That is a really solid collection of "that guy"s. Deep Roy is the shiz.

You have been awarded 1 Power Point for fixing the embed code for Dead Pool video Crying ~ Roy Orbison Show (1965). Thank you for helping maintain VideoSift's reliability.

Interesting to see that compared to a guitar version of one of these, there's a lot more soul and funk.

BTW "Treat Her Right" was a Roy Head song, The Commitments were a fictional band and just did covers, and the very first song (Seven Nation Army) doesn't actually have a bass guitar in it (it's an electric guitar through a Digitech Whammy pedal down an octave).

Still the 4 string guys don't get nearly enough recognition, so *promote the low end!


edit: just finished watching.. no The Chain?!!?! WTF, dude!! give me back my promote, you couldnt-handle-six-strings bastard!

Delve Deeper:
Part one of the series: vimeo.com/84022735
The series was part inspired by Mastery by Robert Greene
amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B009U1U2IU/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1634&creative=19450&creativeASIN=B009U1U2IU&linkCode=as2&tag=adammeetsworl-21
You can read more about Leonardo daVinci's difficult years in: "Da Vinci's Ghost: Genius, Obsession and how Leonard Created the World in his Own Image" by Toby Lester amazon.co.uk/gp/product/1439189242/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1634&creative=19450&creativeASIN=1439189242&linkCode=as2&tag=adammeetsworl-21
This series began life as a couple of essays on Medium
Difficult medium.com/i-m-h-o/a7f8bdabd67b
47 years to success medium.com/the-dept-for-dangerous-ideas/8654ee14e4b2
====
Released under a Creative Commons Licence 3.0 - Remix & share with non-commercial attribution
Credits:
All paintings and archive in the Public Domain via Wikimedia Commons & Prelinger Archives
The Craig Ferguson Show © CBS
Music released under a Creative Commons Licence
"Lullaby" by _ghost (soundcloud.com/ghost-14)
"Hungaria" by Latché Swing (jamendo.com/en/artist/latche_swing_(3)
"July" by Marcel Pequel (last.fm/music/Marcel+Pequel)
"One" by Marcel Pequel (last.fm/music/Marcel+Pequel)
"Todo se precipita a tu alrededor deprisa" by Ruido Blanco
John Coltrane By Gelderen, Hugo van / Anefo [CC-BY-SA-3.0-nl (creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/nl/deed.en)], via Wikimedia Commons
John Lennon By Roy Kerwood [CC-BY-2.5 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5)], via Wikimedia Commons
Sir Alec Guinness By Allan warren → allanwarren.com [CC-BY-SA-3.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0) or GFDL (gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html)], via Wikimedia Commons
Tim Berners Lee By John S. and James L. Knight Foundation [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
Rafael Nadal By Steven Byles from Singapore, Singapore (Rafael Nadal Uploaded by russavia) [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
Steve Jobs By Matthew YoheAido2002 at en.wikipedia [CC-BY-3.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0)], from Wikimedia Commons
Bill Gates By Kees de Vos from The Hague, The Netherlands [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
Richard Branson By David Shankbone [CC-BY-3.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
Bob Dylan by Chris Hakkens
Horse statue By Jenny Poole from London, UK (Skopje horse statue Uploaded by raso_mk) [CC-BY-2.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
Mark Zuckerberg :Credit line on the web (with hyperlink): Guillaume Paumier, CC-BY.
One Direction: Fiona McKinlay
Miley Cyrus: Mike Schmid
Taylor Swift: By Eva Rinaldi from Sydney Australia (Taylor Swift Uploaded by russavia) [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
Subtitles:
Spanish by Ana Ribera Molinos about.me/anaribera
Portuguese by Gustavo Silveira
Story Design and Production by Adam Westbrook
adamwestbrook.co.uk
Published by
delve.tv

