>> ^EvilDeathBee:

If this were America, he would've been tased as soon as he started talking back


Hah or he would be ticketed anyway like most drivers who try and talk their way out of their ticket whom aren't attractive women (assuming a gullible cop of course). There's no "physics" argument involved in whether he stopped or not, just whether it could be observed based on the incline of the hill and the relative safety of stopping on a hill abruptly.

The cop was intimidated/conned by intellectual speak where most cops and definitely most I've come across in the US would just say "tell it to the judge" because that is the process for explaining extenuating circumstance properly. The cop could/would say "I saw it the way I said, u can explain the rest though _____ process and if the camera refutes it they'll likely drop it. For now here's the ticket and what to expect"

Kudos to the driver as there's no harm being done here to anyone, but I've found the best way to avoid a ticket is to be polite and apologetic about the things I actually did wrong (like a california stop or going 10 over) and hope they feel bad for screwing over a nice guy. Arguing just gives them more reason to find pleasure in ticketing you.

Just because you have a clever excuse for the one time you get pulled over every year doesn't mean your not the 5th person that DAY to try and con the cop out of of a ticket.

I see this kid all the time at best buy. He was a very nice guy.

Bryan. He's a nice guy.

What a nice guy. He even gave her a little lesson in bible studies. Did she get fired from politichicks?

You joke, but I fear him plenty, just somewhat less than Romney. http://videosift.com/video/TYT-Julian-Assange-is-Now-Enemy-Of-State is rising much faster than this video, and it's Obama who declared Assange "the enemy". Obama is not a good person who does good things. I think it's less in his nature to do bad things, but he still does the bidding of his masters. That much is indisputable fact.>> ^PostalBlowfish:

Man, you people reacting favorably to the nice guy must be on some drugs or something.
You should fear nice people irrationally!

@BicycleRepairMan

That scientist gave his reason for the impossibility this way: "Paabo said because the Neanderthal DNA was scattered in imperfect fossils, the notion of cloning a Neanderthal was far-fetched." (Source.)


It sounds like he's talking about cloning one individual Neanderthal, rather than synthesizing a Neanderthal genome from many incomplete fossils.

Genomes are just a series of 4 letters... so future tech will only need the complete sequence of those 4 letters. Degradation like a video recorded in low quality doesn't apply... you either can determine which of the 4 letters is in that spot, or you have to get another fossil sample that has that location intact.


Yeah, Naku's value seems to be that he's a nice guy that the public can relate to.

I've seen chubby Amish guys before. They all work hard, but they eat a lot too. And the men rarely wear shoes in the field so their feet always smell like shit (literally).

Clothes and hat look authentic, but not sure why he would think bringing the hat on a skydive was a good idea...

I also knew a Mennonite computer engineer - super nice guy. (Mennonites aren't as strict as Amish, so they can use electricity and technology)

>> ^FlowersInHisHair:

>> ^poolcleaner:
>> ^FlowersInHisHair:
Haha, I know. I don't normally say things like that, and actually I guess the dog has to learn what the fence is for! I know there's no cruelty there. But it does look bad.

poop in your hair

Why? I admitted I was wrong. No fair!


I'm sorry, it's just my way of bonding. I was abused and emotionally stunted as a child, so I achieve a form of solace when I mimick the behavioral traits of trolls. I'm actually a nice guy, oddly enough...

@renatojj

Whether or not everyone is entitled to a job or money is a question I never thought about. The universal declaration for human rights (UDHR) states it as follows:
"The UDHR included both economic, social and cultural rights and civil and political rights because it was based on the principle that the different rights could only successfully exist in combination" -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights (parts classification and indivisibility)

Its really interesting to read the declarations 22 to 28 of the UDHR. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights#Article_22)

For instance:
Article 23
(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment. (2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work. (3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection. (4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

I havent thought this through, but all of the above seem to me to not be inline with free market policies as free market policies dictate against the above rules favoring the natural motion of the market to guide the market along. Natural motion meaning that if there are moments of superfluous workers (large unemployment like today), they dont have a job and dont get paid, which forces them to either start working for themselves or die out which in both cases balance the market again.

A question inline with this: I just dont understand what your ideal is. Is there some country that comes close to your ideal or can you describe what you want to achieve?

Just having less government IMHO isnt a goal, its a means. Is your goal to maximize individual freedom (Ayn Rand style)? Though she has some ideas I fully agree to (rationalism as the only mean to knowledge vs faith for instance) her objectivism has never had much success with academia and for good reason.

Someone much more eloquent then me explained it this way (though he was talking about libertarian-ism, a close relative):
http://videosift.com/video/Noam-Chomsky-on-Ron-Paul-Hes-a-nice-guy-but

One reason democracy and capitalism have done so well for so long is because they keep each other in balance. Democracy is the rights of the majority over the minority. Capitalism (of which free market policy is a part) is the right of the individual, ie the minority over the majority. Both in and off themselves are disastrous. The balance is just where its at. Free market policies push in the direction of capitalism and away from balance. IMHO not what we want.

