PostHeaderIcon True Talent

How about a remarkable diversion from politics and mayhem?

I always thought I had been born too late, and had missed out on the pleasures of the simpler life of our ancestors. It now occurs to me that the opposite may be true:

 

Just imagine what it must be like to be a modern Croatian teenager, watching such talent shows on his TV, rather than “Leave it to Beaver.” BTW… the older guy they keep showing cheering with his thumbs up, is her father. The world has truly changed in our lifetimes, and not always for the worse… no?  😉 ◄Dave►

12 Responses to “True Talent”

  • Chris says:

    LOL as entertaining as it may be there probably isn’t much to call talent. At least not in a classical sense. But then I suppose an ability to entertain is generally considered a talent. Now excuse me while I reload the video.

    Users who have LIKED this comment:

    • avatar
    • ◄Dave► says:

      It was a talent show, Chris. Visit your dictionary. If she isn’t displaying at least one form of talent, then there is no such thing. The effect she had on the uptight judge on the left, was worth the price of admission. 😉

      Now excuse me while I reload the video.

      Caution: Watching it too often can cause the tune to get stuck in your head. 😉 ◄Dave►

  • Chris says:

    The effect she had on the uptight judge on the left, was worth the price of admission

    I’m going to chalk up her abrupt displeasure to nothing more than jealousy.

    Caution: Watching it too often can cause the tune to get stuck in your head.

    And we know this how? 🙂

    Users who have LIKED this comment:

    • avatar
  • LOL …. It can be marked up to extreme talent in muscle control.
    That verges on Olympian standards. She must have been practicing since she was 3 … another sign of athletic determination. Promoted by a proud daddy perhaps?

    As for the judge … pure covert jealousy … LOL

    Users who have LIKED this comment:

    • avatar
  • Troy Robinson says:

    Gag me with a spoon.

    • ◄Dave► says:

      Really? I remember my parents revulsion at Elvis Presley’s swiveling hips too. I sure hope I never get so old and stuck in the mores of the past. 😉 ◄Dave►

    • Chris says:

      Cut Troy some slack Dave. I mean it’s not like he’s stuck in the 50’s or anything. If memory serves me

      Gag me with a spoon.

      was 80’s jargon. The fact it was used by so cal valley girls we need not mention. 😀 Sorry Troy. Harassing liberals isn’t fun any more but I can’t just quit cold turkey.

      • Chris says:

        Rereading that, it sounds like I called you a liberal. That is certainly not the case. Just can’t edit or delete comments. 🙂

      • ◄Dave► says:

        Not so fast, Chris. I hate to spoil our delightful diversion from politics; but you started it. 😉

        I don’t think an apology is necessary. ‘Liberal’ is a term of endearment, or at least it should be, when used in its classic sense, as derived from ‘Liberty.’ The book I just started yesterday points out that liberalism is the antithesis of collectivism. Then, it makes a very persuasive case that far Right populism and/or nationalism, are every bit as much collectivist movements, as those on the far Left. Personally, I would add theism also. To escape the tyranny of collectivism, one must eschew the horizontal statist continuum, and turn to one of the individualist liberalism movements, such as libertarianism, objectivism, or anarchism on the vertical axis.

        You might find the book provocative. It is entitled, “Right Wing Collectivism – The Other Threat to Liberty.” You can get the gist of it just by reading the free sample. I did, and then decided that it would be well worth my $3 to read the rest of it. Your mileage may differ. 😉 ◄Dave►

  • Chris says:

    Ahhhhhh you speak of what many like to call “classic liberalism”. The term is used differently in American politics as I’m sure you know. Liberal and conservative now pretty much refer to attitude regarding adherence to the meaning and intent to the constitution and rule of law. A liberal seeks to “interpret” (read make it say what they want it to) the document. Where I as a conservative sixty years fluent in the English language realizing the constitution is written in relatively simple language sees it as needing little “interpretation” at all. It says what it says and is the rule of law. Like I said I know I don’t need to tell you this.

    The liberalism you refer to is liberal in the sense that one doesn’t care what someone else does as long as it doesn’t harm you. Extreme liberalism in this sense I know is near and dear to your heart. Anarchy at it’s best. Here’s where the old switcheroo comes in. I know it’s hard to accept but there will always be government. Always has been. Human nature doesn’t change like that. The single document in the world that comes closest to guaranteeing the liberalism you would desire is the constitution of the United States. That’s why if you desire liberalism you must be conservative. Letting the extra baggage that comes along with those that call themselves conservative or right wing ruin the simplicity is counter productive. Most of that baggage is exactly what the constitution avoids. If the constitution can mean anything it means nothing.

    Now that you made me explain things you already know it’s time to go to bed. Up early to pay my dues. LOL Speaking of dues I just collected my first ever installment of my 15 year Teamster pension. As distasteful I find unions I gotta say I don’t regret my time in one now. 18 more months sweating for the system then the system sweats for me. Hey it’s their system not mine and I’m gonna love every minute of it. I’m gonna be a collectivist. Collecting every damn thing I can. 😀

    Users who have LIKED this comment:

    • avatar

Leave a Reply

Subscribe via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Political Spectrum
Political Circle
Archives
Blogroll
Internal Links