of course, if the Republicans don't take the Whitehouse in 2016 I wonder what kind of excuse they'll come up with when they have to deal with another Democratic President.

She is full of shit.

Republicans are doing their job.
The President needs to submit a nominee to the senate decide whether or not to allow the nominee to become a Supreme Court Justice.

There no rule saying they HAVE TO appoint an OBAMA pick. They don't have to do jack.

Republicans are not bowing to extremest they are stopping extremest from derailing the country.

Why does the same bow, when bowed in different places on one side of the plate, produce different pitches?

Acetaldehyde isn't Asset-al-dehyde, it's assa-tal-dehyde.

What annoys me is she pronounces acetate fine a few seconds later.

It's like when people pronounce hyperbole "hyper-bowl" instead of "high-per-bow-lee". Makes me want to kill them.

The bow lathe might be good in that situation too:

*related=http://videosift.com/video/Moroccan-Bow-Lathe

Moroccan Bow Lathe has been added as a related post - related requested by oritteropo.

Thanks

If you're ever in a fight with a rock monster, perhaps a bow lathe would be quicker and easier to get up and running - http://videosift.com/video/Moroccan-Bow-Lathe (you still need the chisels though)

@JiggaJonson
khan noonien singh was a genetically enhanced human prince from the 1990's and participated in the eugenics wars,which consequently was the reason for his,and his followers,fleeing to space and escaping the inevitable aftermath from their defeat.

his spaceship the botany bay was discovered 300 years later by captain kirk and the starship enterprise,perfectly preserved in cryogenic sleep.

you all may bow to my geek prowess.

i think this video is referring to the original actor and appear to have taken issue with cumberbatch not being a latin actor.

which i agree with you is pretty damn nitpicky.

on another note.
my first date ever with a young black woman was soul man,starring c thomas howel.i didnt really research the movie and was mortified when c thomas howel painted his face as black man.thank god she was a good sport.though she did bust my chops for months after.

true story.

Yeah, I'd love to hear him on Trump and Cruz...I think he'd be all about Sanders. He blasted the Tea Party, so we can be fairly sure he'd be blasting the leaders of the current field. He'd probably admire that Trump is at least honest enough to say what he wants without a filter, but also reflect how dangerous it is that his views are so accepted among a scary percentage of Americans. How if Trump, or even Cruz, get's elected, it would isolate the US from our allies. They are still upset about Bush, and going that far to the right would endanger our relationships with all of them, save perhaps Israel, which is all the Christian right care about anyhow. He'd be giving a Hitch Slap to the media for the way they are following the Trump circus just for ratings, and building up Clinton while largely ignoring Sanders. Of course the political right would use that people like Hitchens would support Sanders and reason enough to ignore and fear him. "That demonic Atheist supports Sanders, so that's what you get with a vote for Sanders. Satanism wrapped up in the disguise of Atheism... and we all know that every knee will bow and every tongue confess, and we know they honestly do believe, but are just mad at God about something and trying to turn others against him", or something along those lines.

I never said that censorship was something that can only achieved by government.

I get that corporate censorship can and does happen for market reasons. And if companies bow to that, well, that's the world we live in. I judge these things individually on their merits.

The fundamental point is that if a company decides not to produce a game based on market feedback, that's their decision. No one is forcing them not to make that game.

And let's be honest here, Hatred (vile shitty piece of crap that it was) got released on Steam, FFS.

Once again, criticism is not censorship.

After such a flawless performance can you blame him for just wanting to take a bow?

Well, yes, that's possible but not likely, to hold that theory you must assume the people running it are both 1)100% tolerant of antagonistic racist behavior and 2)liars. I'll give them the benefit of a doubt that they didn't bow to perceived possible future pressure and actually found this personally disgusting. That's not a stretch for most. It's also quite possible they saw it as a potential internal lawsuit they were nipping in the bud.

I asked about his rights...I asked..."does he have a right to his job?" The answer is no.

Ahhh, but it's not illegal to ADVOCATE for having sex with children, only to actually HAVE sex with children. What would you arrest him for?

'intent to harm'? Certainly not. For pedophiles, they don't think having sex with children is harmful to them, so there's no intent to harm. On the other hand, the racist DID intend to harm (intentional infliction of emotional distress is a crime in many places) those he ridiculed, he just isn't very good at it.

Advocating for legalization of something is not the same as advocating people doing it illegally....so no.

If the company has a strict 100% no drug policy, yes. I hate those kinds of policies, but I do see that private companies have the right to hire people they trust, and if using drugs makes them lose that trust in a person, they can fire them...for any stupid thing really.

