The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by eric3579.

The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by oritteropo.

Honesty has nothing to do with morals at all. If he attacks the left, and believes the programs are doomed to fail, then that is his preference. If I tell a woman, "Your children are fat, stupid and selfish," she will flip out--even if done nicely. Even if done to save the child's life and give the child a chance.

Honesty is a cruel thing, but is necessary. Ron Paul is honest, even when he doesn't know he is being honest (Which annoys me.)

America will burn as a nation so long as we remain overweight (You can buy soda with food stamps...lovely huh?) We will burn as long as we promote confidence over humility. We will burn as long as we think 9/11 just magically fucking happened. As long as we prop up corporations with corporate-friendly laws. As long as we think we deserve something for nothing. Our culture is useless and will falter, regardless of stimulus, universal healthcare, welfare, WIC, Unemployment insurance, etc. I favor most of these programs for the needy, but then in this culture it does not good, does it? Because we are entitled and greedy.

Paul admits to these--even if every other politician is to busy sucking every Americans cocks and teats to admit it.

Also, Paul supports liberal causes, just in personal choice. This is not dishonest; perhaps stupidity, but not dishonesty.

>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^Lawdeedaw:
Why is he then best friends with Kucinich? Why does everything have to be personal? Can't he just respect Stewart's fascinating honesty? And with that, the part of Stewart's honesty that incorporates and shows off Paul's honesty?

Working backwards:

1. Paul isn't honest.
   
2. Paul makes it pretty clear that he thinks "honesty" is in direct conflict with being liberal, or supporting Democrats.
   
3. Paul makes it pretty clear that he thinks Stewart is "honest" because he attacks the Democrats, which apparently Paul thinks is rare for the left to do.
   
4. Paul's "respect" for this "honesty" is further amplified by the fact that Stewart gives him a platform to spread his ideology unchallenged to a new audience.
   
5. Paul has the same "respect" for Kucinich -- Kucinich often attacks the Democrats from the left, and therefore Paul has "respect" for Kucinich's "honesty."
   

You know what, the government helps most americans, regardless of income, and I never hear middleclass people or rich people complain about the direct and indirect benefits they themselves receive. In fact, I would argue that at my high income, I get alot more financial help than some "ghetto" person. My mortgage tax writeoff alone is probably bigger than most people's yearly WIC/food stamp budget. Last year, the government gave middle class people lots of free money to buy houses.

On Walter Williams, that tool is so intellectually dishonest it's ridiculous; him and Stossel make a good team in that respect. Talk about racial quotas: the only reason WW is given a platform (syndicated columns, etc) for his opinion is because he is an extreme right wing black person that is willing to loudly criticize african americans to white audiences.

But to facts. If you look at every economic statistic, black americans are much more better off than they were in the 60s. Before 1960, most blacks were under the poverty line, now most are above. The number of middle class black people since then has widely expanded. There are more black managers and executives. Surely the Great Society and affirmative action had something to do with this great progress? This video was from the early 80s; we can also see that there has been significant progress since 1980 in terms of poverty, education and other areas. To suggest that government programs have not only not helped but have hindered this progress requires a stronger argument than huxters like WW and JS can muster.

>> ^Ryjkyj:

You support giving unemployed people money, but not feeding them?


I support those that worked and paid into the pot getting a check for the "just in case" moments.

My true gripe with food stamps is that the process is completely broken. Buy soda, beef jerky, red bull, muscle supplements, you name it. Sell them to your next door neighbor if you want... Now, if they had a process that directly feeds someone with decent food, that's a bit different (Say, government sponsored food kitchens?)

WIC? I can agree with that program because it has some accountability measures that makes it harder to abuse. But even that doesn't prevent making a buck when the reason is not legit.

On a side note--the verification process for unemployment is lacking too. I claimed it for about two-three months, and, well, I could apply online with three jobs that I was not qualified for... Another reason unemployment irks me is that a corporation can fight you for nearly as long as they want and you cannot really do dick about it...

But that's in Florida, may be different other places.

I work at target and would be interested to see how the single line que would be useful combined with the ability to dynamically assign cashiers during times of heavy load. If you have ever worked at target, the number 1 annoying part of the job is getting called for additional cashier help from the floor. We are usually stressed enough in getting our job done before the store closes and dropping what we do to service one or two guest because one persons line was to long is annoying. Also if there is a problem at one cashier (needing supervisor overrides, or WiC check items not going through needing overrides can really stop a line), it is hard to pull the next guest or 2 off the belt and into another line.

One thing I didn't like in the video was the que system line was always full. It really didn't give a good sense that the central que system would be faster. as it took a while for one dot to get from the end to the cashier.

I think it pretty safe to say it's likely that costs will be far, far less than they claim.

