|
Dr Christmas posted:There was a recent issue of Batman where the Joker gets cursed by Zatanna and gets pregnant and vomits up some kind of horrible tiny doppelgänger made of cursed mud. My understanding is that this barely cracks the top 5 of hosed up poo poo Zatanna has done.
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2023 20:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 12:04 |
|
|
wow, rule 34 mpreg really becoming mainstream these days
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2023 20:19
|
|
|
Don’t tell Fox about the time that a villain forced Superman into porn production
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2023 20:34
|
|
|
Narcissus1916 posted:What are the odds that Tucker covers this? 75%? He already did https://twitter.com/DecodingFoxNews/status/1612681953953873920
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2023 20:47
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Don’t tell Fox about the time that a villain forced Superman into porn production Wait what
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2023 21:02
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:Wait what Back in the 80s an evil New God called Sleez captured and hypnotized Superman and Big Barda.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2023 21:08
|
|
|
Lol, I was expecting that to be about Joe Shuster's post-Superman kink art that got dangerously close to the look of his most famous character at times
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 01:36
|
|
|
Dr Christmas posted:Back in the 80s an evil New God called Sleez captured and hypnotized Superman and Big Barda.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 01:42
|
|
|
It's not "obese" it's "king size"
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 01:42
|
|
|
Wasn't it a year ago that they lost their poo poo about Dr Seuss books or something
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 01:43
|
|
|
Right Wing Media has to continually generate new content.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 02:13
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/TRHLofficial/status/1612978972660318209?t=0Uuq0eVJ67kmW3Tq9psUVQ&s=19
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 02:15
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:https://twitter.com/TRHLofficial/status/1612978972660318209?t=0Uuq0eVJ67kmW3Tq9psUVQ&s=19 What's up with the picture in the first tweet? Did she piss herself or something and then share it with the internet? Is that what that crotch-level dark spot and "Uh oh." is supposed to signify?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 02:18
|
|
|
Bizarro Kanyon posted:It was the Two Minutes Hate in real life. The entire purpose of the channel is “aren’t you so mad that the world is having small ideas that are different than what you have?” The one thing I'm most sure of in this life is that the people who constantly bitch that something is "like 1984" have absolutely never read the book, and on the off chance they did, they didn't understand the point. It's remarkably prescient, and in none of the ways that people who flippantly cite it think it is. (To be clear, because it's somewhat ambiguous and/or hypocritical, I think you've got it right here)
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 02:22
|
|
|
Completely understood. My BiL suddenly was talking about reading Animal Farm and 1984. I knew what he was going to be looking for but I also know that he would never finish it if he even started it. I gave him my copies and ask him about how he likes them but he says that he has not gotten through either. Yet he still says “this is like 1984” often.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 02:54
|
|
|
PT6A posted:The one thing I'm most sure of in this life is that the people who constantly bitch that something is "like 1984" have absolutely never read the book, and on the off chance they did, they didn't understand the point. It's remarkably prescient, and in none of the ways that people who flippantly cite it think it is. I find this frustrating as well. Everyone who read the wikipedia article on it instead of the actual book just yells and screams about Big Brother, while completely ignoring New Speak. It's right loving here, right now. This thread is a monument to it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 03:23
|
|
|
nine-gear crow posted:What's up with the picture in the first tweet? Did she piss herself or something and then share it with the internet? Is that what that crotch-level dark spot and "Uh oh." is supposed to signify? I thought maybe a baby bump or something. But the intent is twofold: Firstly, to get the attention of thirsty libertarians that will be drawn to a tasteful photograph of her. Secondly, to trigger the libs, more specifically "male feminists" which she likes to rile up until her and her stans can brigade report them when they finally break some rule. Then she can boast to her followers about triggering them. I have no idea what she means about the sixteenth amendment, I know libertarians hate income taxes but don't get what she means about the other stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 03:45
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:I thought maybe a baby bump or something. But the intent is twofold: She linked some sort of bullshit book that I can't be bothered to mention here. It's a stupid argument anyway because Article I Section 8 of the Constitution specifically enumerates the power of Congress, one of which is collecting taxes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 03:50
|
|
|
All of those arguments have been attempted repeatedly in court by people trying to get out of paying their taxes, and they get slapped down every time at every level, including the author of that book (who went to prison for tax fraud).
