Valsuelm
-
Posts
405 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Valsuelm
-
-
1959's Grammy Record of the Year Winner:
-
1
-
-
Whitney Houston got robbed at the 1987 Grammys.
There's no way Steve Winwood's Higher Love is a better record than Greatest Love of All.
While I personally prefer Whitney's song, as well as two of the other nominations (Warwick's and Gabriel's) to 'Higher Love', I don't think Whitney was robbed, and had I been voting I'd not have voted for the song, primarily as it was not an original song. I'd wager a bunch that many of those voting thought similarly. Either way, she did have stiff competition that year.
While remakes of songs are obviously allowed to be nominated, it is quite rare for it to happen. So far as I know there are only two remade songs to have ever won record of the year, one of which was Whitney Houston's 'I Will Always Love You' in 1994 (the other Bobby Darin's 'Mack the Knife' in 1959; an entirely different era of music). It's a testament to just how talented a vocalist she was that not only was she nominated for remake of someone else's song twice, she actually won, once. And had I been voting in 1994, even though I'd have had the same reservations for voting for an unoriginal song as I would have in 1987, I'd have voted for Whitney that year. Two reasons: A) The competition in '87 was much stiffer, a good case could be made for all song but Palmer's to win in my opinion B) As awesome a song as 'Greatest Love of All' is (and I own it on cassette and CD), 'I WIll Always Love You' is better I think. It's Whitney at her best (and that's saying something), and I'd argue that if there was a Grammy award for 'record of the decade' 'I Will Always Love You' should certainly be nominated, if not win.
I'm a big Whitney fan, and the below is her best methinks. It's one of the most moving song recordings ever made, and over 20 years after I first heard it, it still moves me like very few other recordings do.
1994's Grammy Record of the Year Winner:
-
Bruce. Bernie Sanders is 74. Hillary Clinton is 69. This is the likeliest scenario for a Paul Ryan Administration.
I'm not following? Ryan is a Republican
The order of succession: President --> Vice President --> Speaker of the House
...
So if say President Clinton got impeached and thrown out of office, then VP Sanders becomes POTUS. But then, what if he gets a heart attack as soon Clinton is removed from office --and before he could officially name a VP? Boom. President Paul Ryan.
Worry not, Hillary isn't going to be elected.
When Trump is elected, I would not be surprised at all if Paul Ryan's days as speaker are cut short. Coulter may also be right in that Ryan just may follow in Cantor's footsteps this election or next. He's almost as popular as Boehner among Republicans (for our foreigners, this is to say: not that popular at all).
Worry not, Ryan is not going to be President, unless something happens to Obama and Biden (extremely unlikely).
-
Oy vey!
Ann used to always be like nails on a chalkboard to me, and normally still is. Sort of like a female version of Sean Hannity. By Jobu though, she's the smartest person at that table by far. If Ann is the most reasonable intelligent one in the room, you've got a room full of schmucks. (Of course it's been known that Nick and Bill are schmucks for awhile; no idea who the other schmuck is)
Eat it up folks foolish enough to think Trump is sexist. Here we have a more intelligent than most woman supporting Trump.
Also, anyone know where Trump is said to have said he would consider defaulting on the national debt? I want to see that, as if he actually said what is implied that he said, he will have my vote for certain. Unless his VP pick as abysmal, as he will have the most serious variety of assassination attempts coming his way possible.
-
After seeing what Chavez' policies have done to Venezuela....
What's been happening in Venezuela the last few decades is quite complex, and certainly what's been going on to hurt Venezuela is a bit more than Chavez's policies.There's been little in the western media about the nation other than to demonize Chavez. One should ask themselves why Chavez (or anyone for that matter ever) is demonized.
That said, Chavez wasn't perfect (ie: he was a socialist and I'm no fan of socialism) but he did have his nation's best interests at heart much more than almost any current western leader does. That counts for more than a little in a world where most nations' leaders (and most major candidates who ever run to be leader) are at the end of puppet strings of globalist bankers, et al.
