Printable View
https://www.waccobb.net/forums/wacco...3_12-55-57.png
https://www.waccobb.net/forums/wacco...3_12-50-16.png
https://www.waccobb.net/forums/wacco...3_12-57-22.png
https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net...d4&oe=5E99A780
https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net...c3&oe=5EB3384B
https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net...98&oe=5E982931
https://www.waccobb.net/forums/wacco...3_12-53-13.png
https://www.waccobb.net/forums/wacco...3_12-54-39.png
re the 'democrats furious that Trump used the powers they expressly gave him':
yeah, sort of funny and way not really true. They didn't expressly give him any powers; this refers to the 2001 AUMF which authorizes the president to use force against anyone responsible for or associated with the 9/11 terrorist attacks but still, the dems should have had the cojones to push through a proposed amendment making it clear that this does not apply to Iran. And 'they' refers to congress as a whole, not the dems.
but they deserve the weak attempt at humour although pretty much the whole framing is a typical right-wing trope only loosely related to facts.
https://www.waccobb.net/forums/wacco...8_21-16-27.png
https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=728x728
https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=728x728
https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=728x728
https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=728x728
https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=728x728
Is it just me or does anyone else not like the memes?
Please elaborate.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by SonomaPatientsCoop:
I do not appreciate the last few humor posts. What does Americans having guns have to do with Iran having nuclear bombs? The current white house refused to continue the nuclear arms agreement with Iran. This just doesn't make sense. I just got back from Australia where owning guns is taken quite seriously - most people don't have guns and there are no mass shootings. Why do we have to put up with loose gun laws and mass shootings that happen as a result ? The spirit of the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution does not appear to support uncontrolled gun violence we are experiencing in our country.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." -from the second amendment to the Constitution.
"James Madison originally proposed the Second Amendment shortly after the Constitution was officially ratified as a way to provide more power to state militias, which today are considered the National Guard. It was deemed a compromise between Federalists — those who supported the Constitution as it was ratified — and the anti-Federalists — those who supported states having more power. Having just used guns and other arms to ward off the English, the amendment was originally created to give citizens the opportunity to fight back against a tyrannical federal government."
https://www.livescience.com/26485-second-amendment.html
Memes are a form of humor, which is defined by Webster as:
"that quality which appeals to a sense of the ludicrous or absurdly incongruous : a funny or amusing quality"
They definitely express ludicrous and absurdly incongruous contrasts and ideas, which you as an individual may or may not agree with.
You may or may not find them funny if they go against your perceptual bias.
Given the predominant political leanings of Wacco, I imagine many don't find the ones I posted as funny, any more than I find the majority of the humor on this board.
But we're all adults (on a good day) and my hope is that we can expand our consciousness to include ideas we find offensive without attempting to eliminate or censor them because we disagree.
rats, the computer ate my post. I noticed after Ray stepped in with a direct answer. Try again...Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Stefanie Nagorka:
yep, this is Ray's attempt at balancing quantitatively if not qualitatively. We've occasionally tried to engage on the lack of humor rather than on the political content, to no success. They are pretty much always based on demonstrably untrue 'memes' or talking-points from the right, and their purported amusement value seems to be in 'pwning the libs' by being provocative. On occasion there's a novel take. To be fair, a lot of political cartoons aren't all that funny regardless of their political points - they often are just a high-contrast illustration of someone's point of view.
We each have our own opinion and sources of information we find credible.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by podfish:
Most of the cartoons on this board are based on demonstrably untrue far left talking points, in my humble opinion.
Arguing political viewpoints out point by point is pointless; most of us have already made up our mind.
One persons humor is another persons hurt feelings...
I just hope I'm always able to laugh at my own precious personal beliefs being ridiculed, not take them so seriously, and consider - for a second - that the other person might be right...but clearly they're not...and I am...
Take the Red Pill, Neo...
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by ray50sfo:
ok, here are the themes/"memes" you seem to think are just opinion. I disagree; they're manifestly untrue but drawing them in a panel is kinda fun for those who want to believe them.
1) obama's cash vs. trump's willingness to nuke Iran. Based on the idea that the pallets of cash were somehow a concession of Obama's. In fact (real fact) they were the settlement of an arbitration claim; it was Persian money held by the U.S. for years.
2) Omar's quote: taken out of context, turned into a dismissive statement she never made. Again, not an opinion; you can see her full quote if you care. It's more fun to caricaturize her as unbothered by 9-11 but outraged that the U.S. is taking action against Muslims. Ok, it's worse than that; it shows her as gleeful.
3) CNN whitewashing a terrorist to turn him into a peace warrior. I've yet to see any MSM make any excuses or even limit the culpability of any of the opponents in the Middle East who've engaged in violence.
4) "OK for Iran to have nukes". I have never heard anyone, much less anyone who's got any position of responsibility, take any other position except that Iran should not have nuclear weapons. Again, not an opinion. It's easily refutable if wrong.