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 04:01
|
|
|
Lemniscate Blue posted:All of those arguments have been attempted repeatedly in court by people trying to get out of paying their taxes, and they get slapped down every time. Yes but clearly this time will be different. Or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 04:01
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:Yes but clearly this time will be different. Or whatever. It's definitely on the same spectrum of legal nonsense as SovCit stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 04:05
|
|
|
Lemniscate Blue posted:All of those arguments have been attempted repeatedly in court by people trying to get out of paying their taxes, and they get slapped down every time at every level, including the author of that book (who went to prison for tax fraud). That just proves it’s a conspiracy to cover up that the 16th amendment is illegal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 05:15
|
|
|
bird food bathtub posted:I find this frustrating as well. Everyone who read the wikipedia article on it instead of the actual book just yells and screams about Big Brother, while completely ignoring New Speak. It's right loving here, right now. This thread is a monument to it. The fascinating thing is that it's actually a remarkable book, and quite accessible in every sense. I read it in the course of half a flight after buying it for under $5. It's a quick read, and not particularly difficult if you've graduated middle school. And it does offer some really fascinating insights into... well, the world we live in, from the axes of geopolitical power, to the role of conflict in shaping our world, to the modification of language, to the weaponization of blind hatred, to the power of media to create and modify the boundaries of reality itself, to the nature of power and the desire to hold it. There is so much to discuss and critique. But no one ever talks about those aspects, do they? They merely talk about their paranoia of a powerful government, based on what they believe the book might have said.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 05:31
|
|
|
PT6A posted:The fascinating thing is that it's actually a remarkable book, and quite accessible in every sense. I read it in the course of half a flight after buying it for under $5. It's a quick read, and not particularly difficult if you've graduated middle school. And it does offer some really fascinating insights into... well, the world we live in, from the axes of geopolitical power, to the role of conflict in shaping our world, to the modification of language, to the weaponization of blind hatred, to the power of media to create and modify the boundaries of reality itself, to the nature of power and the desire to hold it. There is so much to discuss and critique. But no one ever talks about those aspects, do they? They merely talk about their paranoia of a powerful government, based on what they believe the book might have said. If you think about it, the denial to even face the questions is a reflection of how the narrative influences us. Because people don't read past that surface level, it allows malicious actors to use it as a cudgel for their own ends rather than looking at it critically, allowing them to lead the willfully blind in whatever direction they desire. The warning about a boot stomping on a face forever is now used as the boot itself to stomp on others.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 06:02
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:She linked some sort of bullshit book that I can't be bothered to mention here. It's a stupid argument anyway because Article I Section 8 of the Constitution specifically enumerates the power of Congress, one of which is collecting taxes. Again, I don't quite get the sudden relevance of this nameless liberartian woman whose only claim to fame appears to be that she's a Tim Pool hanger on, but okay...
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 07:28
|
|
|
WAR IS PEACE is only more relevant today but right wingers can't acknowledge that the reason we "can't" afford universal healthcare, education, "you name it", is that the MIC must be fed. If we weren't putting all that money into war, the people might start questioning why it isn't going to, you know, the people. stringless fucked around with this message at 08:17 on Jan 11, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 08:14
|
|
cowboy
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Don’t tell Fox about the time that a villain forced Superman into porn production You mean Kal El, the illegal anchor baby!
