|
Didn't think we'd have color footage of Russ Meyer's formative years
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 08:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 20:43 |
|
|
If you're interested in cinematic schadenfreude, rent a copy of the Blair Witch (2016) that just came out. Either by coincidence or intent, the director's commentary was recorded two weeks after the movie came out, to both commercial and critical failure. And boy howdy, are the two dudes upset about it. At first you think they are just being self-mocking, but no, they keep bringing it up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 08:55
|
|
|
The Snoo posted:this girl is hardcore and a reminder that I still have much to learn about self-defense She's outright cheating by kicking during a boxing match. Also, he blocked almost every single punch she threw while he was on the ground, so yeah, you don't know poo poo about self defense.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 09:14
|
|
|
Regrettable posted:She's outright cheating by kicking during a boxing match. Also, he blocked almost every single punch she threw while he was on the ground, so yeah, you don't know poo poo about self defense. That's why refs never stop the match when someone is mounted and turtled up and doing nothing. your friend a dog posted:while hacking is unfortunate, theres some bizarre point of view how it's not fair that the leaks turned people away from the democratic party, as if voters should be forced to ignore blatant corruption simply because it came from a biased source I think it's more the "third or fourth time in US history someone won popular vote but lost electoral college" bit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 09:20
|
|
|
Regrettable posted:She's outright cheating by kicking during a boxing match. Also, he blocked almost every single punch she threw while he was on the ground, so yeah, you don't know poo poo about self defense. I don't think you can cheat in self-defence.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 09:24
|
|
|
Chichevache posted:Our aristocrats don't call themselves "lords" and we don't have a loving monarch. That makes them worse. Aristocrats you can at least kill, but since wealth fetishisation is always a thing, people are going to rally around to defend their bosses because they think they'll get rich.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 10:19
|
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:If you let this one guy build a house however he wants and without planning permission, some other guy is going to look at that and do the same. Why bother applying for planning permission if they'll let you build whatever if you just whine hard enough. This is it really, it's not that his house was especially bad it's that he tried to circumvent planning rules entirely is why they dicked him over so hard. It's a farm building area and not particularly special so building a slightly less gaudy house would probably have been fine.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 10:24
|
|
|
She got in nine hits including the kick before he was able to block anything. Nicely done.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 10:42
|
|
|
Regrettable posted:She's outright cheating by kicking during a boxing match. Also, he blocked almost every single punch she threw while he was on the ground, so yeah, you don't know poo poo about self defense. Yeah, when I see someone trembling on the ground covering his head in his hands and unable to even react, I think "drat, that kid's good at blocking, you show that girl" E: I bet they just cut the footage at the moment when he super-saiyaned up and piledrove her through that fence, he was just biding his time taking all those hits to the face
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 10:45
|
|
|
Never underestimate the importance of the tactical punch to the forehead.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 11:00
|
|
|
spog posted:I don't think you can cheat in self-defence. I don't think you wear boxing gloves and fight off boxing-gloved attackers in self-defence situations, either.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 11:12
|
|
|
I laugh every time at that gif. Usually kids just wildly flail at each other, but this girl just owns him with a nice body kick + straight right hand.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 11:21
|
|
|
Aramoro posted:This is it really, it's not that his house was especially bad it's that he tried to circumvent planning rules entirely is why they dicked him over so hard. It's a farm building area and not particularly special so building a slightly less gaudy house would probably have been fine. Quite. It's actually pretty easy to get around planning laws. If he hadn't a. Been such a dick and b. Designed such a tacky house he probably would have been ok. Bear in mind we don't have as much space as a lot of countries, most if the time the planning laws are there for a good reason (though they can get a bit corrupted on a local scale). Garuantee everyone locally thinks this guy is a dick. Look at that farm, jesus.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 11:31
|
|
|
Avenging_Mikon posted:I think it's more the "third or fourth time in US history someone won popular vote but lost electoral college" bit. It's why we have an electoral college.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 12:00
|
|
|
Chichevache posted:Our aristocrats don't call themselves "lords" and we don't have a loving monarch. What about a pissing monarch? Owwww right in the freud
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 12:08
|
|
|
your friend a dog posted:It's why we have an electoral college. You’ve heard about the Three‐Fifths Compromise? How slaves were allowed to count as three‐fifths of a free person for Congressional representation? The reason the Electoral College exists is to enable that advantage to count in presidential elections. That’s it. That’s all there is to it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 12:10
|
|
|
Actually I clicked this to find out what kills the spectators. What does?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 12:10
|
|
|
spog posted:I don't think you can cheat in self-defence. Incorrect. Failing to give a warning sigh before cutting a mugger down with your katana is considered unsportsmanlike.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 12:12
|
|
|
Regrettable posted:She's outright cheating by kicking during a boxing match. Also, he blocked almost every single punch she threw while he was on the ground, so yeah, you don't know poo poo about self defense. The rules went out the window the second he punched her in the back while she was walking away. Don't start none, won't be none. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 12:44
|
|
|
Karate Bastard posted:Actually I clicked this to find out what kills the spectators. What does? MisterOblivious posted:Auspol fights in the Schadenfreude thread Decrepus posted:This kills the spectators.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 13:18
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:You’ve heard about the Three‐Fifths Compromise? How slaves were allowed to count as three‐fifths of a free person for Congressional representation? I always thought it was so that the wealthy white landowners who wrote the constitution could be drat sure only the "right" people would get in, i.e. wealthy white landowners, so they included a backdoor for other wealthy white landowners to invalidate any election whose outcome they didn't like. And also to gently caress black people.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 13:56
|
|
|
Gorilla Salad posted:I always thought it was so that the wealthy white landowners who wrote the constitution could be drat sure only the "right" people would get in, i.e. wealthy white landowners, so they included a backdoor for other wealthy white landowners to invalidate any election whose outcome they didn't like. It's a multifunctional system.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 14:06
|
|
|
Regrettable posted:you don't know poo poo about self defense. The Snoo posted:I still have much to learn about self-defense but yeah this: spog posted:I don't think you can cheat in self-defence. I didn't mean proper ~professional~ self-defense poo poo, I meant how to get better with reflexes and also gently caress a dude up. 