Oh, I liked Chavez. I probably would have voted for him back in the day had I been Venezuelan. After seeing the Oliver Stone documentary on all the Chavista leaders being elected across South America in protest against US influence I really thought he was a good guy, and he very well may have been. But the policies he put in place have lead to a complete economic collapse in Venezuela, and its looking like hyperinflation. My turn to the right has only happened recently, but seeing Venezuela fall so far is one of the reasons I did so. Had Chavez been the head of state with a more right leaning head of government handing domestic issues I think he definitely would have been remembered fondly.
In western media he would have just been portrayed as a 'right wing radical'. He still would been demonized, just with slightly different verbiage. He is remembered fondly by many in Venezuela, and elsewhere. One just wouldn't know that from reading/watching major western media outlets.
A problem just about anyone who would stand up to the globalists have, no matter what their economic leanings, as the leader of Venezuela (or most other nations), is that at this point a variety of globalist corporations, and more importantly globalists bankers under the flag of The World Bank (and others) already have a vice grip on the economy. They can and will pull the rug out from under it if their power is threatened. There's only a few nations on earth that are above this, to varying degrees: Iran, China, Russia, North Korea, Israel, and Saudi Arabia (also formerly Libya) are among those few.
This is kind of getting off topic though, and deserving of it's own thread. [Not sure I want to discuss it in depth on this forum though]
I've not seen Stone's documentary, but perhaps I'll check it out.
-
Is there a Daughters of Freya group too
Strangely enough, or not, yes.
Have fun on the search engines. Especially the Images with 'safesearch' off part.
-
Do people need to post all the videos where he attacks men? he attacks their 'manhood' all the time.
I don't think you understand how attacking manhood works. You attack manhood by inferring someone isn't masculine enough, and instead is the weaker feminine. The concept of manhood by existence infers that women are weak.
Attacking one's manhood can take a variety of forms, many if not most of which have nothing to do with nor reflect in any way on women.
-
After seeing what Chavez' policies have done to Venezuela....
What's been happening in Venezuela the last few decades is quite complex, and certainly what's been going on to hurt Venezuela is a bit more than Chavez's policies.There's been little in the western media about the nation other than to demonize Chavez. One should ask themselves why Chavez (or anyone for that matter ever) is demonized.
That said, Chavez wasn't perfect (ie: he was a socialist and I'm no fan of socialism) but he did have his nation's best interests at heart much more than almost any current western leader does. That counts for more than a little in a world where most nations' leaders (and most major candidates who ever run to be leader) are at the end of puppet strings of globalist bankers, et al.
-
@ the Hillary didn't willfully break the law or doesn't understand how email servers work crowd:
So you think she's innocent but admit she's incompetent.
Alrighty then! -
If US president actually had any power, Drumpf'd be a North American Chavez at best and start a nuclear war at worst. Can't see the big deal.
The alternative is still worse.
I'd have taken Chavez for U.S. President over almost every person who has ran for office in the last ~30 years.
And yes... the alternative is worse.
-
-
Stefan molyneux has a good video outlining all the claims about trump and contrasting them to what he actually said that was quite good. Also quoted the art of the deal where trump talks about his media strategy being to be outrageous so people will talk about you. Free media coverage and people will be caught off guard when you are serious.I generally watch most of Stefan's videos where a caller isn't involved, and I did see the one to which you're referring. Stefan is usually good about contrasting fact from fiction in the modern world, at least on mainstream issues.
And yes, Trump is a genius. Hillary's only hope is that the zombies have reached critical mass nationwide. Wo is the U.S. if they have.
I actually like some of the call in ones. The Merkel Destroying Europe one I liked, and the Objectivist one I liked. I use an app that converts the videos to audio streams and just listen at work.
In lieu of the app, you may be interested in this:
-
1
-
-
Updated Electoral College analysis from the Cook Political Report.
Cook clearly hasn't bothered to do their homework (par for the course for a publication such as that).
