Funny (political, religious) pictures

I marked it funny.

That being said, does that publication have multiple authors? If it's the SAME person for both articles, f'n hilarious. If different, still funny, but does happen with a publication with multiple people writing for it.


I have no doubt it's a case of cognitive dissonance, and/or whatever you call it where everything from a "side" you support must be good, no matter how contradictory. Not quite to the level of doublethink in this case, (though single-day turnaround pushes near the definition) but definitely related to it.


FYI: Doublethink as I understand it from the book (yes I've read it) requires you to believe contradictory things at the same time and to voice such as each is needed, not that you changed your mind along the way and that something that was good is now bad, or vice-versa. That's just changing your mind.
 
I marked it funny.

That being said, does that publication have multiple authors? If it's the SAME person for both articles, f'n hilarious. If different, still funny, but does happen with a publication with multiple people writing for it.


I have no doubt it's a case of cognitive dissonance, and/or whatever you call it where everything from a "side" you support must be good, no matter how contradictory. Not quite to the level of doublethink in this case, (though single-day turnaround pushes near the definition) but definitely related to it.


FYI: Doublethink as I understand it from the book (yes I've read it) requires you to believe contradictory things at the same time and to voice such as each is needed, not that you changed your mind along the way and that something that was good is now bad, or vice-versa. That's just changing your mind.
I'm not going to dig through last night's twitter feed, but one guy was definitely going full doublethink. First how bringing in Kelly to reign in the chaos was good, and later how the signs of chaos were just a ruse to confuse Trump's enemies.
 
If they didn't want to pass those opinions off as the opinion of the news outlet, they should've put the author names in the tweets.
 
If they didn't want to pass those opinions off as the opinion of the news outlet, they should've put the author names in the tweets.
Oh I wasn't meaning anything deeper than "I don't know that outlet, I wonder if it's one person or multiple." If CNN (or anything else similarly huge), I assume different authors on nearly everything. If it's an outlet I don't recognize, I don't necessarily know, and that impacts my "amount of funny" on the differing headlines on the same day.

Still an editorial decision to run both, thus still some funny regardless.
 
I'm not clicking that.
Don't fear the Tingle[DOUBLEPOST=1501605946,1501605851][/DOUBLEPOST]And for people like @Dave who are afraid of having their amazon recommendations become more interesting, the full title of that Chuck Tingle masterpiece is "Pounded In The Butt By The Fact That It Took Less Time For This Book To Be Written And Published Than The Entire Length Of Tony Scarymoochy’s Term As White House Communications Director"
 

Dave

Staff member
I already got that by mousing over the link. But I'm at work so clicking gay porn erotica links even on Amazon probably wouldn't be in my best interest.
 
They're blocked by adblockers, so if you're using one... that's the issue.
I haven't changed anything. Maybe the nativeAdBlocker updated? I do see now that there is an "unauthenticated source scripts" warning and a "plugins blocked" warning. Hmm..that's definitely new.[DOUBLEPOST=1501607802,1501607585][/DOUBLEPOST]And it is already proving to be a pain in the ass to try and unblock it. :mad:
 

GasBandit

Staff member
I haven't changed anything. Maybe the nativeAdBlocker updated? I do see now that there is an "unauthenticated source scripts" warning and a "plugins blocked" warning. Hmm..that's definitely new.[DOUBLEPOST=1501607802,1501607585][/DOUBLEPOST]And it is already proving to be a pain in the ass to try and unblock it. :mad:
I'm surprised it doesn't just give you an option to whitelist halforums.com.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
Not secure? Hmmm. Try it now and see if there's a difference.
There's only so much you can do about it. Browsers these days have started deciding to throw hissyfits if every single element on a page is not https. And most hotlinked images are not https. So the browser goes into full Earl-of-Lemongrab mode because OBVIOUSLY that cat meme is trying to steal your identity.
 
I don't know, but I doubt it. My browser's been fuming about insecure content here for weeks, I just told it to STFU and deal.
I haven't been able to see twitter stuff beyond "loading content" for a LONG time despite whitelisting this place in both uBlock and Ghostery (firefox). Facebook stuff just doesn't show up at all.
There's only so much you can do about it. Browsers these days have started deciding to throw hissyfits if every single element on a page is not https. And most hotlinked images are not https. So the browser goes into full Earl-of-Lemongrab mode because OBVIOUSLY that cat meme is trying to steal your identity.
And ya, that cat meme probably IS trying to steal your identity. Pretty much everything everywhere is, if by IP if nothing else. But that doesn't mean I don't want it loaded.


Edit: got that to load (and the amazon one) via disabling tracking protection in Firefox for here. I thought it was one of my addons, not FF itself! Oh well. I still have self-destructing cookies and stuff to remove locally stored objects (supercookies) as well. So we'll see what happens.
 
Top