snoo has a new favorite as of 17:19 on Jan 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 17:17
|
|
|
The Snoo posted:I didn't mean proper ~professional~ self-defense poo poo, I meant how to get better with reflexes and also gently caress a dude up. Rub Flaming Hot Cheetos in an attackers eyes. You're never unarmed if you have Flaming Hot Cheetos.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 17:22
|
|
|
your friend a dog posted:It's why we have an electoral college. Aside from the slavery aspect (which was a major function of the EC!), we have the electoral college because the founding fathers thought the average person was a mouth-breathing cretin who could easily be taken in by a charismatic charlatan making outlandish promises to get into power. So instead of allowing the People to vote directly for the President, the electoral college forced them to vote for intermediaries who would, in theory, be Wiser and Less Gullible than the everyday population, thus limiting the ability of a con man to get into the White House. It's completely against the intent of the EC for the population to vote directly for the President and for states to mandate that electors vote with the majority of the population, and leads to situations like the one we have now - situations that the electoral college was explicitly designed to avoid.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 17:34
|
|
|
camacho 4 prez
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 17:44
|
|
|
Solice Kirsk posted:Rub Flaming Hot Cheetos in an attackers eyes. You're never unarmed if you have Flaming Hot Cheetos. would flamin' hot funyuns suffice?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 17:53
|
|
|
Besesoth posted:Aside from the slavery aspect (which was a major function of the EC!), we have the electoral college because the founding fathers thought the average person was a mouth-breathing cretin who could easily be taken in by a charismatic charlatan making outlandish promises to get into power. So instead of allowing the People to vote directly for the President, the electoral college forced them to vote for intermediaries who would, in theory, be Wiser and Less Gullible than the everyday population, thus limiting the ability of a con man to get into the White House. And then the EC did exactly what they wanted the EC not to do because the con man making outlandish promises actually lost the popular vote, but the Electoral College has been completely twisted around from the original intent behind it: the general population still technically votes for the president because representatives in the EC are effectively barred from voting against whoever wins the popular vote in their state even if there's legitimate fear of that person getting into power, but the rules regarding electoral votes means that you can actually lose the election but still get in because of the electoral vote math working in your favor. Instead of being a check on the popular vote, it's essentially become a cheat for someone on the edge. And so the situation they had foreseen comes to pass not because of the lack of an Electoral College, but because of its presence.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 18:19
|
|
|
Karate Bastard posted:What about a pissing monarch? Hey now no need to get pigish. This beastial dick waving contest is hosed in the head if you ask me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 18:33
|
|
|
Besesoth posted:Aside from the slavery aspect (which was a major function of the EC!), we have the electoral college because the founding fathers thought the average person was a mouth-breathing cretin who could easily be taken in by a charismatic charlatan making outlandish promises to get into power. So instead of allowing the People to vote directly for the President, the electoral college forced them to vote for intermediaries who would, in theory, be Wiser and Less Gullible than the everyday population, thus limiting the ability of a con man to get into the White House. Working well, I see.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
Stoatbringer posted:Working well, I see. I assumed that was 
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
e:  just realized this is the scootenfrood thread and not a political one, if this derail is irritating you skip this post but I don't want to just axe it after I spent the time to write it all, on the off chance someone is interested.Just reminding everyone that all of my nation's founding documents, and the body of supporting writings surrounding them, are freely available to anyone who is interested in reading them. The English is of course fairly dated and the topics under discussion are arcane and legalistic even before you add in that particular wrinkle, but that poo poo is all there. The fact is that the ostensible on-the-box justification for the Electoral College is specifically to provide a safety cutout against something like a Trump administration (there are a couple of other Presidents in our past who were both breathtakingly corrupt and unimaginably incompetent, it remains to be seen just how bad Trump will actually get (this isn't a 'give him a chance' statement, it's a 'learning about real American history is pretty jaw-dropping' statement)), it also functions in order to ensure that only The Right Sort of people (white men, of course, but only the wealthiest subset of property owners; everyone seems to blithely assume that these will also be the best-educated and -informed of spectacularly wealthy white males) are permitted to take office while providing the surface story for plausible deniability, and in the mid-1800s the system was changed deliberately and overtly in order to promote and safeguard the political influence of the slave states on the national stage. All of that poo poo can be, and is, true at the same time. I've found in the last year or so, though, that if you open with the 3/5ths compromise you get some garbled version of the Original Intent back as a rebuttal. Well, in the last few months that's been true, before that most responses were blank stares (or the internet text equivalent) or evasions, but the few who had some inkling of the background of all of this would almost uniformly come back as I described. LonsomeSon has a new favorite as of 21:10 on Jan 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 21:01