I told you, New York is going to be solid red for the first time since '84. Bold prediction that flies in the face of conventional wisdom I know, but I stand by it.
You've got about 6 months now to prepare to write my praises.
-
1
-
-
Ha!I'm not in any sort of moral outrage regarding Trump. I find the things that come out of him to be unintentionally hilarious,
I find some of the things that come out of him intentionally hilarious. The man isn't dumb.
Stefan molyneux has a good video outlining all the claims about trump and contrasting them to what he actually said that was quite good. Also quoted the art of the deal where trump talks about his media strategy being to be outrageous so people will talk about you. Free media coverage and people will be caught off guard when you are serious.
I generally watch most of Stefan's videos where a caller isn't involved, and I did see the one to which you're referring. Stefan is usually good about contrasting fact from fiction in the modern world, at least on mainstream issues.
And yes, Trump is a genius. Hillary's only hope is that the zombies have reached critical mass nationwide. Wo is the U.S. if they have.
-
1
-
-
I'd never vote for a man who eats taco bowls over tacos. Absolutely disgusting.
Burritos and Enchiladas are where it's at.
-
I'm not in any sort of moral outrage regarding Trump. I find the things that come out of him to be unintentionally hilarious,
Ha!
I find some of the things that come out of him intentionally hilarious. The man isn't dumb.
-
I probably need to start studying up on 3rd party folks, but it is pretty early.
Probably the best of the bunch right here:
Who doesn't want free candy?
One can always write in candidates too. That's what I often do. Mickey Mouse and Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho are always solid options. I usually put Yosemite Sam for sheriff at the local level. Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck are great if you want to keep different governmental branches at odds with each other. If I lived in the southwest like you, I'd also consider Speedy Gonzales. He's a quick thinker, always has his heart and mind in the right place, and would probably be good at just about anything.
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
An electronica funk masterpiece:
-
1
-
-
-
I have Bruce in ignore list as well but I will fight to death to let him derail whatever he wish
That's ass-backwards logic. "The right of a person to ruin a discussion is more valuable than the desire of others to see the discussion un-ruined" is putting the cart before the horse.
The principle is what it always is- there's a right (or 'right' since the forums are private property) to freedom of expression within certain rules. If the rules aren't infringed then if you don't like what the other person is saying you need to build a bridge and get over it or buy a pack of cards and deal with it.
If the rules don't facilitate constructive discussion, I'd argue the rules are at fault, and saying "well he didn't break any rules" misses the point entirely.
Someone running around crying 'zomg the rules here suck! Somebody safe space me!' isn't exactly facilitating constructive discussion.
Which nobody was actually doing, but I guess intellectual dishonesty and hostile misrepresentation of viewpoints you disagree with do facilitate constructive discussion in your eyes. Which is... a strange viewpoint, but one you're undeniably entitled to.
Do I really have to go through this thread and pull up all the times you and at least one other have complained about the rules here these last few pages? You started this conversation.
Yea... not gonna do that. But I'll link this search, where you make about a half dozen posts complaining about the rules.
Intellectual consistency and honesty are at the foundation of sanity. Dig yourself deeper underneath that foundation sir, I won't stop you.
But I will post on topic!!!
This one is for Volourn:
(warning, a few naughty words in the following vid)
US Election 2016
in Way Off-Topic
Posted · Edited by Valsuelm
Imagine how inflamed many would be if Trump made that statement. A statement far more sexist than anything he actually has said.
Note: I really don't care. I don't find her attractive, but no doubt in the modern western world how good looking someone is (male and female) plays a part in them getting hired as a TV person more than ever. That said, she is much more than just a TV person (like Megyn Kelly for example). She's an author of many books, and it's those books that get her on TV more than anything else I'd say (at least at this point).
In other words, it is not sexist to point out facts, as you did.
The vast majority of X that many modern people decry as 'sexist', 'racist', etc are in fact not those things. Rather ,it more often than not is those modern people pointing out just how out of touch with facts and reality they actually are, when they make those false allegations.