when it comes to emotion,
makes me start choking
so I, sit by the ocean
spent my last buck on a bottle of whiskey
drunk and broke
sittin' here in history
I made my mind up
I'm going
I got no where to go
don't know where I'm going
I do know one thing
one thing that is true
wherever I go, I'm gonna need you
we just cant let each other go now
were too close, to ever slow down
the only one who keeps my chin up
when you touch my lips we're like two dogs stuck
cold, cold beer
don't you ever worry I am right here
never live without you
don't care what I amount to, no.
talkin' bout cold cold beer
don't you ever worry, I am right here
can't ever live without you
I pick you up
I take you home
sit on my couch, turn off my phone,
cuz I love your taste, love your smell
who would ever thought that we could do so well
hell, I guess we're meant for each other
sorta like the microphone and my buddy Bruce Buffer
I can't really express my joy
sorta like a scrap between Osgood and Patty Roy
I cant take my eyes of you
went to rehab, thought that I lost you
but now we're are back together, with a vengeance
must be my little, Irish decendance.
it feels pretty good, to get this off my chest
even though people sayin, Jesse's obsessed
well maybe I am, maybe their right
one thing that I know, it was love at first sight.
Yeah, cold cold beer
don't you ever worry i am right here
can never live without you
i wouldn't even want to
cold, cold beer
don't you ever worry
i am right here
never live without you
you don't care what I amount to
Well I'm sitting on my stoop feelin' kinda lonely
me and Brenda fightin' so I call up the homies
but guys busy hangin' out in front of Sobey's
there's only one little fella who really knows me
he comes in a little brown, bottle or can
sits in my hand til I can barely stand
he's part of the family, he's part of the team
Took me under his wing when I was just a teen
every time he comes around he always,
takes me back to when I had a fake ID, and a little dirt stash
he rope soak cold pop 2 4 white pop pop top swish top tall boy, cold shot
BEER, cold, cold beer
don't you ever worry, I am right here
never live without you
you don't care what I amount to,
Oh cold beer,
don't you ever worry,
I am right here can't ever live without you
I wouldn't even want to

Might I suggest to you and @lucky760 "the wages of fear"? My favorite movie, and the introduction of Super Mario (oddly I'm only kind of joking about that) in the 50's. It's about bums in Mexico getting a job driving trucks of nitro glycerin through the jungle to a burning oil well. Remade as "sorcerer" in 77 with Roy Schieder (see the original first) it's still my favorite movie, due largely to the last 30 seconds of the film (I won't spoil it). It's a bit of a slow start, like many older movies are, but it gains speed quite nicely. I still love it even though it's French (and I hold onto my irrational hatred of the French because, well, you gotta hate someone!)
Hope you like it if you try it.
Newt

It's your choice. Yes. Does McDonalds make your choice harder, oh hell yeah. It's all about moderation. But, of course, it's hard to "feel full" when you're only eating a portion of the actual meal. When Burger King came out with their Eggnamormous sandwich, it contained as many calories as the average person should eat in a whole day. That was before drink and tater tots.

So yeah, it's not per se McDonalds fault . . . but they're not helping. Roy Crock invented the Super Size because he wanted to increase sales per person, not to increase the quality of food. He saw that people wouldn't go back for seconds because they felt gluttonous …. So he made it bigger and told them they were getting better value for their money. It seemed to have fooled a lot of people.

You have been awarded 1 Power Point for fixing the embed code for Dead Pool video Roy Buchanan - Roy's Blues. Thank you for helping maintain VideoSift's reliability.

> "you are sounding more and more like an anarchist.
> you didnt click the link i shared did you?
> it explained in basic form the type of anarchy i subscribe to. "

The link is about libertarian socialism, not strictly anarchism. I consider libertarian socialism, not left-libertarianism, but rather a contradiction. Coherent left-libertarianism, like that of Roderick Long, is for free market, not the traditional definitions of socialism. Different people define these differently. I use libertarianism to mean adhering to the non-aggression principle, as defined by Rothbard. But whatever it means, socialism, communism, syndicalism, and similar non-voluntary systems of communal ownership of "property" cannot but interfere with individual property rights, and by extension, self-ownership rights. These also need rulers/administrators/archons to manage any so-called "communal" property, so it cannot fit the definition of anarchy. If you don't have a bureaucracy, how do you determine how resources get allocated and used? What if I disagree from how you think "communal" resources should be distributed? Who determines who gets to use your car? It is a version of the problem of economic calculation. That wikipedia article conflates several different "libertarian socialist" positions, so which one does he adhere to?

