Grape posted:

Imagine being the buffalo chud and having become visual shorthand for "insane person".

JamesBont posted:

Don't forget Fetterman

quote:

Many of those who join the military do so, at least in part, to obtain access to the G.I. Bill and the financial means to obtain a degree. According to a 2011 Pew Research Survey, 75 percent of those who enlisted said they did so to obtain educational benefits. That statistic has risen from the pre-9/11 era when it was just 55 percent — likely because college has become that much more expensive! As of 2014, 48 percent of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans utilized the G.I. Bill, with 59 percent of female veterans doing so (a demographic the military wants to see grow in its ranks). If college became free, the incremental value of the G.I. Bill would be dramatically reduced. The effect would be similar for the Yellow Ribbon program, which provides money for education to those who have already served, ROTC scholarships, which provide funds to pay for a bachelor’s degree for aspiring officers, tuition assistance programs for those already on active duty, and the various programs to fund graduate education for officers. Without the G.I. Bill as a serious inducement to enlist, the military is likely to experience substantially more difficulty in recruiting new personnel. This will, with little doubt, require us to pay more to recruit tomorrow’s force and sustain the qualitative edge of our superb military.

Saint Sputnik posted:

Went looking for some stats about the GI Bill and found an article in a national security publication that outright says what Varvel suggests
https://warontherocks.com/2016/09/does-free-college-threaten-our-all-volunteer-military/

Raised By Birds posted:

Bob Gorrell

Pants Donkey posted:

Pants Donkey posted:

Apple Pie Hubbub posted:

1

I dont know posted:

I fully understand the ghoulish logic of "we must keep college expensive to get poor people to enlist in the military". It's monstrous, but it does make sense if you are an rear end in a top hat.

The thing that gets me about that Varvel is it seems to be celebrating that the poor bastard died trying to afford college. Why show grieving parents crying over a casket if this is the outcome you want to promote? Seriously, who does that appeal to other than bloodthirsty sociopaths? I could see a more competent cartoon trying to make the same point, by having a straitlaced, muscular soldier with a buzz-cut (the rightwing vision of everything a man should be) saying if he hadn't been forced to join the military to pay for college he never would have been forced to grow up and become a man.

JamesBont posted:

Do you have a source to back that up, drinky duck?

wizzardstaff posted:

*yahoo news

VitalSigns posted:

E: here's my favorite Asay conservative-logic cartoon

quote:

TOLKIEN IS SPINNING IN HIS GRAVE

Amazon’s ‘woke’ Lord Of The Rings extravaganza is a $1 billion production. It might be widely watched, but so far it has received a lot of thumbs down and Amazon is now banning many of those negative reviews. It appears they are trying to protect their investment.

I read Tolkein’s three volume LOTR work twice in my younger days. It made quite an impression on me when I first read it while in high school. I remember trying to draw Boromir from my imagination. It wasn’t very good, but I’ve improved with years of practice. Apparently dramatic writing hasn’t improved—at least the script for the LOTR on Amazon hasn’t. I have no plans to watch it—especially after reading some of the reviews including this one from The Daily Mail, which gave it one star out of five:

“Turkey is not the word. No turkey, however bloated and stupid, could ever be big enough to convey the mesmerizing awfulness of Amazon’s billion dollar Tolkien epic. This is a disaster dragon – plucked, spatchcocked, with a tankerload of Paxo stuffed up its fundament, roasted and served with soggy sprouts. The Lord Of The Rings: The Rings Of Power is so staggeringly bad, it’s hilarious. Everything about it is ill-judged to a spectacular extreme. The cliche-laden script, the dire acting, the leaden pace, the sheer inconsistency and confusion as it lurches between styles – where do we start?”

The women are made into super heroes due to feminism. The white males are made weak and ineffective. They also must have inclusivity, so there will be black dwarves, hobbits, and elves, and I have no problem with that. However, I heard they will also introduce the usual prideful rainbow-ism. I don’t care if anyone is gay, but it’s not part of Tolkein’s vision. In his work, men are able to be friends with other men without suspicion of something ulterior going on. Likewise with the women. Maybe they’ll introduce a gay Balrog or something. How about a trans-orc?

Regardless, woke-ism tends to turn all it touches into garbage. It’s really nothing more than cultural Marxism, which has destruction as its core goal. It doesn’t care if it’s entertaining or not.

— Ben Garrison

Cowcaster posted:

you just know he started with nancy pelosi as gollum and then gave up from there

NDP posted:

Why is Nancy Pelosi always depicted as a drunk when it was her husband who got arrested for DUI?

Apple Pie Hubbub posted:

1

NDP posted:

Why is Nancy Pelosi always depicted as a drunk when it was her husband who got arrested for DUI?

NDP posted:

Why is Nancy Pelosi always depicted as a drunk when it was her husband who got arrested for DUI?

quote:

I don’t care if anyone is gay, but

quote:

I don’t care if anyone is gay, but

Neito posted:

Still wicked mad about that Lipstick on a Pig comment, huh benny?