5) I already had a post about the "military powers" that were supposedly given by the Democrats.
The others, maybe are more easily defensible. The one about appeasement may derive from a difference in political views. Seeing a deep-state coup, well, maybe that's an opinion and not a paranoid fantasy? and expecting the news to find a way to blame Trump? That last, not a fantasy, but pretty much is always factual since he's to blame for a hell of a lot.
.. I did kinda like the last one.
https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=728x728
https://www.waccobb.net/forums/wacco...7_19-20-15.png
https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=728x728
https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=728x728
https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=728x728
https://www.waccobb.net/forums/wacco...7_19-18-00.png
https://www.waccobb.net/forums/wacco...3_12-42-30.png
https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=728x728
https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=728x728
https://www.waccobb.net/forums/wacco...3_12-40-14.png
https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=728x728
https://www.waccobb.net/forums/wacco...3_12-40-57.png
https://www.waccobb.net/forums/wacco...3_12-41-38.png
This is a good one. And hopefully people think about it more. Because yes.... Nuclear is a much cleaner climate fuel source. Yet...having grown up down river from 3 Mile Island... we know there are serious risks. And we still haven't really figured out what to do with all that spent fuel for hundreds...and hundreds...and hundreds of years.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Barry:
But of course... whether it's electric cars or nuclear power...we're still just talking about how we can best go about our lifestyles with less impact. No one's really willing to talk about whether the reality we have created is actually sustainable.
https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=728x728
https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=728x728
https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=728x728
https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=728x728
https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=728x728
https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=728x728
https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=728x728
Interesting related article in this month's High Country News:
Nuclear power is clean – if you ignore all the waste
And this doesn't even get into discussions about what electricity is used for. As Amory Lovins once said something like, using the white-hot temperatures of a nuclear reactor to generate electricity, so red-hot wire can heat a house to 70 degrees, is inexcusably crude,"like cutting butter with a chainsaw."
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by SonomaPatientsCoop:
I don't really like cute observations like that when they're used in a political context. There are plenty of objections to nuclear power, but this isn't one of them. Lovins seems to use this not as funny bon mot, but to imply that this process is inherently overkill and therefore obviously foolish. It's actually the reverse - taking a small, localized white-hot source and scaling it down at the point of use is actually a cunning solution. The way to measure crudity in an engineering sense is to look at wasteful byproducts. How much of the energy in coal or gas is applied to work? Inefficiency and bad side effects are the problems to consider.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by BManna:
.. that said, it is kinda droll...
If you have been getting individual email updates of our ongoing curation of the best in political humor and you'd like them to continue, then go to the new thread for February and click "Express your Gratitude for this Post" (not on this post) and that will let me know you appreciate them and continue your subscription for this month
Given that your contributions to this thread seem to have as a purpose the counterbalancing of the generally democrat leaning tendency of Barry's choices, this particular set seems a little strange. It is notable, for instance, that in the first one the donkey is saying "guilty" while the elephant is not saying "innocent" but rather "acquittal" which seems only too depressingly accurate in terms of attitudes. The same is true of the third one. The donkey sees something he does not like and is doing something about it while the elephant is simply ignoring the situation: not a very good example of responsible government. The fourth one simply speaks to the fact that pretty much all public proceedings are deathly boring (Law and Order and Perry Mason do not show how things go in a real courtroom). But the one that raised my curiosity the most is the third one. I will leave aside the question of whether it is even funny (does anyone think Schiff looks particularly rodent like, and can what he is doing really be described as destructive, and are groundhogs really noted for their destructiveness or simply for their weather predicting skills? I tend to think not.)
What does puzzle me is the pencil neck thing. One skill that Trump undeniably wields is finding weak spots and capitalizing on them. He has a keen and generally accurate eyes for the wounding slur that expresses what others may feel deep down but would not articulate. In this case I do not get it. Schiff seems to me to have a pretty normal neck, and I do not think that most people associate a thin neck with any kind of moral depravity. And why a pencil? Is this some cultural reference I am unfamiliar with? It is especially odd considering the fact that Trump himself appears to have no neck whatever: one might think he would be the last to draw attention to necks. Seems like a singularly ineffective taunt. Can anyone enlighten me on this matter?
Patrick Brinton
Yes, I don't draw them, only select them from a rather slim set of choices. While they reflect, as you pointed out, a counterbalance to the predominant thread here, they aren't always totally logical, nor do they reflect the complete picture as you, I or others may see it. Certainly not philosophically complete.
Just a little fun, silly at times, and another voice among the monotone of the TDS cartoons.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by pbrinton:
I thought that diversity was a good thing. Seeing as how Barry never posts any humor contribution other than Left leaning, isn't a bit of diversity a good thing?Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by pbrinton:
Can anyone enlighten me on this matter?
