I can’t stand it, I know you planned it
I’mma set it straight, DeSanto gate
I can’t stand tweetin’ when I’m in here
‘Cause your crystal ball ain’t so crystal clear
So while you sit back and wonder why
I got this ginger thorn in my side
Oh my god, it’s a mirage
I’m tellin’ y’all, it’s FAB-otage!
“Four hundred years ago on the planet Earth, workers who felt their livelihood threated by automation flung their wooden shoes called sabots into the machines to stop them.”
– Kim Cattrall
“Kim Cattrall?!”
Excuse me, Ms Shizzle, but I believe you mean LT VALERIS said that. I don’t who this Kim person is, but they were obviously quoting Lt Valeris. I know this is true, or my name isn’t Howard Lessick!
Yes, I know who Big Trouble in Little China, Mannequin, Star Trek VI, Sex & The City Kim Cattrall is. But technically, it was her character, Lt Valeris, who made that quote, not the actress. *shrug*
(I figured calling myself Howard made it clear I was making a joke; guess not)
Well, it helped – that was the only reason I thought you might have been joking. ^^;;
Anyway, I do see your point, but I would much rather quote one of the greatest actresses of all time rather than the character. Because, as you note, she’s been in a ton of amazing stuff. Mannnequin, silly as it is, was a fundamental part of my childhood.
You can attribute the quote to the screenwriters (Nicholas Meyer &
Denny Martin Flinn) or (if you also include the movie title) the character. Never the actor, unless they’re also the writer.
Good Omens the miniseries went up on Amazon today. If you’ve never read the book, it’s by Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman (so there’s your reason to read it right there), and it’s about and angel and a demon who don’t want the Apocalypse to happen, no matter who wins, so they team up to influence the Antichrist and make sure that the game stays basically a no-score tie.
Caught the first episode tonight. So far it’s amazingly loyal to the book, with tons of dialog almost line-for-line. Comes from getting one of the authors to write the show, I guess.
And the cast is amazing. David Tennant, Michael Sheen, Jon Hamm, Nick Offerman.
And Frances McDormand is God. Also, she’s playing God on the show.
Indeed! He’s an amazing actor. I’m really looking forward to watching Good Omens. But I first wanted to read the book before watching it, and I might want to binge it, so I’ll wait a bit and hope I can find the time for the book before that.
Isn’t Jessica Jones the one with the villain of the week who’s just a big guy who runs pretty fast and dies because he stands still under falling construction equipment? Or am I thinking of a different show?
No. You must be thinking of a different show.
Killgrave isn’t a villain of the week. He’s not a big guy. He doesn’t run fast and he sure as hell doesn’t die under falling construction equipment.
That’s a minor encounter in the second season. The character wasn’t a villain of the week, but an unbelieved informant who is murdered by *pushed* falling equipment. That’s like saying “isn’t Star Wars that one where the old guy cuts off the villain’s arm in a bar fight?”
All I’ve seen is a goofy slow-motion shot of a guy throwing a box of tissues at the protagonist, so it’s my only frame of reference. If all I knew about Star Wars was the bar scene, I’d probably ask something like what you said.
It was Terry’s deathbed wish to Neil. So Neil showrunned the thing himself. From everything that I’ve seen leading up to the release, it can’t not be amazing.
it’s by Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman (so there’s your reason to read it right there)
That’s actually my biggest reason for not reading it – while I love Gaiman’s comic book, television, and short prose work, and I like what short fiction I’ve read by Pratchett and adaptations of the Discworld books, I’ve found both of them to be basically impossible to read in long-form prose.
So I read Good Omens first, and then tried to read their individual works, and I agree. Good Omens isn’t like their other works. It takes Pratchett’s zany dry humor and Gaiman’s character and lorebuilding, and makes something similar to but completely unlike Hitchhikers Guide.
Hmm…That is the best part of each of them, and converging on HHGG would certainly not be bad (not entirely unexpected from them)… I may give it a try (and will certainly be checking out the TV series…eventually…I have a lot ahead of it).
Excellent comparison; I’ve actually referred to Adams, Pratchett and Gaiman as the Holy Trinity of BritSpecFic. All three have distinct styles, yet you can see the shared cultural ties between them.
Gaiman refines Pratchett’s tendency to go off on angry tangents and Pratchett keeps Gaiman’s gaze strictly focused on lampooning the subject matter rather than his own navel.
The two rather balance out each other’s weak spots.
Except presumably in that case, it’s possible to prolong the end. In this case, someone has to win because that’s how linear time works. I guess through the power of Comic Book Time™, Robin’s election can stay months away until about 2021.
(…I just got the Tage/Taj pun, by the way. Don’t mind me, just embarrassedly heading off to bed now at not having gotten it earlier. Sorry for coming off as aggressive in any way.)
Maybe five Buzzfeed News articles. Regular Buzzfeed had at least 1,700 algorithmically generated clickbait articles by the time the press conference was over.
There’s not a lot a hardworking leftist can do in rural/gerrymandered-college-town Indiana. Roz has one job: “Don’t let my awful and completely conscience-free sister get reelected.” I guess she’s taking it seriously.
Her tweets are also a large part of the reason she dropped in the polls in the first place and part of why the party dropped its support. Becky’s done more than Roz to sabotage Robin’s campaign. Though Roz set up the situation that got Becky involved, Becky took it from there.
So tweet about cartoons or something. Talk about the cadbury creme egg ‘cereal’ for breakfast. Flip the message again so people think Robin’s even more unreliable. Ask people to vote in an utterly dead tone of voice. Remind them of her antics when you ask them to vote.
I think Becky should do everything in her power to get Robin elected as long as she’s accepted her money. Mostly because it’s the only way she can step in when Robin is incapacitated by being tied up in the bedroom.