> "i agree with your position.
> i may word mine differently but our views are in alignment for the most part."

This may be true, at least once we do away with any notions that socialism, or non-voluntary "communal" property can be sustainable without a free market and the notion that you can have any such thing as "communal" property, owned by everyone, and not have ruler/administrators/government to make decisions about it. that shirt you are wearing, should we take a vote to see who gets to wear it tomorrow? How about if there is disagreement about this? Anarcho-socialism is unworkable.

> "what i do find interesting is how a person with a more right leaning ideology will
> point to the government and say "there..thats the problem" while someone from a
> more left leaning will point to corporations as the main culprit."

Governments exist without corporations. Corporations cannot exist without government. Governments bomb, kill, imprison, confiscate, torture, tell you what you can and cannot do. Apple, Microsoft, Walmart do not and cannot. Government produces nothing. Corporations produce things I can buy or not voluntarily and pay or not for them. There is no comparison in the level of suffering governments have caused compared to say Target.

If you disobey the government, what can happen? If you disobey Google or Amazon, then what?

> "in my humble opinion most people all want the same things in regards to a
> civilized society. fairness,justice and truth."

Yes, but some want to impose (through violence) their views on how to achieve these on everyone else and some (libertarians) don't.

> "i agree the federal government should have limited powers but i recognize
> government DOES play a role.i believe in the inherent moral goodness of
> people.that if pressed,most people will do the right thing."

If people are inherently good and will do the right thing, then why do we need government/ruler?

Why not just let everyone do the right thing?

> "this is why i think that governments should be more localized.we could use the
> "states rights" argument but i would take it further into townships,local
> communities and municipalities."

I agree. And from there we can go down to neighborhoods, and then households. And of course, logically, all the way to individuals. And any government a voluntary one where everyone unanimously agree to it. But this is not longer government per se, but rather contracts between voluntary participants.

> "for this to even have a chance this country would have to shake off its induced
> apathetic coma and participate and become informed.
> no easy task.
> in fact,what both you and i are suggesting is no easy task.
> but worthy..so very very worthy."

Ok.

> "when we consider the utter failures of:
> our political class.
> the outright betrayal of our intellectual class who have decided to serve privilege
> and power at the neglect of justice and truth for their own personal advancement,
> and the venal corporate class."

So if people are basically good and do the right thing, why has this happened? Then again, when have politician not been self serving kleptocrats?
few exceptions

> "we,as citizens,have to demand a better way.
> not through a political system that is dysfunctional and broken and only serves the
> corporate state while giving meaningless and vapid rhetoric to the people."

True.

> "nor can this be achieved by violent uprising,which would only serve to give the
> state the reason to perpetrate even greater violence."

True.

> "we cannot rely on our academic class which has sold itself for the betterment of
> its own hubris and self-aggrandizing."

True.
Nothing a libertarian anarchist would not say.

> "even the fourth estate,which has been hamstrung so completely due to its desire
> for access to power,it has been enslaved by the very power it was meant to
> watchdog."

I have not gone into this, but you can thank "democracy" for all this.

> "when we look at american history.the ACTUAL history we find that never,not
> ONCE,did the american government EVER give something to the people."

Yeah, governments are generally no-good.
Let me interject to say that I agree that plutocrats cause problems. I certainly agree that kleptocrat cause even more problems. But I am not ready to exclude the mob from these sources of problems. As Carlin said, "where do these politicians come from?

> "it is the social movements which put pressure,by way of fear,on the political
> class."

The mob can and does often get out of control.

> "we have seen the tea party rise and get consumed by the republican political
> class."
> "we saw occupy rise up to be crushed in a coordinated effort by the state.this was
> obama that did this yet little was ever spoken about it."
> "power is petrified of peoples movements."