Name ongoing federal government social program created in the past fifty years that cost LESS than originally projected. I counter by saying, the only thing we know for a fact is that the medical program will cost far MORE than originally projected. Medicare - overbudget. Medicaid - overbudget. SCHIP - overbudget. WIC - overbudget. Every government run medical program goes over budget, loses money, and costs far more than estimated. Your claim social medicine would cost 'far far less than they claim' is based on no evidence. My claim that it will go OVER budget is supported by the CBO, the bill itself, and ALL historical precedent of government involvement in medical care.

No mention of the thousands upon thousands (millions?) of americans who go without health care because they can't afford a private plan.

The U.S. 'uninsured' is as low as 11 million people if you exclude illegals, people between jobs, and people who qualify for medicare/medicaid. If you include EVERYONE who for any reason does not currently hold a head-to-toe umbrella policy then the number is 46 million (about 12%).

The liberal left likes to say 12% of our population is staggering around, desperate for medical care, unable to get treatment, and dying in the streets while rich insurance policy holders ride by in imosines laughing at them. The reality is nothing like what the neolib left is selling. By law, all persons must receive medical treatment whether they can pay or not. The implication that "X" uninsured translates into "X" untreated, uncovered, dying schlubs is bunk.

To use your parleyance, thousands (millions?) of the uninsured are perfectly healthy individuals who can easily afford private major-medical insurance plans. The vast bulk of the remainder are people that qualify for government assisted medical care that ALREADY EXISTS. The remaining uninsured can easily be accomodated by private assistance at the local, city, or state level. There is no need for a national system.

World in Conflict is your typical RTS but is easier to pick up and play instead of having to build your support infrastructures just to create fancier units. It's a fun and nice RTS game that I can actually enjoy instead of other RTS that tend to bore me somehow. WiC also focuses more on teamwork in the multi-player aspect of the game. The visuals are stunning and the effects are quite nice to watch, especially tactical aid strikes ranging from Daisy Cutter to Cluster Bombs to Carpet Bombing to the ever-entertaining Nuclear Strike.

There are 4 "How To Play" videos of the game available at Game Trailers, which can give you a bit of a glimpse on how the game plays. A quick search can reveal a number of World in Conflict actual gameplay videos.

#1 Basic Gameplay
#2 Tactical Aids
#3 Fortifications
#4 Game Modes

Tags for this video have been changed from 'massive, wic, attack, norway, nato, soviets, russians, game, explosions, ingame, realtime' to '1989, amazing, graphics, sweden, massive, rts, soviet, invasion, war, wic, ubisoft' - edited by Zonbie

Tags for this video have been changed from '1989, amazing, graphics, sweden, massive, rts, soviet, invasion, war, wi' to '1989, amazing, graphics, sweden, massive, rts, soviet, invasion, war, wic, ubisoft' - edited by Zonbie

Tags for this video have been changed from 'world in conflict, game, sierra, rts, cgi, animation, 1989, new york, massive, sweden, wic' to 'world, conflict, game, rts, cgi, animation, 1989, new york, massive, sweden, wic, ubisoft' - edited by Zonbie

Tags for this video have been changed from 'world in conflict, game, sierra, rts, cgi, animation, 1989, new york, massive, sweden' to 'world in conflict, game, sierra, rts, cgi, animation, 1989, new york, massive, sweden, wic' - edited by Zonbie

Tags for this video have been changed from 'massive, wic, attack, norway, nato, soviets, russians, game, explosions, carpet bombing' to 'massive, wic, attack, norway, nato, soviets, russians, game, explosions, ingame, realtime' - edited by Zonbie

WiC is a good game.

I live in San Francisco. If you're coming to this area (or are you headed to L.A.?) we should meet up

I spent a year studying in Lund, not too far from Malmo, and I agree; Sweden is pretty awesome. (I unfortunately never made it over to the U.K.)

In reply to this comment by Zonbie:
My name is Ste and I'm originally from the Manchester,UK I'm currently working for Massive Entertainment (hence why I did not post any of the WIC videos!) in Sweden as an environment artist. Previously worked 5 years in UK in the games industry as an artist; and will be going over to the US hopefully soon as well (I am a self taught artist)

I like drawing (I have not done much of) or playing them computer games - I am also trying to get my ass back in shape so I go to the gym.

I love to spend time with my girlfriend, especially as she is in the US at the moment. She joined videosift too (Lady Death), I think becasue of all the links I sent her! I miss her lots so it will be nice to meet up again with her in the coming months, when she comes here

Sweden is awesome! UK is awesome! California is...awesome? I will know soon I hope!

I used to sift while I waited for stuff to compile at work (can't do much while you waited) so then I joined in November last year, but it was only about 3 months ago I started to post videos

I really like this site, so recently I became a charter memeber too
Everyone is really nice here, and it has the air of an "intelligent community"

So I love to read everyones comments too. Oh and for the record, politics good, farting cats, they have a place in the world too...

I hae a website but I haven't updated it in sooo long...