She’s a campaign manager not a chief of staff. Those two don’t usually mix. That’s why it’s so frustrating to talk to your rep’s offices and say you won’t vote for their candidate in next election, because there’s rules about discussing campaigns and campaigns have a different staff.
Also, I don’t think the chief of staff gets to step in if the rep is indisposed, but what do I know? With all the crap the US political system has in it, nothing would surprise me anymore. 😛
Becky has accepted payment for her position. Intentionally sabotaging the person she’s contractually bound herself to help, when Robin herself has thus far shown good faith in said contrsct, would and should bring severe consequences. No matter the ideology or cravenness of her boss, Becky is obligated to work in Robin’s best interests. That still leaves plenty of room for leeway, but intentionally making Robin lose the election through neglect is not in that room.
Yeh, can’t bring myself to give a fuck if Becky sabotages a politician who was happily campaigning against her rights two weeks ago either. Becky getting tuition out of Robin’s campaign tanking is just the icing on the cake.
Sabotaging a person’s campaign for office is absolutely a harm done to that person.
Will Robin do *more* harm to people while in office? Almost certainly barring major narrative character development that should in no way be relied upon. But Becky knew that when she accepted the job.
Let’s say Becky destroys Robin’s campaign through intentional neglect and/or sabotage. If I were a multi-millionaire, I’d pay Becky’s legal fees. If I were a lawyer with obligations to a firm, I’d take Robin’s case in a heartbeat because it’d be an easy win.
Robin is not entitled to a public office or to retaining power. She has plenty of disposable income and will be able to find other jobs. Robin. Will. Be. Fine.
If you know Robin will do more harm to people once she’s back in office, you should be applauding Becky for trying to keep her out of it.
A lawyer would never take this case against Becky because as you said, she doesn’t have anything worth suing for. It’d be a waste of a law firm’s resources. But you’re already arguing that employment obligations are more important than whether or not people get hurt so I don’t know what else to say.
We are in complete agreement that Robin is not entitled to public office. What she is absolutely entitled to is Becky’s best efforts to get her re-elected to said public office. Becky entered into a contract knowing full well what Robin was, and so long as Robin delivers on her end Becky is obligated to deliver on hers. There’s subtleties in contract law such as impossibility of performance yada yada, but that’s the general rule.
There’s what you think is right, and then there’s duty. Becky is free to quit and do what she thinks is right. She’s free to try to leverage her power to get what she thinks is right done. But the moment she violates her duty to work to get Robin re-elected, she is breaking her professional commitment.
You think public defenders only defend innocent people? You think judges just follow their conscience? Professional lumberjacks get to hammer nails through trees? Doctors decide whether they like someone before treating them? No, you know your duty and you do it. If you don’t, you shouldn’t be in the job.
No, she’s not. An employer can fire someone for half-assing their job, but they would have a very difficult time filing for breach of contract. That’s assuming Becky’s even signed a contract, which would very much surprise me considering this is Robin and I will bet internet cash she’s never written one up (or would even know where to go to get one drawn up) in her life. There are verbal contracts, sure, but those are a lot harder to prove.
Congratulations, you’ve just validated every single piece of shit whose committed atrocities, discriminated, etc. because ‘just following orders’, ‘just doing my job’, ‘it’s company policy’, etc. That’s exactly where ‘professional commitment > people’ leads. When it comes to other’s well being? Yeah, fuck professional commitments.
Becky ensuring Robin doesn’t get elected doesn’t infringe on her civil or human rights or risk her health the way a public defender, doctor or lumberjack do were they to take those actions. As for judges, they DO overturn unjust laws all the time. That’s part of the reason we HAVE judges.
I’m sick of retyping this post over and over without any notice of how long my posts would be automatically deleted.
Suffice to say the fact that you can’t tell the difference between professional responsibility and pawning off that responsibility as just following orders to commit atrocities shows the shallowness of your framing.
Fine with me if you’re going to be condescending as all get out.
If your job requires you to do something which you know will cause harm to people – which you’ve admitted getting Robin re-elected were – then no, I don’t care if you sabotage your job. Professional responsibilities can be fucked up and they can and do harm people. ‘I’m just doing my job’ is what everyone who works at all sorts of fucked up places tell themselves because they value professional commitments over people’s wellbeing.
Please do not confuse having confidence in a deeply studied position with condescension.
You keep defending Becky’s actions under the premise that fulfilling her professional responsibilities would do harm to others (to be clear, anyone wielding with power harms someone in ways great or relatively unimportant, but sometimes it’s for a greater good). Yet you seem to suppose that my position is that Becky should do her job to the best of her abilities. That is not my position. Becky should do her job to the best of her abilities because she has accepted and continues to accept payment for it. She is free to break her contract. But while she’s there, she can try to be a Mattis.
The fact that Mattis prioritized defense policies over civil rights as the Secretary of Defense should come as little surprise because of the nature of his professional duty. Mattis slowed Trump on the transgender front by commissioning a study on its impact on the military. He fulfilled his professional duties to the best of his abilities and quit when it was clear he could not.
That’s fair. But my point is that Becky should not accept consideration from Robin and then immediately betray her professional duty and integrity by neglecting or undermining Robin’s campaign. If she’s in it, she ought to put in a good faith effort. And if not, she should leave.
She’s got to at least ask some people so when she goes to Robin and says ‘I asked people to vote for you’, then she at least has some witnesses if Robin weirdly wants to verify she did at least ask and did ask some why they said no. Becky herself literally said she’s got to at least make the appearance of trying even though she doesn’t want to actually succeed.
Plus, like, Mandy already said Robin’s opponent is way far ahead of her. It is extremely unlikely that Becky would be able to, by asking around, magically turn the tide in Robin’s favour. She has only secured one vote by asking around so far from someone happy to do pretty much anything you ask.