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 09:30
|
|
|
PT6A posted:The fascinating thing is that it's actually a remarkable book, and quite accessible in every sense. I read it in the course of half a flight after buying it for under $5. It's a quick read, and not particularly difficult if you've graduated middle school. And it does offer some really fascinating insights into... well, the world we live in, from the axes of geopolitical power, to the role of conflict in shaping our world, to the modification of language, to the weaponization of blind hatred, to the power of media to create and modify the boundaries of reality itself, to the nature of power and the desire to hold it. There is so much to discuss and critique. But no one ever talks about those aspects, do they? They merely talk about their paranoia of a powerful government, based on what they believe the book might have said. J.A.B.C. posted:If you think about it, the denial to even face the questions is a reflection of how the narrative influences us. Because people don't read past that surface level, it allows malicious actors to use it as a cudgel for their own ends rather than looking at it critically, allowing them to lead the willfully blind in whatever direction they desire. The warning about a boot stomping on a face forever is now used as the boot itself to stomp on others. One of the scenes from the book that I think of most is the party officer giving a speech to the crowd, getting a note mid-speech and seamlessly switching from Eurasia being the enemy to Eastasia being the enemy, with the crowd then "realising" the propaganda posters around them must be wrong and freeing the prisoners on display who were not the enemy at all, it was the other bastards.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 12:02
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:One of the scenes from the book that I think of most is the party officer giving a speech to the crowd, getting a note mid-speech and seamlessly switching from Eurasia being the enemy to Eastasia being the enemy, with the crowd then "realising" the propaganda posters around them must be wrong and freeing the prisoners on display who were not the enemy at all, it was the other bastards. The inspiration for this, if i remember right, was Orwell's reaction to the start of the Cold War. The Soviet Union went from being allies of Britain and the USA to now feared enemies. Considering that Orwell hated Stalin and what Stalin turned the USSR into, it says a lot that he was willing to call this out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 17:52
|
|
|
FFT posted:WAR IS PEACE is only more relevant today but right wingers can't acknowledge that the reason we "can't" afford universal healthcare, education, "you name it", is that the MIC must be fed. One of my favorite parts of the book, which doesn't come up much even among people who've read it, is the section Winston reads in The Book laying out what may or may not actually be Emmanuel Goldstein's theory on how The Party actually works and why it all three superstates engage in the forever war. War fulfills two vital needs for the ruling parties: first, it provides the appearance of existential danger to superficially justify the perpetuation of dictatorship, and second, it consumes the productivity of their societies without raising the standard of living or allowing the people any greater space (which could conceivably endanger The Party's dominance). I've always taken it for granted that, despite supposedly being a forged document meant to lure in Thought Criminals for their eventual arrests, this is an entirely accurate description of actual Party policy given what O'Brien later tells Winston during his time in MiniLove.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 19:45
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:The inspiration for this, if i remember right, was Orwell's reaction to the start of the Cold War. The Soviet Union went from being allies of Britain and the USA to now feared enemies. Considering that Orwell hated Stalin and what Stalin turned the USSR into, it says a lot that he was willing to call this out. Regardless of the specific precipitating incident, it's shockingly common. See, for example, how this week the right-wing UK rags decided that killing Taliban soldiers during the war in Afghanistan was wrong -- very wrong indeed -- despite the fact they were cheerleading for the loving war as it was going on!
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 19:49
|
|
|
I read 1984 when I was a teenager in the George W Bush years, and my thoughts reading it were along the lines of “Hey, this thing seems like something the Bush administration is doing!” and I don’t get* people who don’t interpret the book as Orwell thinking up a Stalinist dystopia and accidentally predicting modern capitalist-imperialist dystopia. *Actually I do get them: I get that they have  from right wing propaganda.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 20:34
