Funny/Strange News Stories

32xcfs.jpg
 
Which really isn't doing a good job of explaining away Trump being a complete knob. It's just about as stupid to berate NASA for moon missions if the moon is part of getting to Mars, as would be to say that the moon is part of Mars. And honestly, given so many if his previous tweets, either way it's not surprising.
 
Which really isn't doing a good job of explaining away Trump being a complete knob.

Quite. Still, I can see what he was trying to say... but it illustrates very well why his tweets drag the reputation of his office down (imo). If you or I make a mess of a post here, on Twitter, or wherever, then that's just how it is. For the president of a powerful first world country it's just embarrassing.
 
Last edited:

Obviously you can't paws a live stream but litter on they're feline fine about it.

Crap puns but I'm annoyed that I came here to post this story and it was already here :D
 
Christian group petitions Netflix to have TV series 'Good Omens' cancelled... unfortunately it's not on Netflix.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2...d-omens-christian-neil-gaiman-terry-pratchett
Is that the one for which Gaiman ensured Terry had a seat (with the various accoutrements Terry would have wanted had he been able to attend) reserved at the premier public screening? That gesture made me feel tingly inside and I'm a fan of neither Pratchett nor Gaiman.
 
I'm reminded of *pfft* stupid Flanders watching TV he'd recorded to check for "offensive" content.
 
I find this quite a hilarious case of playing victim on social media to the extreme.

No, Hikind, just because you think you have a noble principle behind your egregious lawsuit, doesn't make it look any less stupid, I'm afraid.

Surely it's making the point? If politicians' social media outputs are part of public speech from which certain individuals can not be blocked then that principle must go to all politicians, no?

EDIT: Just noticed this is the funny news thread... hadn't expected that.
 
Surely it's making the point? If politicians' social media outputs are part of public speech from which certain individuals can not be blocked then that principle must go to all politicians, no?

EDIT: Just noticed this is the funny news thread... hadn't expected that.
Personally I would prefer a world where the freedom to not listen exists for everyone - some people can get really insufferable. :dopey:

Also, you went as far as publishing a post in this thread but never checked what the title was? :odd:
 
Personally I would prefer a world where the freedom to not listen exists for everyone - some people can get really insufferable. :dopey:

That's the freedom not to listen, a self-effected act. The ruling is on the other side of the coin: politicians' speech in public domains is public and they can't wilfully block some of the public from that.

Also, you went as far as publishing a post in this thread but never checked what the title was? :odd:

You never lose track between America, Aliens, Racialistism, Muslamicals or Conspiracing? ;)
 
It's nice to see that ruling is being upheld. And while I don't necessarily agree with Hikind's litigious approach, I don't think AOC is above this.
 
Back