Becky’s covering herself in the case of an off-chance and isn’t really making any true effort to convince people.
Roz can you just understand Becky’s situation and help her? Call it redemption for everyone calling you an ally with more bite than bark? Though if I’m being honest with myself it’s just that I really like Becky and I want /someone/ to actually help her with this complex she’s in. Dotty couldn’t be depended on so I’m grasping at every person Becky meets.
Roz is completely 100% in the right here, so, yeah, I don’t think she needs to “understand Becky’s situation”. Becky is doing something to help herself. It’s totally understandable, but that doesn’t make Roz wrong to call her out on it. If she wins, Robin is a safe vote for a conservative government—you know, the one that wants to deport Marcie and render Becky homeless and up Sarah’s tuition and deny Ruth access to health care etc etc etc.
If Becky owes anyone an explanation for this, it’s probably the person who’s been desperately trying to prevent Robin’s election this entire time. Becky needs to explain what’s going on before Roz can try to help her.
I feel like people calling Roz a “performative ally” are taking something Roz is frequently *accused* of and treating it as fact. In reality, we don’t really know whether Roz is a good ally, but she sure isn’t some Twitter loudmouth. She works her *ass* off to help people—working behind-the-scenes to sabotage her own sister’s Republican campaign, thrusting her body into a media frenzy for the same reasons, volunteering for Planned Parenthood, etc.
Roz is a flawed ally. She’s very argumentative and uncompromising, and maybe a bit quicker to call out other people’s screwups than she is to examine her own. I think people take those flaws and Flanderize her into some sort of Debate Bro.
Roz can be very holier than thou sometimes, but mother of god if anyone knows Robin can’t be trusted and needs to be kept far away from the white house, it’s her.
She has had at least one moment of being a performative ally (literally talking over Leslie. In her own class.) in regards to LGBT+ issues. We haven’t seen her be so with women’s issues or sexual assault. But her holier than thou attitude at times can make it seem more done to ‘be superior’ than out of true care even if she does insist she actually cares (and I do believe she genuinely cares).
However, I wouldn’t say Roz is 100% in the right here since she is literally screaming in Becky’s face instead of asking for an explanation which is very much not a reasonable reaction to anything Becky is currently actually saying.
Becky doesn’t address what Roz is talking about until the last panel. Roz is competitive, holier than thou, and obnoxious, but she’s not screaming in response to Becky giving harmless answers.
What do you mean Dorothy couldn’t be depended upon? Dorothy has done everything she can to support Becky and Joyce. Including literally putting food in her mouth.
Ah, I guess it’s not Dorothy’s fault that their conversation just ended with a “k bye” instead of advice of any sort being exchanged.
And I wasn’t trying to say that Roz is less than 100% right either, I just mean it’s nice when people go beyond being right. Anyway this is a dead thread perhaps, since the story and the comment sections still roll on 🙂
When it comes to maslows hiearchy of needs, it’s important for becky to “try” to help robin. The way she “tries” isn’t particularly effective, but its good enough to guarantee the roof over her head and her education, which, to becky, is ultimately important. She’s in such a rough spot, but making the choice to make sure she survives another day vs morals has got to weigh on a teenagers mind. I wonder if Becky will frame it like that for Roz?
“Doing this guarantees that I, a homeless lesbian youth, will have a job, a home, money and education.” Kinda bomb right on Roz’s performative allyship
Roz is concerned because she is trying to prevent her sister from winning an election in Indiana—which, despite Becky’s literally completely clueless bravado, Robin has *every chance of doing*, because it’s in a rural district of *Indiana*. Becky doesn’t know politics. Roz does. I have a strong feeling Roz is about to point this out.
Robin is a national representative. She is voting on policy, and she plans to be a solid red vote—that’s a vote against gay rights, against health care, against the homeless, against trans people, against immigrants, against abortion, and so on, and so on.
Growling at Roz for being “performative” is frankly bizarre. This is politics. This is about the exercise of power and the consequences for our actions. Becky’s choices are totally, absolutely understandable, and maybe even fair, but she is gambling with a lot here. Roz has strong opinions about politics because politics get people killed. If Becky gets Robin elected—and Roz has every reason to be concerned that she will—that’s a vote against abortion access, against impeachment of any bad Republican president who happens to get elected, and so on and so on.
Becky is playing with fire. The “hierarchy of needs” is all very nice, but “I am doing [bad thing] because I need it to get by” is a very complicated and not-at-all easily defended justification.
Especially when you remember that Becky could have stayed on Leslie’s couch and at least extracted some campaign promises from Robin that might have mitigated potential damages later.
Becky’s made some really questionable choices here. Roz, love her or hate her, exists in the story to call people out.
Becky absolutely does know politics. Roz may know the mechanics of them better, but Becky’s actually lived them. She’s the one who will be directly impacted first if Robin gets elected and resumes her old policies. She knows what’s at stake on a personal level. She KNOWS politics can get people killed, because it very nearly happened!
And those promises she could’ve extracted wouldn’t have been worth squat. It’s not something that can be put into a legally binding contract, so there’s no way to hold her to it. By the time she found out if Robin was lying, the election would be over. It’s much safer to just half-ass the job so she loses
Roz is right to be concerned, as she doesn’t know Becky isn’t REALLY trying to help Robin win, but Becky’s got brains too
Yeah, if Robin wins, they’re both fucked. Becky on LGBT+ rights and women’s rights, Roz on women’s rights, reproductive rights (which would also screw Becky long term but isn’t a pressing concern for her right now) and whatever fresh hell the GOP feels like unleashing on Latina folks.
I’m not at all sure what the political situation here is. Manley seemed somewhat competitive before the scandal and from a couple days back, Robin’s so far behind there’s no point in voting. (Which is a bad attitude of course, but hardly looks good for Robin.)