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:One of my favorite parts of the book, which doesn't come up much even among people who've read it, is the section Winston reads in The Book laying out what may or may not actually be Emmanuel Goldstein's theory on how The Party actually works and why it all three superstates engage in the forever war. War fulfills two vital needs for the ruling parties: first, it provides the appearance of existential danger to superficially justify the perpetuation of dictatorship, and second, it consumes the productivity of their societies without raising the standard of living or allowing the people any greater space (which could conceivably endanger The Party's dominance). The Theory and Practice of Oligarchal Capitalism is definitely an entirely accurate description of the system. It serves a double purpose in the novel. First, it lays out to the reader the policy and practice of all three parties/states. Second, it demonstrates how insidious and powerful information control can be. Winston is allowed to see the truth so that knowledge can then be used to destroy him. It's like what J.A.B.C. said about the warning about the boot becoming the boot itself. Julia intuits this, which is why she doesn't care at all for the book and just wants to enjoy their time together in apparent freedom. Another nice little touch in the novel is the implicit ecological calamity of it all. Nobody knows what the pink coral contained in the paper weight is. PT6A posted:Regardless of the specific precipitating incident, it's shockingly common. See, for example, how this week the right-wing UK rags decided that killing Taliban soldiers during the war in Afghanistan was wrong -- very wrong indeed -- despite the fact they were cheerleading for the loving war as it was going on! It's just an incredibly normal part of human society and history. England and France were the greatest of foes until they were allies trying to curtail Germany's imperial ambitions. The perfidious Japanese "stabbed us in the back" at Pearl Harbor. A decade or so later, they became one of our closest allies. Even Rome and Carthage were friendly when it was in both of their best interests to pacify Sicily and stop Pyrrhus's ambitions.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 20:44
|
|
|
Cross posting from the Ukraine war threads: Can anyone comment in detail on what position Fox News is taking with respect to the invasion of Ukraine? I get the impression that Tucker Carlson is actively pro Russia, but what about the rest of the network? Do they actively support Russia's invasion and justify it, openly hope for Russia to win, or is it a more passive "we shouldn't be spending our money halfway around the world instead of right here at home!", which is obviously also useful to Russia but doesn't require active endorsement of Russia's invasion?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 20:47
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:It's just an incredibly normal part of human society and history. England and France were the greatest of foes until they were allies trying to curtail Germany's imperial ambitions. The perfidious Japanese "stabbed us in the back" at Pearl Harbor. A decade or so later, they became one of our closest allies. Even Rome and Carthage were friendly when it was in both of their best interests to pacify Sicily and stop Pyrrhus's ambitions.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 21:14
|
|
|
duck.exe posted:I read 1984 when I was a teenager in the George W Bush years, and my thoughts reading it were along the lines of “Hey, this thing seems like something the Bush administration is doing!” and I don’t get* people who don’t interpret the book as Orwell thinking up a Stalinist dystopia and accidentally predicting modern capitalist-imperialist dystopia. I dunno, my favorite BAD Right Wing take was the guy who argued that Handmaids Tale is an analogy for cancel culture and not Christian Nationalism.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 21:15
|
|
|
Narcissus1916 posted:I dunno, my favorite BAD Right Wing take was the guy who argued that Handmaids Tale is an analogy for cancel culture and not Christian Nationalism. I need to see this scorching take, if it still exists.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 21:20
|
|
|
My new motto is: "Jesus died for your sins; not your literacy."
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 21:21
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:Cross posting from the Ukraine war threads: Ostensibly the message is the latter, a passive "this war is a waste of our time and we shouldn't be involved in it, that money could be better used at home (not that we'd support using the money at home)". This is done along two simultaneous messages: 1) that Russia is strong and powerful and macho and the United States military under Obama and Biden is woke and weak and effeminate and would easily be destroyed by Russia; and 2) Hunter Biden was a paid agent of Ukraine, and maybe some of the money being sent to Ukraine is going to Hunter Biden and therefore Joe Biden and maybe that's why we're supporting Ukraine????? No proof, we're just asking questions, but you know it's actually true. From Fox News' perspective, the war - like many other things - exists solely as a means to attack the Biden administration and to hold up an ideal of a strong, masculine, straight and Christian dictatorship as the proper model for America and anything smacking of liberalism or progressivism as an enemy of America. So they aren't directly cheering Russia or the war, and don't really care which way the war goes, so long as they can use Russia's strength as a way to 'prove' that America is limp-wristed and lily-livered and needs a strong Republican Man to lead it again.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 21:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 12:04 |
|
|
which is directly contradicted by Russia still not winning. like that most generous interpretation is Beta Biden and a bunch of other beta countries helping Beta Ukraine are stronger than big daddy Alpha Putin and they should make the war "fair" Note that timelines will always have Fox somehow use it as an attack on non regressives/support of Putin's cock. Even in ones where prez Donnie somehow tricks himself to be pro Ukraine.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2023 21:50
|
|