Descripción:I have a cold. booo Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)

Descripción:1er single de su último álbum "Translate" (2006)

Descripción:From NZ tv documentary 96

Descripción:Your Daily Politics Video Blog: For $700 billion, I'd sure want to know what I was getting. So what is the American economy getting for its $700 billion bailout? Well, it's kind of like a bazooka, or a mythological sea monster, or something like that.

Descripción:fela kuti live

Descripción:This is my favorite Felix cartoon, especially because of Neptune's speech. (My other favorite little touch is the sound made as the fish's tears hit the bottom of the bowl.) Since this cartoon appears to be public domain as it is readily found on bargain basement DVDs and videocassettes, I thought it would be nice to share it with everybody. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0141654/

Descripción:Videoclip for belgian band The Rones

Descripción:www.myspace.com/waver_ Daniele Papini - Church Of Nonsense (Original Mix)

Descripción:http://crideos.blogspot.com India Tour in Australia 2007-2008. Day 5 2nd Test Australia vs India at Sydney Highlights

Descripción:Fire...

Descripción:Watch the entire show at http://www.theyoungturks.com

Descripción:Ace ventura drives through the jungle singing "chitty chitty bang bang" and parks is perfectly, "like a glove"

Descripción:Leftover footage from John McCain Dazed and Confused - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWX5u69hmzY

Descripción:new music video for A MILLIE! i was so excited when my boy wayne walked up to me and asked me to direct a music video for his single 'a millie'. unfortunately he told me i had to do it for free...

Descripción:1970 exploding whale

Descripción:Alice In Wonderland, CBS TV. Ringo is the Mock Turtle in this production.

Descripción:"If we're looking at the highlights of human development, you have to look at the evolution of the organism and then at the development of its interaction with the environment. Evolution of the organism will begin with the evolution of life perceived through the hominid coming to the evolution of mankind. Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon man. Now, interestingly, what you're looking at here are three strings: biological, anthropological — development of the cities — and cultural, which is human expression. Now, what you've seen here is the evolution of populations, not so much the evolution of individuals. And in addition, if you look at the time scales that are involved here — two billion years for life, six million years for the hominid, 100,000 years for mankind as we know it — you're beginning to see the telescoping nature of the evolutionary paradigm. And then when you get to agricultural, when you get to scientific revolution and industrial revolution, you're looking at 10,000 years, 400 years, 150 years. Uou're seeing a further telescoping of this evolutionary time. What that means is that as we go through the new evolution, it's gonna telescope to the point we should be able to see it manifest itself within our lifetime, within this generation. The new evolution stems from information, and it stems from two types of information: digital and analog. The digital is artificial intelligence. The analog results from molecular biology, the cloning of the organism. And you knit the two together with neurobiology. Before on the old evolutionary paradigm, one would die and the other would grow and dominate. But under the new paradigm, they would exist as a mutually supportive, noncompetitive grouping. Okay, independent from the external. And what is interesting here is that evolution now becomes an individually centered process, emanating from the needs and desires of the individual, and not an external process, a passive process where the individual is just at the whim of the collective. So, you produce a neo-human, okay, with a new individuality and a new consciousness. But that's only the beginning of the evolutionary cycle because as the next cycle proceeds, the input is now this new intelligence. As intelligence piles on intelligence, as ability piles on ability, the speed changes. Until what? Until we reach a crescendo in a way could be imagined as an enormous instantaneous fulfillment of human, human and neo-human potential. It could be something totally different. It could be the amplification of the individual, the multiplication of individual existences. Parallel existences now with the individual no longer restricted by time and space. And the manifestations of this neo-human-type evolution, manifestations could be dramatically counter-intuitive. That's the interesting part. The old evolution is cold. It's sterile. It's efficient, okay? And its manifestations of those social adaptations. We're talking about parasitism, dominance, morality, okay? Uh, war, predation, these would be subject to de-emphasis. These will be subject to de-evolution. The new evolutionary paradigm will give us the human traits of truth, of loyalty, of justice, of freedom. These will be the manifestations of the new evolution. And that is what we would hope to see from this. That would be nice."

Descripción:Peak Moment 81: Former energy analyst Jan Lundberg opens by singing "Have A Global Warming Day" and closes with "The Depaver's Song." In between is an unabashed look at climate distortion, peak oil, and declining ecosystems, all bringing a necessary collapse of our "pigging out" economy. He envisions a future with radically curtailed energy use, and people coming together to find local solutions. [www.culturechange.org]