Becky’s efforts led to that. She helped break Robin from the party and cemented that break by continuing to tweet leftist policy statements. She was hired to continue that. It’s not at all clear to me that doing more of that will somehow win her nearly enough support to win. If it does, it’ll be by driving away her rural conservative support and somehow inspiring an “independent” leftist surge. Theoretically possible, I suppose, especially if Manley is one of those “I’m trying to be almost as conservative as the Republican to win in this red district” Democrats.
She could still win if the conservative base voters come home to her just to vote against the Democrat, but that will be despite Becky’s best efforts, not because of them.
Honestly Robin’s best strategy would have been to denounce everything she’s “said” in the past week or so and have Becky arrested for hacking her account, then go hard right again to pick up her old supporters. But she didn’t do that.
It’s also not at all clear to me that if Becky does pull off the miracle, despite not wanting to, that Robin will go back to being the reliable conservative vote. If she wins because of the popular ideas Becky’s been tweeting with a surge of pro-LGBTQ social and economic justice voters, won’t she see that as a means of staying in office? Especially with Becky still pushing her that way. (And it’ll appeal to Leslie?)
I’m also not at all sure
I think “guaranteed” is a bit of a stretch. She who can be appointed on a whim can be removed on a whim. Becky survives as long as she delivers results. If her actual usefulness (not just appearance of usefulness) ever falls below her expenses, she’ll be canned. Becky could make a useful scapegoat if things take a dive- De Santo can say she gave her an honest try, but she couldn’t deliver the numbers, then switch to whoever the next campaign manager is. Or Becky actually delivers the numbers. Win-win, it’s actually pretty shrewd.
People other than cis women do have periods though, like some trans men and nonbinary people. Also to be nitpicky not all people with a uterus do have periods and the term (biological) women especially in a parenthetical like that is not the most correct and inclusive way to refer to such. Afab women or cis women is better if you want to talk specifically about that group of peeps.
Personally I kind of stay away from most cable news, I prefer to get my news feed from website articles like vox & Huffington post or YouTube news channels like The Young Turks or the Humanist report.
Internet journalism can be just as slanted as cable TV, or even more heavily biased.
The important thing to watch out for is the presentation of opinion-based tabloid editorial content as legitimate journalism. The heavily advertised networks with big-name personalities are terrible about this. The actual news organizations behind them (CBS News, NBC News, PBS, AP, Reuters, etc) are usually better to read, and that’s where a lot of content creators get their reporting from in the first place. They just chew it up, spit it out on a plate, spice it up a bit, and serve it to hungry eyeballs that find their spices palatable.
I agree with this, article sites like the New York Times and politico are very well plugged in but they can seem really heavily biased and have a nasty case I’m trying to push a narrative first before straight up reporting a factual story.
I don’t trust most corporate-owned news companies these days. While I still use them occasionally, I get a lot more of my news from more lefty news sites like Common Dreams, Paste magazine’s politics section, and sometimes Jacobin magazine. I also like The Young Turks and Secular Talk on Youtube.
That’s equal but opposite to saying “I don’t trust the liberal mainstream media, I only get my news from Drudge Report and Breitbart”. At best you’re getting a slanted perspective, at worst you’re getting opinions masquerading as journalism.
A big part of the issue is media outlets presenting us with what they say our opinions should be, instead of presenting what’s actually happening. Hard news should be as unprocessed as possible, and in an ideal world that’s what we’d see on TV. Unfortunately the biig cable news stations with big-name faces exist on advertising revenue, and hard news is very dry viewing material. Bored eyeballs change the channel, but entertained, placated eyeballs keep watching. To keep the viewers engaged they have to spice their productions up with hotheaded bickering pundits and newsreaders who stare into the camera like they’re watching someone eat a bucket of mayonaise with their bare hands. As a result, these opinion shows have taken more and more air time away from hard fact based news reporting, and the line between them has been blurred in the public perception.
Read the news wire services. Look for consistency between multiple sources, because that’s where your facts are. Most of the media outlets spinning the news get their starting off point from a “corporate” outlet anyway. Don’t take processed news at face value, it’s all tainted with varying amounts of filler and other peoples’ opinions.
that sounds sort of like I sarcastically defined perpendicular but actually, like, sabotage that runs it’s course at the same time as Roz’s but shouldn’t interfere with it.
Although she might have just meant that it won’t interfere.
That’s only in a single plane, where parallel or intersecting are your only two options. In 3-d space, Becky’s line of sabotage could be skew to Roz’s (i.e., neither intersecting nor parallel).
I normally hate Rox for all she has done and her phony liberalism, but I agree that Becky shouldn’t help Robin even if she is using Robin… Oh my stars that makes Becky look worse.
As Leslie pointed out, it is hipocritical that Roz doesn’t allow other people (Joyce) to change and that she is being rude to a gay person (Leslie). She also uses her sex life as an excuse of being liberal, made a sex video to sabotage her own sister, used Joe as a tool (he doesn’t mind), and even the dean (who isn’t Big Boss in this universe) said that she has the right to her body but not the right to use the installations of the school for porn. Also, she is a sociopath like Robin, and her exchanges with Dorothy show she is a populist that uses her own popularity to get what she wants. She reminds of the current president of my country, but as a hyper sexual college girl.
Joyce has changed a lot in just three months. That is better than her gradual and slow change in the years of Walkyverse.
I agree with the sabotage, but it could have been handled in a better way.
I can dabet a lot about Roz’s behavior but I will restrain myself.
Dorothy is just starting at college and needs more experience outside the classroom, but the way Roz compares herself to Bane makes her look like a narcisistic manchild that focuses more on charisma than actual political activities. She was wearing a cowboy hat like if she were Cheney’s wife campaigning for him in southern states.