|
|
|
Hyperlynx posted:I don't think you wear boxing gloves and fight off boxing-gloved attackers in self-defence situations, either. This^ My point was that saying someone's badass for deliberately breaking the rules is kind of dumb and he was actually defending himself pretty well considering the situation, but I was really drunk and failed pretty hard at making it. My apologies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 21:07
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:You’ve heard about the Three‐Fifths Compromise? How slaves were allowed to count as three‐fifths of a free person for Congressional representation? No, sorry, despite what Vox and HuffPo have told you, that is completely ahistorical bullshit. I understand that it's a comforting notion to console yourself with rather than face up to the fact that Hillary ran a lovely, awful campaign, one that she might not have even had the opportunity to run had the DNC not fixed its own internal election to choose a candidate, but it's simply a false and untrue statement as a matter of history.. Hint: Northern states that had *already abolished slavery* also supported the Electoral College system. PA abolished slavery in 1780, and Gouverneur Morris argued at the Convention that a "great evil of cabal and corruption" couldn't be avoided under popular vote. Massachusetts representatives to the Convention argued similarly, despite slavery being de facto outlawed in 1781 (there wasn't a law passed forbidding it, but lawsuits stripped it of legal enforcement). Ditto Connecticut's representatives. There was actually real and highly significant contemporary opposition to a national popular vote for reasons that had nothing whatsoever to do with slavery, and delegates from slave states and from states that had already abolished slavery had severe misgivings with Wilson's popular vote proposal. Including Morris, who was Wilson's *fellow delegate*. Wilson's popular vote proposal wasn't really in the running, it was considered radical and dangerous; the real debate was between the national legislature electing the President and having the state legislatures involved. *Even Wilson* considered it a long shot. So no, that is definitely not "all there is to it." LonsomeSon posted:Just reminding everyone that all of my nation's founding documents, and the body of supporting writings surrounding them, are freely available to anyone who is interested in reading them. The English is of course fairly dated and the topics under discussion are arcane and legalistic even before you add in that particular wrinkle, but that poo poo is all there. Yep. I sure wish more people would do that rather than having their historical awareness spoon-fed to them by Ezra Klein. Phanatic has a new favorite as of 21:28 on Jan 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 21:25
|
|
|
That's some amazing schadenfreude guys... anyway 
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 21:32
|
|
|
The Electoral College as an idea has nothing to do with slavery, but the issue of how slaves would be counted had to be dealt with, so the issues got all wrapped up together at the 1787 Convention. The slave states weren't just going to say "yea go ahead and count all slaves exactly the same as free men", because that would totally undercut the philosophy that their entire economy was built on. They also weren't willing to let the slaves go completely uncounted because that would mean they'd get like 30% less representation in the legislature. So a compromise was made that allowed slavery to be accommodated into the Electoral College system, but there was nothing inherently pro-slavery about the idea of the College itself.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
ekuNNN posted:That's some amazing schadenfreude guys... Man that cat is fat as hell This one is fatter though & also very uncomfortable, prime schadenfreude: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45FxGkFMmSQ
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 21:45
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lc-CgzTkyF4 This is the best "Newscaster laughs at wrong time" video.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 21:49
|
|
|
bobjr posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lc-CgzTkyF4 I saw that guy's eyes and I burst out laughing, too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 21:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 20:43 |
|
|
Scalpers taking losses on tickets to Trump inauguration, as secondary market interest on the mogul’s swear-in wanes quote:Rosenberg bought the pair of tickets on Craigslist from a "Second Amendment activist" in Katonah, N.Y., last week and immediately listed them on his Facebook account, as well as back on Craigslist. Welcome to the FBI Watchlist, idiot. Brocktoon has a new favorite as of 22:22 on Jan 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 22:10
|
|