>> ^NetRunner:

I could've just as easily have downvoted for the stupidity of your pox upon both their houses view of modern politics though. I don't really get the sense much of anyone on the left is filled with some sort of "zeal" for the "donkey" -- and the disdain for the Republicans largely stems from the way they seem to be functionally identical to the Inner Party members from 1984.
---
The fact that one side, and only one side has fully committed to this level of partisan loyalty should make even the most cynical, above the fray, non-partisan person sit up and take notice.


It seems to me having (effectively) just two parties makes some degree of partisanship mandatory for anyone participating in politics. You yourself talk of sides. A blue vs. red system like that leaves anyone truly independent-minded somewhat disenfranchised.

I was talking with a guy from California not long ago, he was pretty pissed that his tax money was being used to blow people up in other countries. Will Obama stop the killing? Will Romney? Who should someone who really, really doesn't want to have his government blow folks up vote for, the nice guy with blood on his hands or the nice guy who's waiting to get some on his? Or should there actually be some other option?

from day one, it's been obvious that many many republicans are not really thrilled with Romney, Obama's campaign is milking that fact for all it's worth and good on them for doing so.

To Cenk's point though, he keeps attributing the success of Obama's campaigning to Obama himself though. It's his campaign managers and teams that really run the show. It's not like Obama himself came up with these campaign ideas.

So Cenk's argument that Obama is somehow picking his battles seems a bit flawed to me. There's a huge line between politics and governance. My theory is that when it comes to governance, he's a pushover...he's a nice guy. I think he honestly believed that he could convince Republicans to work with him. I think he honestly believed that everyone was ultimately on the same team. Presidents on both sides of the aisle have countless advisors. They're the ones with the influence. They're the ones shaping things. The president (again, regardless of party) is really just a mouthpiece and a pretty face for the camera.

The other problem is just simply people put way too much emphasis on the office of the President. People seem to believe the nation turns on a dime depending on who wins the presidential election. When Bush won, liberals were CERTAIN Roe v. Wade would be overturned. When Obama won, conservatives were CERTAIN he would take away their guns. It doesn't work that way people. Congress has the real power in America. It's the legislative branch that need to be scrutinized more heavily, not the executive.

Yep, definitely seems like a prick to me.

>> ^spoco2:

@DrewNumberTwo (and @kymbos), in @conan 's defence I think the problem that he and I have is not only that he did those things (although it's a pretty huge part, assaulting people purely based on their race, and to the point that they are blind in one eye for life is pretty horrible), but more so that he seems to be all good with it.

"He said the right thing to do would be to try to find the blinded man and make amends, and admitted he has not done so, but added that he was no longer burdened by guilt: "You have to go and ask for forgiveness and it wasn't until I really started doing good and doing right by other people, as well as myself, that I really started to feel that guilt go away. So I don't have a problem going to sleep at night. I feel good when I wake up in the morning."

He spent 45 days in prison for attempted murder, has not made any restitution to the actual people he's wronged, and yet feels good in himself.
That and his insane tough guy comment about 9/11:

"If I was on that plane with my kids, it wouldn’t have went down like it did. There would have been a lot of blood in that first-class cabin and then me saying, ‘OK, we’re going to land somewhere safely, don’t worry.'"

And from interviews and the way he seems with others, he still has this tough guy dick attitude towards people and a self image of god like ness.
Don't like the man at all.
You can say that I've never met him, and he may be a nice guy in person, but from all accounts, all he's said, all that's seen of him, he seems to still be the thug he was, just with more money and with a family now.

@DrewNumberTwo (and @kymbos), in @conan 's defence I think the problem that he and I have is not only that he did those things (although it's a pretty huge part, assaulting people purely based on their race, and to the point that they are blind in one eye for life is pretty horrible), but more so that he seems to be all good with it.

"He said the right thing to do would be to try to find the blinded man and make amends, and admitted he has not done so, but added that he was no longer burdened by guilt: "You have to go and ask for forgiveness and it wasn't until I really started doing good and doing right by other people, as well as myself, that I really started to feel that guilt go away. So I don't have a problem going to sleep at night. I feel good when I wake up in the morning."

He spent 45 days in prison for attempted murder, has not made any restitution to the actual people he's wronged, and yet feels good in himself.

That and his insane tough guy comment about 9/11:

"If I was on that plane with my kids, it wouldn’t have went down like it did. There would have been a lot of blood in that first-class cabin and then me saying, ‘OK, we’re going to land somewhere safely, don’t worry.'"

And from interviews and the way he seems with others, he still has this tough guy dick attitude towards people and a self image of god like ness.

Don't like the man at all.

You can say that I've never met him, and he may be a nice guy in person, but from all accounts, all he's said, all that's seen of him, he seems to still be the thug he was, just with more money and with a family now.