No…doing the easiest “Where’s Waldo” ever…unless he’s in drag.

I FOUND WALDO!

I also admire his focus. Not easily distracted.

OMG! WALDO!

I saw a pic of her and she's wearing a where's waldo shirt and they can't find her.

I wonder how many bodies they pull at the end of each day.

Your job as a lifeguard = Where's Waldo turned up to 11, for eight hours straight.

If you fail, someone dies unnoticed.

If you succeed, someone dies noticed. All you can do is point, shout and flail your arms.

I really shouldn't bite, but okay, where exactly is the misogyny here? (It feels like some twisted version of Where's Waldo)

This is great. Long-time Colbert fan.

I've been watching the new late show and after a while I noticed some "Where's Waldo?" Colberts hidden in the intro. I didn't spot any new ones in this version, but the three subtle ones I know of are in there.

The obvious ones (basketball, piano) don't count.

Hints: 1. Ole! 2. Tablecloth 3. Big flag wave!

I mean like... there's a camera... on the waldo... I was impressed by the FPV setup in the buggy... the truck blows me away...

Well, I found Waldo.

@ant - I don't understand. Do you assign channels incorrectly as a joke? It seems like it's something you have always done and always continue to do, but is it honestly just for laughs?

Did you really assign this to "Water" because there are drops of water on the windshield? People visit the Water channel to view content that's actually about water and not just any random video in which something wet might appear somewhere on the screen.

Channel assignments are not supposed to be like a Where's Waldo where you're searching and guessing to figure out why a video's in a channel. Channels are supposed to offer categorization for people who are interested in viewing specific and meaningful content on a particular subject.

Waldo almost got the high-seas skewer there...Do that correctly and it's called "pulling an Irwin."

@enoch

Well, note that the "governs best, governs least" quote IS Thoreau speaking, and although I think it's nonsense (I don't personally want to live completely outside any social structure, I don't think it's practical to separate myself from all of the advancements of society), I DO still think that Thoreau was a brave and noble person for believing in something and seeing that belief come to fruition. That's freedom.

But, when you're constantly putting down a system that you seem to wholeheartedly disagree with, but still support, that's hypocrisy, again, acc to me.

I brought up the issue of taxes because that's what Thoreau did. It's not terribly complicated. He felt that the system of government he was a part of was corrupt and restrictive, so he chose to not participate in it by not paying his taxes. He was jailed because of it, and when his friend Ralph Waldo Emerson bailed him out of jail he was upset. He WANTED to remain in jail because he didn't want to contribute to the social system he disagreed with so.

So when blankfist compared himself to Thoreau: http://videosift.com/talk/Gov-t-stopped-funding-charity-private-donations-surge-500#comment-1185054

I felt, and am reminded every time I see this type of propaganda, that there are a few ways of looking at this american libertarianism and those who follow it:

1) They don't believe in the government, but still support it through taxes.
2) They don't actually believe in the principles outlined in their own philosophy, and that's why they support what they affirm is a corrupt, freedom crushing, system, and that explains their support of it.
3) They believe in their ideas, but want to change things through the current system of government, which seems like a bit of a weird Catch 22.
or
4) They just want to have a theoretical discussion.

I've asked and asked, but he maintains that he's a freedom fighter who supports the government that he hates (through the payment of taxes, etc.)

There are other options I've probably considered along the way that aren't mentioned here, but I really put more thought into this than trying to tear blankfist down. It's genuinely confusing to me for someone to seemingly believe something so strongly and not act on those feelings.

Let me give you an example of what I mean. My first teaching job was in a very rural part of the US. Word got out quickly to the principal that I didn't say the pledge of allegiance in the morning (I have a variety of reasons for this, but the main one is that I am an atheist and don't agree with the phrase "under god"). I was brought into the principal's office after his stooge assistant "stopped by" my room several days in a row before and after the announcements. He wanted to know why I wasn't saying it and the conversation was respectful but went something like:

"Well, I choose not to, and I make sure everyone, including myself, is respectful during that time of the day, but I make it clear to the students that they don't have to as well."
"But don't you think you're setting a bad example for the students?"
"Well, no...? (at this point I knew they basically wanted me to just fall in)"

Long story short, at the end of the year, my job no longer existed. They moved the journalism teacher to another building and my position went from Eng teacher to Eng/Journalism teacher (I don't have a journalism license). Since I didn't have a license for that, I couldn't stay. :-/

It was hard to deal with, impossible to prove, but I'm better off 7 years into my career not being surrounded by those people anyway. They REALLY wanted me to just say the pledge, but it wasn't in my job description that I had to say the pledge every morning, and today, I'm happy to be in an inner city school with a more diverse and understanding population where I don't have to.

That's one BIG example from my life, and I'm no Thoreau, but neither is Blankfist. Now if he would just admit it.

You get the Carmen Sandiego / Where's Waldo badge!

No arekin, what you are watching is a standard hack journalism piece form an news org notorious for such tripe-"Poppy Harlow" here (pretentious and douchey female-reporter name), is attempting to infuse the story with some heart-wrenching emotionalism and grave tone..
It's a rape honey, cut to the sentencing segment as you spin the tale of these poor athletes with their lives ahead of them who double-teamed someone without her consent. Get a shot of the big, blubbering one there as his counsel consoles him!

Where's more Waldo in this unprofessional ballad of useless information about these douchebag rapists? They came from a troubled family...blah blah blah.."father a former alcoholic??"- Uhh, what the fuck does that even mean?!

Yet another time-filler offered-up from CNN, their standard fare, an over-dramatized example of developmental-disability in our distracted society. This is not journalism, is fucking Maury Povich and people throwing chairs at they baby-daddys.

Poppy, thank you for edifying us with that useless wind-session. Please get a job that assists in the evolution of the human condition...like on a crabbing boat in Nova Scotia!