No, please, do not hold back! I really want to know how exactly is Roz a sociopath and why Dorothy has the excuse of “just starting college and needs more experience” but not Roz, even though they’re both the same age.
Is Becky going to be any good at this? Does de Santo expect her to be? Is she just going to be a scapegoat? Maybe Becky is savvy enough to reach people who will actually turn out to vote. Maybe not. I don’t remember a lot of 20somethings voting or even being registered to vote last time I checked, let alone in local/state elections.
Becky’s job is basically to raise Robin’s popularity by continuing to do what she was doing, since her tweets were the only thing popular about Robin right now.
I have absolutely no problem with Becky continuing to push pro-LGBTQ and leftist policies as Robin’s official positions. Mostly I think it’ll hurt her politically and if it does help her win then she’s got reasons to stick with it.
I don’t think Becky’s approach would help her win and if it somehow does I think she’d be less likely to go back to hardline conservative than if she won because of the peeps that used to back her.
It’s worth adding that ‘wrangled’ is entirely the wrong word and probably completely inverts the real current power dynamic between Robin and Becky. Oh, Robin wanted to wrangle her but instead, has found herself basically being wrangled herself!
How?
She has an openly gay youth running as her campaign manager, someone who can completely rebrand her image. A delay on the payment until the end of winter (ie after the polls close) and access to someone who’s in direct contact with her main crush.
And all she has to do is let her stay in her apartment.
Robin hasn’t done that last one. She’s not committed to change at all and still doesn’t understand what the problem with her policies was before. She’s unreliable af.
I love Roz but I dread seeing her show up and saying anything vaguely related to politics. I know the comments are going to be exhausting and the words “performative ally/performative allyship” are going to show up multiple times.
On one hand, I agree with Roz’s principles. On the other though, Becky was pretty low on the hierarchy of needs being met. Can’t blame her for taking the money. And once again, Roz seems myopic when it comes to actually understanding peoples’ motivations.
After letting the comic build up a backlog for nearly 18 months due to a long and boring reason, I’ve spent the past week and a half catching up. I don’t know what I’m going to do with myself now that I’m used to reading 30 strips a day…
This ends one of two ways. Either Roz fights Becky hard on this and ends being antagonistic towards Becky for weeks in comic time and years in outside time, or Becky explains herself and convinces Roz what she’s doing isn’t a bad thing and they end up…not friends per say, but perhaps pals? Buds? Comrades? What word works best for “not friends but more than aquaintances”?
In airports, TVs are often tuned to CNN, because a) it’s a cable news channel, which is b) not Fox News, and c) not MSNBC, so it draws fewer complaints from the air-traveling public than either of the latter two would.
Or at least that used to be the case. In my recent experience (mostly limited to SJC, ELP, and PHX), airports mostly don’t have TVs in public anymore, except in bars, where the TVs are usually tuned to sports channels. No real demand for them anymore, since most people use their phones/tablets/laptops for entertainment.
Loading ...
I can’t stand it, I know you planned it
I’mma set it straight, DeSanto gate
I can’t stand tweetin’ when I’m in here
‘Cause your crystal ball ain’t so crystal clear
So while you sit back and wonder why
I got this ginger thorn in my side
Oh my god, it’s a mirage
I’m tellin’ y’all, it’s FAB-otage!
“Four hundred years ago on the planet Earth, workers who felt their livelihood threated by automation flung their wooden shoes called sabots into the machines to stop them.”
– Kim Cattrall
“Kim Cattrall?!”
Excuse me, Ms Shizzle, but I believe you mean LT VALERIS said that. I don’t who this Kim person is, but they were obviously quoting Lt Valeris. I know this is true, or my name isn’t Howard Lessick!
… I can’t tell if you’re kidding, but just in case…
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000326/
Yes, I know who Big Trouble in Little China, Mannequin, Star Trek VI, Sex & The City Kim Cattrall is. But technically, it was her character, Lt Valeris, who made that quote, not the actress. *shrug*
(I figured calling myself Howard made it clear I was making a joke; guess not)
Well, it helped – that was the only reason I thought you might have been joking. ^^;;
Anyway, I do see your point, but I would much rather quote one of the greatest actresses of all time rather than the character. Because, as you note, she’s been in a ton of amazing stuff. Mannnequin, silly as it is, was a fundamental part of my childhood.
IN SWOOPS PEDANTIC MAN!
*clears throat*
You can attribute the quote to the screenwriters (Nicholas Meyer &
Denny Martin Flinn) or (if you also include the movie title) the character. Never the actor, unless they’re also the writer.
Er, “attribute my quote”… stupid lack of an edit button.
“I don’t say sabotage. *You* say sabotage. *I* say sabatadge.”
– William Shatner
“sabatoogie”
– Curly Howard
This etymology is mostly an urban myth (but well that’s what we get when we get it from an hollywood scenarist :P).
https://www.etymonline.com/word/sabotage
Now that’s a discarding sabot tage.
“Let’s make some noise. … That’s a good choice.”
Gotta love the Beastie Boys https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5rRZdiu1UE
I don’t have to, really. In fact, I can’t stand the Beastie Boys!
You are entitled to your opinion – even if it happens to be wrong. ;-p
Ah, classical music.
Good Omens the miniseries went up on Amazon today. If you’ve never read the book, it’s by Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman (so there’s your reason to read it right there), and it’s about and angel and a demon who don’t want the Apocalypse to happen, no matter who wins, so they team up to influence the Antichrist and make sure that the game stays basically a no-score tie.
Roz and Becky should team up, is what I’m saying.
Yeah, yeah! They’re like… like… sabotage sisters or something!
Thanks for the reminder! I want to watch that but had completely forgotten about it before now.