Patrick Brinton
Actually, 'left-leaning' is more centrist, as the USA keeps moving toward the right.
Really? Many believe AOC and others have driven the Democratic party (and the country) to the Left.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by american dream:
Which is why it seems so irrational to ban natural gas in homes. How does it make sense to burn natural gas to generate electricity to heat a wire red hot rather than using the heat from the gas to heat the house.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by BManna:
On the other hand, excluding the capital cost, one would not rationally heat a wire red hot, instead one would use the electricity to run a motor to create a Carnot cycle transfer heat from the earth into the house (aka heat-pump). I have heard it argued that the cost per BTU of heat would be cheapest with a solar powered heat pump, but I think that includes government subsidy. Here in California the cost of electricity is already an average of 3x the national cost, if you move out of the first tier which is likely for electric heat, so it is really going to be expensive to heat houses with it.
I cannot enlighten you; I am equally puzzled by the things you so aptly describe. In fact, I couldn't make any sense at all out of the first two cartoons. Is it because of liberal rigidities in my brain, or are the cartoons intrinsically confusing? I would actually love to see some really clever right wing cartoons; surely they must be possible!
they're just illustrations of a POV, not 'humor' in a literary sense. The same personality traits that make right-wing stuff appealing seem to be antithetical to many kinds of humor. (ed: to give two examples - too much respect for authority, discomfort with ambiguity). There have been a few funny conservatives, but not many. An attempt several years ago to make a conservative counterpart to the Daily Show failed really fast. Now, no-one thinks of themselves as humorless, so you'll find objections to this description. The biggest reason I see is that the conservatives are totally trapped by projection; this extends to the idea that it's lefties who are projecting! Now a lefty might find that idea funny, but the right-wing guys are deadly serious. It's that unwillingness to hunt for their own foibles that I've found to be the difference. Any current comedy show, all of which the Fox crowd will consider to have a lefty bias, is gleeful about making fun of "their own". I've never seen a political cartoon with any right-wing slant that pokes fun at Trump, for example, while Obama and Clinton were relentlessly targeted.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by occihoff:
What in the world does this mean, Cyberanvil???
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by cyberanvil:
Really? Is it that obtuse?Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by occihoff:
Iowa caucus was a massive screw up.
Can't run a caucus, maybe can't run a country. After all, people like Bernie and Warren want the government to control just about everything. No soup for you!!!!
you mean 'obscure'. And it is a connection that's only obvious if you're familiar with the flavors of koolaid used by the memers on the right. What on earth does Deliverance have to do with a state election official? And it's a very tenuous thread, from inexperienced officials trying to overuse technology and, (gasp) having delayed election results!!! to an indictment of government in general.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by cyberanvil:
I agree. Not a very good likeness of Bernie.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by podfish:
Was it the Russians? Was it Hillary? Was it the DNC trying to damage a Socialist? Nah, just inexperience with a simple app which cost a pittance. Yea, sure.
you say 'cost a pittance' like that wasn't a sign that it's probably garbage. Everyone seems to think apps are easy and phones are reliable computers. But this was a failure that could have been seen (and was, according to some reports) coming from miles away. Ask anyone who deals with this kind of stuff on a professional level - ok, ask an engineer, not a marketing or salesperson - and it was apparent that this couldn't work well.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by cyberanvil:
Throw in the impact of the Trumpian trolls, who jammed the conventional phone lines after they saw the number leaked (again, by people who had no idea of basic security practices) and it's a very predictable situation. The Russians may have used this to train some of their monkeys, but so far there's nothing here showing expertise. Actually, it's the opposite.
well, QED then!! but what's quod here?? Maybe that he shouldn't just donate, but should make sure they can actually program something more tricky than "hello world" in Java?Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by ray50sfo:
I read somewhere that Pete Butt donated $48,000 to Shadow Inc. Where's the rest of your list, Ray?
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by podfish:
How quickly we forget. Hello...anyone remember the REPUBLICAN Iowa caucus in 2012? Romney "won"...and went on to pull off the rare double win in New Hampshire. BUT.... of course...over 2 weeks later the Republicans announced Rick Santorum had actually "won" Iowa. Kinda. Maybe. They actually refused to declare either Romney or Santorum the winner. Eventually, if memory serves, they declared Santorum the winner- very late on a Friday or early Saturday...a favorite time to bury news...
And of course... one of the most (in)famous election screw ups of modern times. Bush/Gore in FL. The infamous hanging chads. Where Gore, as VP, broke the partisan hung vote in the senate and ended the recounts. And of course, in the following months, the journalists, election officials and researchers who looked at what had happened found that every count, by every method... Gore had indeed won.
But hey... we live in a world where despite the facts our POTUS *still* claims he won the popular vote and had the largest inauguration crowd ever.
I saw him in the debate last night and though his presentation was OK he appeared as an aging garden gnome. We need strength as well as intelligence to overcome the rats in office
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by cyberanvil: