Illjwamh

 
If Dan published books the way Willis does for Dumbing of Age, I'd suggest this for a title.
 
Can't it be both?

Holy shit, it's not a new character!

I'm sure a lot of you picked up on it being Vladia back in the Jan. 16 strip, but I'm a bit dim, okay?

Mainly.

That's only a problem if the audience of the review show knows that and gets suspicious. After all, Susan's idea is they just act like themselves while transformed, fooling those who don't know about transformation magic into thinking they're acting.

 
 
There is a broad gray area in between selfless and evil. Many police, in many nations function on that level. Many bureaucrats as well. When you toss in the possibilities that delusional thinking adds, well damn, it's difficult to apply the yard stick. Circle around to why religion is widely disliked; religion justifies nominally evil acts and colors them as 'God's will'.
 

 
Take your time
We'll check back before lunch
 

What fun! I thought this thing had been lost forever! Looks like I've got some catching up to do. Let's go one month at a time.
 
Mon. Apr. 6, 2020
Elliot: 990
Susan: 542
 
Wed. Apr. 8, 2020
Elliot: 991
Susan: 543
Sarah: 719
Tedd: 807
Diane: 257
 
Fri. Apr. 10, 2020
Diane: 258
Tedd: 808
Ellen: 704
 
Mon. Apr. 13, 2020
Justin: 476
Ellen: 705
Tedd: 809
Diane: 259
Elliot: 992
Susan: 544
 
Fri. Apr. 17, 2020
Tedd: 810
Elliot: 993
Ellen: 706
Diane: 260
 
Mon. Apr. 20, 2020
Elliot: 994
Tedd: 811
Justin: 477
Diane: 261
Ashley: 239
Grace: 904
Sarah: 720
 
Thu. Apr. 23, 2020
Susan: 545
Grace: 905
Diane: 262
Nanase: 636
Elliot: 995
Tedd: 812
Sarah: 721
 
Mon. Apr. 27, 2020
Elliot: 996
Tedd: 813
Sarah: 722
 
Wed. Apr. 29, 2020
Elliot: 997
Sarah: 723
Tedd: 814
Grace: 906
 
 
FULL COUNT:

Wed. Dec. 2, 2020
Diane: 320
Susan: 581
Tedd: 867
 
Fri. Dec. 4, 2020
Susan: 582
Tedd: 868
Diane: 321
Noriko: 5
 
Mon. Dec. 7, 2020
Tedd: 869
Diane: 322
Susan: 583
 
Wed. Dec. 9, 2020
Ashley: 273
Elliot: 1032
 
Fri. Dec. 11, 2020
Ashley: 274
Elliot: 1033
 
Mon. Dec. 14, 2020
Elliot: 1034
Ashley: 275
 
Wed. Dec. 16, 2020
Ashley: 276
Elliot: 1035
 
Fri. Dec. 18, 2020
Ashley: 277
Elliot: 1036
 
Mon. Dec. 21, 2020
Tedd: 870
Susan: 584
Diane: 323
Justin: 519
Nanase: 666
 
Wed. Dec. 23, 2020
Susan: 585
Tedd: 871
Diane: 324
 
Mon. Dec. 28, 2020
Ellen: 732
Tedd: 872
Larry: 35 (1st appearance since 2018)
Rich: 27 (1st appearance since 2018)
Nanase: 667
Diane: 325
 
Wed. Dec. 30, 2020
Tedd: 873
Pandora: 120 (2020 debut)
 
*Can I just say I think it's funny that a character is making their debut for the year on the very last day?
 
FULL COUNT:

I'll put $Q 25 on April... of 2021.

On January 31 in The Future:   2021 - Former president Donald J. Trump is finally removed from the White House by Secret Service and police, where he had been holed up for eleven days, refusing to leave. Of course we all know he really just accidentally locked himself in the bathroom.   2033 - An assassination attempt on Senator Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez fails when her would-be killer suffers a stroke just before he is able to initiate his attack. A self-described "anti-socialist", he had refused access to free public healthcare (famously championed by the senator), which could have saved him. You can't make this stuff up.   2057 - The last patch of Maldives soil sinks beneath the waves for good. Now I'm never getting my security deposit back.   2081 - Coca-cola retires their once-iconic polar bear advertising mascots, deeming them insensitive. That, and most people under 25 don't even know what they are.   2107 - The last ice from the last glacier on Earth melts. This is going to be a really bad hit to the bottled water industry.   2116 - The first shots are fired in the Third American Civil War. Folks in the nations of California and Cascadia feel a certain vindication.   2199 - Alison Simms, the first human born on Mars, is...well, born. The first person in the history of the world not to be part of the history of the world.   2245 - Pope Francis III is elected. Let's hope he's a bit more like his first namesake than his second, eh? Eh? You know what I'm talking about.   2311 - Rwanda officially takes the place of Peru as the world's largest economy. China quietly reminds us all of their storied history of playing the long game.   2465 - The crew of the Astraeus become the first human beings to leave the Solar System. "Smart move, getting out while you can." ~California and Cascadia

I know that there are at least some Christians present, either former or currently practicing, and I thought this might be of interest to them.
https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2019/december-web-only/trump-should-be-removed-from-office.html
Meanwhile, I need to go have a heaping helping of crow. I have been condemning Evangelicals wholesale for a while now and was recently reminded that this was a bad thing. This article drives the point home quite hard.

"Religion has actually convinced people...that there's an invisible man! Living in the sky! Who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of TEN THINGS he does NOT want you to do! And if you do ANY of these ten things, he has a special place full of fire, and smoke, and burning, and torture, and anguish, where he will send you to live, and suffer, and burn, and choke, and scream, and cry, forever and ever 'til the end of time.
"But he loves you! He loves you. He loves you, and he NEEDS MONEY! He always needs money! He's all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing, and all-wise, somehow, *thunk*, just can't handle money!
"Religion takes in billions of dollars, they pay no taxes, and they always need a little more. Now, you talk about a good bullshit story, ho-ly shit."

~George Carlin

54% for impeachment and 50% for both impeachment and removal, if it is the one I saw quoted.

I would posit that it is impossible to know. However, the fact that you are still looking communicates to me that somewhere in your heart you want to believe.

I obviously do not share your life experience, but based on my own, that's my take.

I thought it wasn't until he saw poop. Dog poop.
The atheistic stance that rings closest to true for me is actually from Babylon Five. Marcus Cole.
"Wouldn't it be much worse if life were fair, and all the terrible things that happen to us come because we actually deserve them? So, now I take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe."

 
To deny that Western culture and Christianity are deeply intertwined is to ignore over 1600 years of European history, to say nothing of the post-Columbian western hemisphere.

At the same time, saying Western culture is "largely based" on Christian thought is, in my opinion, an overstatement or an oversimplification. I'm not sure which.

The roots of Western culture go back much further than the existence of Christianity. The two have greatly influenced each other, and they grew and changed together for hundreds of years, to the point that for a time they might have been considered one and the same, but to say something is "based on" something it fundamentally  predates doesn't really work.

 
To deny that Western culture and Christianity are deeply intertwined is to ignore over 1600 years of European history, to say nothing of the post-Columbian western hemisphere.

At the same time, saying Western culture is "largely based" on Christian thought is, in my opinion, an overstatement or an oversimplification. I'm not sure which.

The roots of Western culture go back much further than the existence of Christianity. The two have greatly influenced each other, and they grew and changed together for hundreds of years, to the point that for a time they might have been considered one and the same, but to say something is "based on" something it fundamentally  predates doesn't really work.

Atheist tend to make a lot of sense, they aren't caught up in a religious framework that they feel compelled to defend, and in turn they don't have one that they use to rationalize their behavior.
 

I think I am very tired. I read that as 'immorality.' I guess in the case of Zeus it wouldn't be too far off.

It kind of depends. Standing on his own a king is always a sovereign ruler. Feudal rulers were all in agreement on that. You could have a rank equal to that of a king in an empire, but then you called yourself something different, e. g. a Royal Duke or a viceroy (this latter if appointed by the Emperor or Empress). It is also important to note that you could have a King or Queen of England who simultaneously was also Emperor/Empress of the British Empire.
On the other hand, you could also be the sovereign ruler of a country and at the same time Duke (or similar lesser rank) of fiefdoms outside your actual kingdom. This was the case of the Danish Kings for quite a while; apart from being Kings, they were also Dukes of Schleswig and Holstein. But the latter two were not part of Denmark. They were German fiefdoms and enjoyed separate rights and laws. This triggered an actual rebellion when the Danish King Frederik the Seventh started to treat them as part of Denmark in 1848 and later on the infamous 1864 war against Prussia and Austria when the singularly incompetent and inept government we had at the time outright attempted to annex them into the kingdom itself.
And of course, in 1920 we had the Easter Crisis when Denmark was offered the return of both plus the land the Prussians had taken away from us in 1864 as part of the Allied attempt to dismember Germany. The Danish government at the time possessed both brains and foresight beyond their current term (nearly unique for our political history) and elected to solve the issue through a plebiscite. They drew the border as close to the 50% want to go to Germany/50% want to go to Denmark point as possible. Stunningly, this meant that Schleswig and Holstein preferred to stay German. Then our not very bright King Christian the 10th threw a hissy fit and fired the government because this reasonable solution did not suit his Royal Ego. Ah well.
Back to the King point again: feudal lands were so anal about this that when Prussia attempted to establish itself as a monarchy, the hapless Friedrich had to make do with the title 'King in Prussia' rather than 'King of Prussia' as the latter would have made his neighbours twitch and might have caused a war. And he had to do a delicate diplomatic dance to get even that much. They could be incredibly anal about that title sometimes.

There is a very simple way to determine if someone is a King...
 

You've got WAY more patience than I do, Hack. I gave up a long time ago even attempting to reason with people who are so obviously drowning in Kool-Aid. Just reading this thread is maddening, which usually makes my responses flippant and unhelpful. Thanks for hanging in there.

That took him two days and he only did it because his spin doctors made him.
This is my opinion of Nazis. If one Nazi and nine other people sit around a table and none of the others around the table object to the Nazi's views, there are ten Nazis at that table.
Oh, you are a homophobe, too. That's okay then.
Name one other US president who fawned over a man like Putin and defended his aggression against smaller countries.
I'll wait.
-- At the last G7 meeting, Trump argued loudly for Russia's re-inclusion in them. Russia was specifically expelled for its attack on Ukraine. It still hasn't returned the possessions it stole and remains at war with her.
-- There is currently an American base in Syria which now has Russian flags flying because Trump ordered all defense of it heedlessly abandoned when he betrayed the Kurds.
-- The diplomatic position internationally of the US has degenerated to that of laughingstock. President Emmanuel Macron of France recently pronounced NATO on 'life support' because abovementioned betrayal of the Kurds (urged by Erdogan, another dictator) showed that the US cannot be relied on to keep its treaties. Despise him though I may, in this he is unfortunately right. The other G7 countries try to avoid Trump because of his fawning over Putin and he was all but ignored at their last meeting.
-- the situation in the Middle East is immensely improved to Putin's advantage.
-- abovementioned and ongoing destruction of the US' international standing leaves a power vacuum which of COURSE is to the advantage of an opportunistic dictator like Putin.
-- Trump has convinced his entire base, you included, that it is to the advantage of the US to trust in and believe Putin over its own intelligence services.
Not a bad start, and that is just what I can remember off the top of my head.
You must be sodding blind and deaf.
When a journalist during the 2016 campaign with a neurological disorder attempted to interview him, Trump openly mocked him and made exaggerated and clownish movements in order to ridicule him.
He attacks Muslim families whose children fight in the US armed forces.
The current government of Israel is itself racist. He is not supporting them because he loves them. He is supporting them because he wants to fan the flames in the Middle East -- which also favours Putin.
He called an American-born judge 'Mexican' because he took a position against him.
For YEARS he insisted that the five young people of colour in New York who were accused of rape deserved the death sentence -- and continued to do so even after they were found 'not guilty'.
He and his father long carried a policy of not allowing Black people to rent apartments or rooms of any kind in Trump property and went to court for it. They lost.
The whole vile 'Birther' mess, which you of course will claim was not at ALL racist.
I did not say it was a crime. What I say is that it was reprehensible and disgusting. I will stand by that. What makes me wonder is why everybody else in the GOP just tamely either accepts it, supports it or at MOST vaguely mutter that it 'lacked class.' Without noticing that Trump has never, EVER shown class. Tell me, would you have given Obama a pass for doing anything like that? Or even kept it to a mild statement like 'it lacked class'?
You really do live in a bubble, don't you.
Hello? Did you even listen to the direct transmissions from the public hearings in the House of Representatives? I did. I'd learned my lesson from Justin Amash, thank you. Ambassador Yovanovitch was the victim of a smear campaign for months and was removed over the objection of several other career diplomats who had served Republican and Democratic administrations both for decades. Are you REALLY so lost that you actually believe that everybody who ever objected to Trump is part of or the patsies of a Deep State conspiracy?
The details are out there. LOOK THEM UP. I refuse to do your work for you because I could quote the bollocking Encyclopaedia Britannica at you and you would call it a Deep State plot.
What I marvel at is that you apparently feel it is okay for Trump to attack someone and then lay the burden of proof on the people he attacked.
...last I heard, killing someone because he was 'probably' guilty of a crime was still murder. I believe the specific term is 'vigilantism.'
So if I aim a loaded gun at someone, I am not engaged in a reckless and dangerous action as long as they are unaware of it?
And more to the point, HOW DO YOU THINK THAT TWEET WOULD AFFECT SOMEONE ELSE WHO MIGHT BE CONTEMPLATING GIVING EVIDENCE?
Are you really so incredibly dense that you don't recognise the same methods used by the Mafia when they employed public intimidation against witnesses, not just to try and silence them, but also to make an example of them to other potential witnesses? Trump was saying, "I am destroying this woman's reputation and telling my followers to hate her and persecute her. This will happen to anyone else who tries to present evidence I don't like, too."
Yeah, for of COURSE he doesn't have, like, staffers to do that for him who might conceivably tug at his sleeve and tell him, "Mr. Chairman, you need to see this."
I mean, Justin Amash has a staff that he can put to work for him for things just like that, but after all, he is a Congressman in the opposition and Schiff is only a committee head.

As to what he wanted or didn't want to hear, that is sodding irrelevant. What matters is what Ambassador Yovanovitch said.
At least there we can agree.
They have the evidence of all the witnesses put together, and I am increasingly convinced that you did not even bother to watch the direct transmissions of the public hearings themselves. Funnily enough it was a Republican who taught me that partisan fervour alone is no substitute for paying attention to what is actually going on.
Witness tampering is obstruction of justice. See above.
Ordering public servants not to testify in spite of Congress subpoenas is obstruction of justice.
As to the rest of it, you clearly have more faith in a Putin narrative parroted by Trump than you have in your own nation's intelligence services. I hope you like your bubble since you refuse to ever poke your head outside of it.

Absolutely right person. You are just in Trump's very own bubble. You stubbornly defend Trump, who:
-- defends Nazis. He said there were good people on both sides in Charlottesville.
-- persecutes LGBTQI* people. He ordered trans people out of the military. You know, dangerous threats to society like me.
-- fawns over and kowtows to dictators. Kim Jong Un is grateful for the platform Trump gave him. Erdogan made Trump abandon the Kurds with ONE phone call. Putin has gained SO much from Trump's decisions.
-- is openly disablist, misogynistic, racist and promulgates hatred and distrust.
-- calls the intelligence services of the United States incompetent, untrustworthy and untruthful. You know, well known partisan organisations like DHS and CIA. These have never had Republican leaders ever.
-- engages in smear campaigns against top ranked diplomats who have served the US loyally for decades.
-- Routinely defames decorated war veterans and insults Gold Star families.
-- conversely, he just gave a pardon to a war criminal who had shot down an unarmed not yet fully grown girl in a flower-decorated burkah. Over the objections of the Pentagon.
-- engages in outright witness tampering by tweeting libel and threats at men and women who have been called to Congress as fact witnesses.
And you justify all of this by saying "Democrats are just as bad or at least they would do it if they could do it, too."
None of the above is justifiable. No matter the party the perpetrator pretends to belong to.
 

...
...yes, yes. Whatever you say. I may answer later if I can be bothered. I really have better things to do than to argue with someone who firmly believes that one side is the source of all wrongs and hence this justifies the other side in repeating the exact same wrongs only worse.
Enjoy your partisan bubble. I will go on reading both progressive and conservative arguments and attempt to navigate a course from there. It's much less comfortable because I keep having my beliefs challenged and even proven wrong at times, but I prefer that, possibly because I am a masochist.