Caught the first episode tonight. So far it’s amazingly loyal to the book, with tons of dialog almost line-for-line. Comes from getting one of the authors to write the show, I guess.
And the cast is amazing. David Tennant, Michael Sheen, Jon Hamm, Nick Offerman.
And Frances McDormand is God. Also, she’s playing God on the show.
I had no idea this existed, book or series. I am now just minutes into the first episode and it is wonderful. Thank you for bringing attention to it!
David Tennant? Isn’t he the skinny guy from Broadchurch? He was pretty fantastic in that.
Oh man, watch Jessica Jones. I loved him as Doctor Who, but the sheer casual insanity he brings to that role *shivers*
Indeed! He’s an amazing actor. I’m really looking forward to watching Good Omens. But I first wanted to read the book before watching it, and I might want to binge it, so I’ll wait a bit and hope I can find the time for the book before that.
David Tenant is amazing in literally everything he’s done. I’m even fond of his turn in the Fright Night remake.
Good Omens is a fantastic book! One of my favorites.
Isn’t Jessica Jones the one with the villain of the week who’s just a big guy who runs pretty fast and dies because he stands still under falling construction equipment? Or am I thinking of a different show?
No. You must be thinking of a different show.
Killgrave isn’t a villain of the week. He’s not a big guy. He doesn’t run fast and he sure as hell doesn’t die under falling construction equipment.
That’s a minor encounter in the second season. The character wasn’t a villain of the week, but an unbelieved informant who is murdered by *pushed* falling equipment. That’s like saying “isn’t Star Wars that one where the old guy cuts off the villain’s arm in a bar fight?”
All I’ve seen is a goofy slow-motion shot of a guy throwing a box of tissues at the protagonist, so it’s my only frame of reference. If all I knew about Star Wars was the bar scene, I’d probably ask something like what you said.
I’ve told myself I can’t watch until I finish my most recent re-reading. And I only figured out which box it was packed in earlier today.
Really? I didn’t know that was getting a mini series. Guess I’ll be adding that to the watch list. Love that book.
It was Terry’s deathbed wish to Neil. So Neil showrunned the thing himself. From everything that I’ve seen leading up to the release, it can’t not be amazing.
That’s actually my biggest reason for not reading it – while I love Gaiman’s comic book, television, and short prose work, and I like what short fiction I’ve read by Pratchett and adaptations of the Discworld books, I’ve found both of them to be basically impossible to read in long-form prose.
So I read Good Omens first, and then tried to read their individual works, and I agree. Good Omens isn’t like their other works. It takes Pratchett’s zany dry humor and Gaiman’s character and lorebuilding, and makes something similar to but completely unlike Hitchhikers Guide.
Hmm…That is the best part of each of them, and converging on HHGG would certainly not be bad (not entirely unexpected from them)… I may give it a try (and will certainly be checking out the TV series…eventually…I have a lot ahead of it).
Excellent comparison; I’ve actually referred to Adams, Pratchett and Gaiman as the Holy Trinity of BritSpecFic. All three have distinct styles, yet you can see the shared cultural ties between them.
Gaiman refines Pratchett’s tendency to go off on angry tangents and Pratchett keeps Gaiman’s gaze strictly focused on lampooning the subject matter rather than his own navel.
The two rather balance out each other’s weak spots.
Except presumably in that case, it’s possible to prolong the end. In this case, someone has to win because that’s how linear time works. I guess through the power of Comic Book Time™, Robin’s election can stay months away until about 2021.
In an amazing bit of synchronicity, I’ve just finished re-reading that novel.
*cues Beastie Boys*
It can’t be sabotage. Nobody’s throwing wooden shoes at anything.
. . . . Man this is an uncomfortable situation. It feels so. . . *dishonest*.
If this were a temple it’d be the Tage Mahal.
…assuming you meant the Taj Mahal, that building’s a tomb, not a temple.
(…I just got the Tage/Taj pun, by the way. Don’t mind me, just embarrassedly heading off to bed now at not having gotten it earlier. Sorry for coming off as aggressive in any way.)
Also, Becky, c’mon, you know there’s, like, five Buzzfeed articles about you by now.
Maybe five Buzzfeed News articles. Regular Buzzfeed had at least 1,700 algorithmically generated clickbait articles by the time the press conference was over.
Ah, so Roz is still on that. Here I figured she’d called it a day by now with the stuff she’d already accomplished.
No relaxing until the election’s over, I imagine.
There’s not a lot a hardworking leftist can do in rural/gerrymandered-college-town Indiana. Roz has one job: “Don’t let my awful and completely conscience-free sister get reelected.” I guess she’s taking it seriously.
I’m impressed that Becky understands the concept of orthogonality. I guess her home schooling wasn’t all about religion.
And . . . I just noticed her hair gets an “A” in panel 4.
And now I’m going to cook some Moroccan food for rebels: sabo-tagine.
Aight, who played this Beastie Boys CD over the PA system?
Jaylah. She likes the beats and shouting.
Seriously, Becky, you could probably get away with just tweeting all day and not asking people to vote for her at all. Listen to Roz.
Her Tweets are more effective than this
Yeah, her tweets were so effective it got her hired from the increase in support Robin was getting.
Her tweets are also a large part of the reason she dropped in the polls in the first place and part of why the party dropped its support. Becky’s done more than Roz to sabotage Robin’s campaign. Though Roz set up the situation that got Becky involved, Becky took it from there.
Yes, but now they’re ‘the only popular thing about her’.
And she’s so far down in the polls it’s not worth voting against her. Bad approach of course, but not a good sign for her campaign.
That’s not helping. That’s just reminding me of 2016. That’s not a thought I’m super jazzed about with Robin.