I'm pretty sure we have laws protecting people from being fired based on political affiliation...so no.

Again, I never said it was justice. I said it's reality. I actually mentioned that I think it's overboard that he's essentially unemployable now, but also mentioned that he could get a job with Trump, or any number of other employees that don't have a problem with his racism. Being fired for ridiculing random strangers for being non-white and therefore on welfare...well, that's poetic justice at least, if not pure justice. Poetic justice is a form of justice...so yes.

Companies have every right to not employ grotesque and offensive people. Don't you think?

Again...intentional infliction of emotional distress...that's harm. Not physical harm, but harm none the less. You may disagree, but you're disagreeing with the law and supreme court, not me.

They were no threat to his livelihood, he's not a fracker, he's in construction.


When is it OK to hold them to company policy? When they are making public, recorded, unambiguous, inapropriate statements and actions. The company draws the line, the company decides where, the company enforces it. If this were due to an outside influence, I would think differently, but because the company itself wrote how disgusted they are and that they have a zero tolerance policy for this...it's fine. He's not just a racist bastard off work...if they have a single person of color working for them, they just saved themselves from a HUGE lawsuit for allowing a hostile work environment.

Yes, the courts have said they have that right.

Again...no PC police here, just his company bosses that were outraged and disgusted with him...and they fired him. This is not new, or strange in any way. It happens hundreds of times daily.

Why? Because we have decided that firing/denying service to someone based on their (or your) religion is not acceptable, and codified that in law. Racists have no such protection, either by society or the law.

yes, I can look at the entire situation and see that some justice was served. I can also look to the future and see that it likely will be over served....but not necessarily. He just needs to apply to the Trump campaign, they love this kind of person, then it will be pure justice.

Look to the past. This 'moral calculus' has been in effect and in use for decades. I find it disturbing that you only get upset about it when it's applied to racist douchebags...he's insanely far from the first one.

Once again...NO PC POLICE HERE. Why don't you get it? Come on man...please...just GET IT. This is a private companies sole action...not bowing to PC police...the PC police didn't have time to find out where he worked and complain, the company saw it and said 'Aww HELL no!".

I would also rather keep my liberty and freedoms...like the liberty and freedom to hire people that share my level of civility, and display that at all times, not only while being paid. Fortunately for me, that's what the law says today...but if people thinking like you have your way, that liberty and freedom will be lost and companies will be forced to hire and not fire disgusting pieces of racist shit like this...because people that think like you are can't fathom that his job found this disgusting, you've decided it MUST have been the PC thugs (or fear of them) that forced his job to fire him, PC thugs that must be fought, so you're fighting. To me, that's just sad, and incredibly poorly thought through or understood...and a bit like seeing racism where it doesn't exist.

You have your liberty and freedom to do as you wish...there was NEVER the freedom to do what you wished AND HAVE NO CONSEQUENSE FOR YOUR ACTIONS. That's what you're advocating. This isn't about a law, it's a private company's private decision...no right has been removed, you have the right to be as disgusting as you wish, you don't have a right to force yourself into a job.

In short, this is his (non existent) right to keep his job VS his bosses right to fire him. The right right won out.

EDIT: It seems you two have not considered the possibility that the company might be owned by a black person.

It seems you are under the mistaken assumption that they bowed to public pressure by PC warriors and fired him. Read the description, the company itself was disgusted, and has a policy of being intolerant of hate speech by their employees. Do you feel the company has no right to fire him for public statements and actions outside work that run 100% contrary to the company policy?
Where do you draw the line? What if he was advocating for the legalization of sex with prepubescent children? Should they still ignore it if he only does it outside work? If that line is up to the company to decide, what's the issue here?

How is this different to any other social pressure pushing bullshit in other countries (US, Aus, UK).

Vocal people apply pressure to change the status quo. Look at the treatment of integrated and peaceful Muslims around the world at the moment...

It's not the Chinese gov. you have to worry about, it's Facebook, Google etc... Where the fuck do people think this evil ass data mining and social pressure started? Monetising your preferences and forcing people to bow to social (peer) pressure or face shaming. Tencent and Ali Baba are the real motivators behind this and even if China went full capitalist tomorrow, those companies would continue to promote this system and it would still work in exactly the same way.

The real horror is that we look at China and think that they are getting the short end of the stick. We need to look at ourselves. We're not free, we're consumers. We accumulate stuff and we think that equates to having choice. China is just following the sterling example set by others...