I don't disagree. But people's movements are not necessarily always benign. And they have a tendency to fall in line with demagogues. Plutocrats bribe kleptocrats. Kleptocrats buy the mob. They are all guilty. I know, you say, they people need to be educated. Sure, like they need to be educated abut economics? How is that going to happen? If everyone was educated as an Austrian libertarian economist, sure, great. Is that the case? Can it be? Just asking.

I do support any popular movement that advocates free markets and non-aggression. Count me in.

> "power is petrified of peoples movements."

People's movements are often scary. And not always benign. But non-aggressive, free market ones, like Gandhi's, sure, these are great!

> "because that is the only way to combat the power structures we are being
> subjected to today. civil disobedience. and i aim to misbehave."

Maybe. This is a question of strategical preference. Civil disobedience. Ron Paul says he thinks that maybe that's the only option left or it may become the only option left sometime in the future. But, like you said, secession to and nullification by smaller jurisdictions is also a strategy, although you may consider it a "legal" form of civil disobedience. You seem on board.

I see great potential for you (writer), once you straighten out some economic issues in your mind.

> "there will be another movement.
> i do not know when or how it will manifest.
> i just hope it will not be violent."

If it is violent, it is not libertarian in the most meaningful way, adhering to non-aggression.

> "this starts exactly how you and i are talking.
> it is the conversation which sparks the idea which ignites a passion which turns
> into a burning flame.
> i am a radical. a dissident. but radical times call for radical thinking."

If you want something not only radical, but also coherent and true, here you have libertarian anarchy.

> "you and i both want fairness,justice and truth. everybody does."

Yep.

> "some of our philosophy overlaps,other parts do not.
> we discuss the parts that do not overlap to better understand each other."

Yes, good. Keep listening, and you will see for yourself.

> "this forms a bond of empathy and understanding.
> which makes it far more harder to demonize each other in terms of the political
> class and propaganda corporate tv."

And for clarity, I don't say the corporate is made up of saints. I only point out that their power to abuse comes from government privilege that they can control. Whether corporations control this power or the mob does, either way, it is a threat to individual liberties. Break the government monopoly, and let the market provide for what we need, and they will have little power to abuse, or as little as possible, but both more power and incentive to do good.

> "I don't say the corporate world is made up of saints"

As long as government and not the market distributes the spoils, abusive plutocrats will arise.

As long as government and not the market distributes the spoils, kleptocrats will seek office to enrich themselves and cronies, as well as for the power trip.
As long as government and not the market distributes the spoils, kleptocrats will bribe the mob (the so-called people) with stolen goods taken from their legitimate owners through force.

The only real positive democracy, is market democracy, the one much harder to exploit and abuse. the one that is not a weapon used to benefit some at the expense of others.

> "the power elite do not want me to understand you,nor you to empathize with me."

But I do empathize with you! And you are making an effort to understand me.
And remember, many not in the "power elite" have been bribed/conditioned also to turn on you and prevent you from understanding/empathizing.

> "fear and division serve their interests.
> hyper-nationalistic xenophobia serves their interests.
> i aim to disappoint them."

Good for you! And for everyone else.

> "maybe it will help if i share the people i admire.
> chomsky,zinn,hedges,watts,harvey,roy,
> just some of the people who have influenced me greatly."

I know them well. Now perhaps you can take a look at things from a different angle, one that I think corrects some of their inconsistencies.

> "nowhere near as polite and awesome as you."

Thanks, man. You too

you are sounding more and more like an anarchist.
you didnt click the link i shared did you?
it explained in basic form the type of anarchy i subscribe to.

which leads us further into the rabbit hole of governments role.
which by your response it appears i need to describe a tad further.

so lets change the question from:
"what is governments role?"
to
"what,if at all,is the FEDERAL governments role"?

which of course we can refer to the federalist papers or the articles of confederacy.
one is a great argument in regards to what federal powers should be the other was an absolute failure and needed to be discarded.(too much anarchy lol)

that argument is still going on today.
well,between people like you and i,not from the political class.

i agree with your position.
i may word mine differently but our views are in alignment for the most part.

what i do find interesting is how a person with a more right leaning ideology will point to the government and say "there..thats the problem"
while someone from a more left leaning will point to corporations as the main culprit.

you need to understand i point to both.
hence my "plutocracy" argument.
so while you are correct that a corporation cannot throw you in jail,they can and DO influence our legislation (in the form of alec,lobbyists,campaign funding) to enact laws which may make anything their competitors do "illegal" or keep them out of the market completely.or make anything they do "legal".both governments and corporations do this for their own survival and self-interest.

the war on drugs and the private prison system come to mind.since weed is becoming more and more acceptable "illegal" immigrants will become the new fodder for the prison.

in my humble opinion most people all want the same things in regards to a civilized society.
fairness,justice and truth.

now how we get there is the REAL discussion (like you and i are having right now).

i agree the federal government should have limited powers but i recognize government DOES play a role.i believe in the inherent moral goodness of people.that if pressed,most people will do the right thing.

this is why i think that governments should be more localized.we could use the "states rights" argument but i would take it further into townships,local communities and municipalities.

for this to even have a chance this country would have to shake off its induced apathetic coma and participate and become informed.

no easy task.
in fact,what both you and i are suggesting is no easy task.
but worthy..so very very worthy.

active citizenship basically.

when we consider the utter failures of:
our political class.
the outright betrayal of our intellectual class who have decided to serve privilege and power at the neglect of justice and truth for their own personal advancement,
and the venal corporate class.

which all have served,wittingly or unwittingly, to create the corporate totalatarian surveillance state we now find ourselves living in.
there can be ONLY one recourse:

we,as citizens,have to demand a better way.
not through a political system that is dysfunctional and broken and only serves the corporate state while giving meaningless and vapid rhetoric to the people.

nor can this be achieved by violent uprising,which would only serve to give the state the reason to perpetrate even greater violence.

we cannot rely on our academic class which has sold itself for the betterment of its own hubris and self-aggrandizing.

even the fourth estate,which has been hamstrung so completely due to its desire for access to power,it has been enslaved by the very power it was meant to watchdog.

the institutions that existed 50 years ago to put pressure on the levers of power are gone,destroyed and crushed or outright abandoned.

when we look at american history.the ACTUAL history we find that never,not ONCE,did the american government EVER give something to the people.those rights and privileges were hard fought for by social movements.
in fact,america had the longest and bloodiest of labor movements on the planet.
the woman sufferagists.
the liberty party in its stance against slavery.
the civil rights movement.

it is the social movements which put pressure,by way of fear,on the political class.

we have seen the tea party rise and get consumed by the republican political class.

we saw occupy rise up to be crushed in a coordinated effort by the state.this was obama that did this yet little was ever spoken about it.

power is petrified of peoples movements.

there will be another movement.
i do not know when or how it will manifest.
i just hope it will not be violent.

because that is the only way to combat the power structures we are being subjected to today.
civil disobedience.
and i aim to misbehave.

this starts exactly how you and i are talking.
it is the conversation which sparks the idea which ignites a passion which turns into a burning flame.

i am a radical.
a dissident.
but radical times call for radical thinking.

you and i both want fairness,justice and truth.
everybody does.
some of our philosophy overlaps,other parts do not.
we discuss the parts that do not overlap to better understand each other.
this forms a bond of empathy and understanding.
which makes it far more harder to demonize each other in terms of the political class and propaganda corporate tv.

the power elite do not want me to understand you,nor you to empathize with me.
that does not serve their interests.
fear and division serve their interests.
hyper-nationalistic xenophobia serves their interests.

i aim to disappoint them.

now go watch that video i posted for ya.
when ya got time of course lol.

maybe it will help if i share the people i admire.
chomsky,zinn,hedges,watts,harvey,roy,
just some of the people who have influenced me greatly.

anyways.
loving this conversation.
i am in 3 other debates with highly educated people.
nowhere near as polite and awesome as you.
then again..i am kicking the crap out of them.
arrogance really annoys me,makes me vulgar and beligerent.
peace brother man.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'jaws, steven speilberg, roy scheider, richard dreyfuss' to 'Jaws, Steven Speilberg, Roy Scheider, Richard Dreyfuss, Robert Shaw' - edited by chingalera