So tweet about cartoons or something. Talk about the cadbury creme egg ‘cereal’ for breakfast. Flip the message again so people think Robin’s even more unreliable. Ask people to vote in an utterly dead tone of voice. Remind them of her antics when you ask them to vote.
There are ways around this.
Ways around convincing nobody?
Ways around her tweets being effective and around trying this hard. I know she’s not trying really hard, but there’s room to do even less here.
There really aren’t. Doing any less would make it obvious she was doing nothing.
Twitter wise, maybe, but Robin’s not with her watching how she canvasses. Or even checking she IS in fact, canvassing.
I think Becky should do everything in her power to get Robin elected as long as she’s accepted her money. Mostly because it’s the only way she can step in when Robin is incapacitated by being tied up in the bedroom.
She’s a campaign manager not a chief of staff. Those two don’t usually mix. That’s why it’s so frustrating to talk to your rep’s offices and say you won’t vote for their candidate in next election, because there’s rules about discussing campaigns and campaigns have a different staff.
Also, I don’t think the chief of staff gets to step in if the rep is indisposed, but what do I know? With all the crap the US political system has in it, nothing would surprise me anymore. 😛
Becky has accepted payment for her position. Intentionally sabotaging the person she’s contractually bound herself to help, when Robin herself has thus far shown good faith in said contrsct, would and should bring severe consequences. No matter the ideology or cravenness of her boss, Becky is obligated to work in Robin’s best interests. That still leaves plenty of room for leeway, but intentionally making Robin lose the election through neglect is not in that room.
I don’t give a shit about Robin and want her far the fuck away from Washington. If Becky sabotages her via neglect all I can say is ‘good’.
It doesn’t matter whether you give a shit about Robin. Becky is paid to give a shit about Robin and has taken on a heavy professional responsibility.
Yeh, can’t bring myself to give a fuck if Becky sabotages a politician who was happily campaigning against her rights two weeks ago either. Becky getting tuition out of Robin’s campaign tanking is just the icing on the cake.
Hence why “being right” is never a defense to harming another.
Robin will be fine. Not being in a position where she can continue hurting people is not a harm done to Robin.
Sabotaging a person’s campaign for office is absolutely a harm done to that person.
Will Robin do *more* harm to people while in office? Almost certainly barring major narrative character development that should in no way be relied upon. But Becky knew that when she accepted the job.
Let’s say Becky destroys Robin’s campaign through intentional neglect and/or sabotage. If I were a multi-millionaire, I’d pay Becky’s legal fees. If I were a lawyer with obligations to a firm, I’d take Robin’s case in a heartbeat because it’d be an easy win.
One nice thing for Becky though is that she’s judgment proof right now. Robin could sue the pants off her, but pants are about all Robin would get.
Robin is not entitled to a public office or to retaining power. She has plenty of disposable income and will be able to find other jobs. Robin. Will. Be. Fine.
If you know Robin will do more harm to people once she’s back in office, you should be applauding Becky for trying to keep her out of it.
A lawyer would never take this case against Becky because as you said, she doesn’t have anything worth suing for. It’d be a waste of a law firm’s resources. But you’re already arguing that employment obligations are more important than whether or not people get hurt so I don’t know what else to say.
We are in complete agreement that Robin is not entitled to public office. What she is absolutely entitled to is Becky’s best efforts to get her re-elected to said public office. Becky entered into a contract knowing full well what Robin was, and so long as Robin delivers on her end Becky is obligated to deliver on hers. There’s subtleties in contract law such as impossibility of performance yada yada, but that’s the general rule.
There’s what you think is right, and then there’s duty. Becky is free to quit and do what she thinks is right. She’s free to try to leverage her power to get what she thinks is right done. But the moment she violates her duty to work to get Robin re-elected, she is breaking her professional commitment.
You think public defenders only defend innocent people? You think judges just follow their conscience? Professional lumberjacks get to hammer nails through trees? Doctors decide whether they like someone before treating them? No, you know your duty and you do it. If you don’t, you shouldn’t be in the job.
No, she’s not. An employer can fire someone for half-assing their job, but they would have a very difficult time filing for breach of contract. That’s assuming Becky’s even signed a contract, which would very much surprise me considering this is Robin and I will bet internet cash she’s never written one up (or would even know where to go to get one drawn up) in her life. There are verbal contracts, sure, but those are a lot harder to prove.
Congratulations, you’ve just validated every single piece of shit whose committed atrocities, discriminated, etc. because ‘just following orders’, ‘just doing my job’, ‘it’s company policy’, etc. That’s exactly where ‘professional commitment > people’ leads. When it comes to other’s well being? Yeah, fuck professional commitments.
Becky ensuring Robin doesn’t get elected doesn’t infringe on her civil or human rights or risk her health the way a public defender, doctor or lumberjack do were they to take those actions. As for judges, they DO overturn unjust laws all the time. That’s part of the reason we HAVE judges.
I’m sick of retyping this post over and over without any notice of how long my posts would be automatically deleted.
Suffice to say the fact that you can’t tell the difference between professional responsibility and pawning off that responsibility as just following orders to commit atrocities shows the shallowness of your framing.
Fine with me if you’re going to be condescending as all get out.
If your job requires you to do something which you know will cause harm to people – which you’ve admitted getting Robin re-elected were – then no, I don’t care if you sabotage your job. Professional responsibilities can be fucked up and they can and do harm people. ‘I’m just doing my job’ is what everyone who works at all sorts of fucked up places tell themselves because they value professional commitments over people’s wellbeing.
Please do not confuse having confidence in a deeply studied position with condescension.