Descripción:Apologies for the crappy syncing. Here's a transcript: Reasons why Ron Paul won't win so don't vote for him makes NO sense. 1. If you are a Democrat, the front runners -- Barak & Hillary, have both promised military action against Iran, Barak even advocating nuclear action. Hillary & Barak also speak regularly at fundraisers for AIPAC [explained in video] If you are a Republican, the front runners (in fact virtually everyone that isn't Ron Paul) wants to keep these wars going, and that results in huge debts that can only be paid off in taxes. The historical Republican principle has been "stay out of wars" and "stay out of debt!" So if you're worried that voting for Ron Paul will cause you to "waste your vote," just remember that voting for these other candidates, who are pro-war, pro-debt, and pro-espionage, is an even bigger waste. 2. Assuming you don't have a problem with Clinton, Obama, Giuliani, or McCain, but you think their odds are better than RP's, and you don't think your one vote for Ron Paul would make enough of a difference to get him into office; just remember, your one vote isn't enough to get any of the others into office either! If you're so sure one of the others is bound to win anyway, what difference does it make if you vote Ron Paul? They'll still win, just like if you voted for them. But at least they'll win by less! Or, maybe enough of you will see this before the Republican primary, and enough of you will vote your conscience and Ron Paul will get elected. 3. If enough support for Ron Paul is recognized, future candidates may be forced to start implementing some (or maybe all!) of his policies, in order to steal support from libertarian-leaning candidates. I don't know if that's good or bad, but hey! let's just pretend it's good. 4. The top-tier candidates are very similar to each other, not to Ron Paul. In the past, people complained that Nader stole the election from Kerry, as if Kerry was closer to Nader than he was to Bush -- keep in mind, Kerry took money from the same IG's and corporations as Bush did, and he was pro-war and pro-Israel too. He just wanted to invade "differently" (BS). Today, we're seeing something similar. Top-tier candidates are promoting the same pro-war, pro-Israel, neoconservative ideology. Hilary gets donations from Rupert Murdoch. Anti-war activists criticize Barak Obama's Iran position. Giuliani & McCain want to spend spend spend! There's no truth to the "lesser of two evils" thing, they're ALL evil! So don't waste your vote on evils with higher probabilities (what? you wanna be able to say "I picked the winner"?) Waste your vote on a moral candidate with lesser probability! In the end, no matter which way you spin it, there's really no reason not to vote your conscience. SO -- for those of you who have come to realize that this time around, that better candidate is none other than Ron Paul -- register for the primary elections in your state and vote Ron Paul! If you're in a state with a closed primary, you're going to have to register as a Republican. I know some of you detest the idea, but remember it's for a good cause. Thanks. UPDATE: Here are some links regarding Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama, AIPAC, the Iraq War, and the impending action in Iran: Barak O-bomb-a Obama believes that we need to keep going in Iraq: http://obama.senate.gov/speech/051122-moving_forward/index.php AIPAC, a neoconservative Israeli lobby, gets in trouble for espionage: http://www.jewishsf.com/content/2-0-/module/displaystory/story_id/27560/edition_id/527/format/html/displaystory.html http://www.cicentre.com/Documents/DOC_Larry_Franklin_Case.htm Obama speaking at an AIPAC convention, proudly supporting this group that is in trouble for espionage.. http://obama.senate.gov/speech/070302-aipac_policy_fo/ ...and one of his biggest donors telling him it was wrong: http://www.nysun.com/article/50846 Obama saying we should use missiles on Iran... http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/printedition/chi-0409250111sep25, 1, 4555304.story?ctrack=1&cset=true ...even though Iran has no nukes... http://www.un.org/radio/story.asp?NewsID=888 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/22/AR2005082201447_pf.html http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HJ25Ak01.html ...and the Iranian leader did NOT advocate genocide, rather his remark was mistranslated: http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/jonathan_steele/2006/06/post_155.html Hillary the NeoCon fake anti-war Candidate Hillary is (deceptively enough) pro-war and wants us to go into Iran too! What a peace candidate! Exactly what the American people are looking for!: http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2006/01/18/news/14289.shtml What?! Not just Iran? She enjoyed bombarding Iraq too?!?! http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Hillary_Clinton.htmWar_+_Peace Voted for Iraq war based on available info; now would not.**(Apr 2007) Critic of Iraq war, but won't recant 2002 vote in its favor. (Nov 2006) Regrets Bush's handling of war, but not her war vote. (Oct 2006) Voted NO on redeploying troops out of Iraq by July 2007. (Jun 2006) Voted YES on investigating contract awards in Iraq & Afghanistan. (Nov 2005) Voted YES on requiring on-budget funding for Iraq, not emergency funding. (Apr 2005) Voted YES on $86 billion for military operations in Iraq & Afghanistan. (Oct 2003) Voted YES on authorizing use of military force against Iraq. (Oct 2002) Condemns anti-Muslim bigotry in name of anti-terrorism. (Oct 2001) **Fact that the "info" was already "available": http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Statements/2003/ebsp2003n006.shtml Hillary Clinton speaking for AIPAC: http://www.senate.gov/~clinton/news/statements/record.cfm?id=268474 Conclusion: Obama & Clinton are not anti-war. They're fakes. And they speak for groups that spy on the American public. They are corrupt as hell. What's worse is they're Democrats, so on top of getting increased militarism you also get the continued liberal destruction of our economy. What could be more American than death AND taxes?!?! VOTE LIBERTY! VOTE RON PAUL.

Descripción:Here's some clips from the Jim and Bret shoot. Jim barely makes sense of what he's saying. Pretty funny.