Yummy, arguing on the internet!
I haven't done this in years, I'm gonna throw my hat in the Ring now.
I spent countless hours here for years, just enjoying the show. Staying out of all this, in the end at least, unimportant chatter. I came for the videos. Then somebody starts singing about sluts and I end up with an account. What can I say? I like sluts.
I spent much time reading and skipping over the posts of @shinyblurry here. And I still wonder why people feel the need to argue with him in such detail and length. He talks a lot about his faith in God and Jesus but what it come down to is this: He believes in The Bible.
The Bible features God and Jesus and all that but most important of all, it features a heckload of arguments for all kinds of things that are often in direct conflict.
Earlier in this thread, somebody threw a Bible quote about how rape victims have to marry their rapist in @shinyblurry's face and he actually started to explain (correct me if I misunderstood) how it's a punishment for the rapist that he has to pay money and marry the woman if the father chooses that.
I have money to burn. Is Jessica Alba married and where does her dad live? She's super hot and I *need* that kind of punishment. God wants her to fulfill her marital duties, right? If she's not available, I could make a list.
Now, I could argue this IMO rather distasteful idea with him, quoting the Bible back and forth, using other philosophical sources for arguments (I'm sure Hitchens mentioned rape somewhere sometime) but all that doesn't matter.
He believes in The Bible.
If I went back in time and edited early versions to my liking to include gems like "Every man shall also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed no abomination: they shall surely be praised", old shiny here would organize gay pride parades now. Because it's in the book. Whatever is in there, it's the truth. Whatever.
It's the same reason why creationist (I have no idea if old shiny is among them) can not accept evolution. It's not in the book.
They believe in this powerful, omnipotent god, not just in I-can-command-all-sea-animals-god. No, not that Aquaman shit the Greeks had, I'm talking about I-invented-the-universe-god. Get this, this guy did *invent* the universe. And still it was all some Siegfried and Roy BS we *know* to be nonsense. 7 days? Really? Was he in a hurry? Couldn't he wait until we get to the Game of Thrones and Tivo part of History? Was there another Earth to take care of? Contract work?
The idea to credit that dude for creating Evolution itself is too much to ask for these people. The idea that God created a giant machine (the universe) and allowed it to feature other tiny, tiny machines that repair, reproduce and improve themselves (life itself; evolution), is too mindblowing.
Who's more awesome in your book? The god that can do magic or the god who could do magic but opted for inventing everything science has discovered so far?
You know, science failed to disprove the existence of god. They can't do that yet. But they can disprove The Bible, at least parts. And yet, they still side with that darn book.
They don't care about God, the don't even care about Jesus. They care about what they read about them. They care about their perception of it.
Telling @shinyblurry that Jesus was a little, brown, jewish Hippie who got mixed up with existing mythology is like telling a fourteen year old that Ed Cullen is, by his own admission, a creepy murderer who stalks underage girls 80 years his junior. They don't want to hear it because that is not what the book said. They book didn't say that god created the natural laws of physics, chemistry and biology and set them upon the universe to wreak havoc until dinosaurs showed up. The book said it took 7 days. And ribs and dirt.
The Bible says so. Nothing else matters.
That's why it's pointless to argue scripture with him. The book is everything and allows so brilliantly for circular logic and cherry picking. It worked with slavery and how many are willing to argue nowadays in front of a TV camera for it? But gays are not slaves and women can always be picked on. Some wrong ideas are easier to conceal behind a book cover than others.
The Bible is everything to him, God and Jesus are just featured players. In the end they could be replaced by Donald Duck and Batman, they just weren't around back when they started to write it.
That doesn't mean I wouldn't love to hear your thoughts about the latest Daft Punk single, @shinyblurry. Or are you more into Rock music?

Of course you're begging. For some reason on the sift music videos from interesting new stuff to classics struggle to get ten lousy upvotes. I've got 9 in my personal queue, any of which have to be worth at least that much. And Roy Orbison definitely is too.

And that anonymous senator is......Roy Blunt

http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2013/04/sen-roy-blunt-monsantos-man-washington

The guy looks like Roy from IT Crowd in the thumbnail