You keep defending Becky’s actions under the premise that fulfilling her professional responsibilities would do harm to others (to be clear, anyone wielding with power harms someone in ways great or relatively unimportant, but sometimes it’s for a greater good). Yet you seem to suppose that my position is that Becky should do her job to the best of her abilities. That is not my position. Becky should do her job to the best of her abilities because she has accepted and continues to accept payment for it. She is free to break her contract. But while she’s there, she can try to be a Mattis.
what’s all this “be a mattis” bull
mattis let trump do basically any bigoted thing under the sun, only splitting when trump did stupid syria shit
The fact that Mattis prioritized defense policies over civil rights as the Secretary of Defense should come as little surprise because of the nature of his professional duty. Mattis slowed Trump on the transgender front by commissioning a study on its impact on the military. He fulfilled his professional duties to the best of his abilities and quit when it was clear he could not.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/amp/story/2018/12/20/how-mattis-tried-to-contain-trump-1049741
If Becky isn’t ready to occupy in that role, she can quit now.
just because it comes as little surprise but doesn’t make it not friggin’ shitty, nor does it mean i have to accept it
That’s fair. But my point is that Becky should not accept consideration from Robin and then immediately betray her professional duty and integrity by neglecting or undermining Robin’s campaign. If she’s in it, she ought to put in a good faith effort. And if not, she should leave.
nah
She’s got to at least ask some people so when she goes to Robin and says ‘I asked people to vote for you’, then she at least has some witnesses if Robin weirdly wants to verify she did at least ask and did ask some why they said no. Becky herself literally said she’s got to at least make the appearance of trying even though she doesn’t want to actually succeed.
Plus, like, Mandy already said Robin’s opponent is way far ahead of her. It is extremely unlikely that Becky would be able to, by asking around, magically turn the tide in Robin’s favour. She has only secured one vote by asking around so far from someone happy to do pretty much anything you ask.
Becky’s covering herself in the case of an off-chance and isn’t really making any true effort to convince people.
Maybe I’m just on edge because A) I don’t trust Robin, B) This is way too close to 2016 for comfort and C) She did talk to Agatha.
If the most effective thing your campaign manager is doing is wandering around individually asking people she knows, she’s not actually helping.
Like I said, this whole storyline sets me on edge, so it’s entirely possible I’m being irrational or unfair.
Who’s got the Beastie Boys playing on the hacked muzak tonight?
“You gotta fight!
For you right!
To paaaarty!”
“Intergalactic, Planetary
Planetary, Intergalactic”
Roz can you just understand Becky’s situation and help her? Call it redemption for everyone calling you an ally with more bite than bark? Though if I’m being honest with myself it’s just that I really like Becky and I want /someone/ to actually help her with this complex she’s in. Dotty couldn’t be depended on so I’m grasping at every person Becky meets.
Roz is completely 100% in the right here, so, yeah, I don’t think she needs to “understand Becky’s situation”. Becky is doing something to help herself. It’s totally understandable, but that doesn’t make Roz wrong to call her out on it. If she wins, Robin is a safe vote for a conservative government—you know, the one that wants to deport Marcie and render Becky homeless and up Sarah’s tuition and deny Ruth access to health care etc etc etc.
If Becky owes anyone an explanation for this, it’s probably the person who’s been desperately trying to prevent Robin’s election this entire time. Becky needs to explain what’s going on before Roz can try to help her.
It’s not a black-and-white issue, but Roz has right-of-way here. That said, we’re veering very close to a parallel with an earlier conversation between these two…
http://www.dumbingofage.com/2017/comic/book-7/03-the-thing-i-was-before/smitten/
I feel like people calling Roz a “performative ally” are taking something Roz is frequently *accused* of and treating it as fact. In reality, we don’t really know whether Roz is a good ally, but she sure isn’t some Twitter loudmouth. She works her *ass* off to help people—working behind-the-scenes to sabotage her own sister’s Republican campaign, thrusting her body into a media frenzy for the same reasons, volunteering for Planned Parenthood, etc.
Roz is a flawed ally. She’s very argumentative and uncompromising, and maybe a bit quicker to call out other people’s screwups than she is to examine her own. I think people take those flaws and Flanderize her into some sort of Debate Bro.
Roz can be very holier than thou sometimes, but mother of god if anyone knows Robin can’t be trusted and needs to be kept far away from the white house, it’s her.
While Roz does often have a point in what she says, it’s the delivery that tends to often undermine the message.
“Jerkass has a point” is a trope for a reason.
I never said she wasn’t a jerk? All I’m saying here is she does indeed have a point.
She has had at least one moment of being a performative ally (literally talking over Leslie. In her own class.) in regards to LGBT+ issues. We haven’t seen her be so with women’s issues or sexual assault. But her holier than thou attitude at times can make it seem more done to ‘be superior’ than out of true care even if she does insist she actually cares (and I do believe she genuinely cares).
However, I wouldn’t say Roz is 100% in the right here since she is literally screaming in Becky’s face instead of asking for an explanation which is very much not a reasonable reaction to anything Becky is currently actually saying.
Becky doesn’t address what Roz is talking about until the last panel. Roz is competitive, holier than thou, and obnoxious, but she’s not screaming in response to Becky giving harmless answers.
What do you mean Dorothy couldn’t be depended upon? Dorothy has done everything she can to support Becky and Joyce. Including literally putting food in her mouth.
Ah, I guess it’s not Dorothy’s fault that their conversation just ended with a “k bye” instead of advice of any sort being exchanged.
And I wasn’t trying to say that Roz is less than 100% right either, I just mean it’s nice when people go beyond being right. Anyway this is a dead thread perhaps, since the story and the comment sections still roll on 🙂
Really, really enjoying Becky’s lines in panels 2 and 4. Calm, flippant, and funny! Feels like peak DoA snark to me.
When it comes to maslows hiearchy of needs, it’s important for becky to “try” to help robin. The way she “tries” isn’t particularly effective, but its good enough to guarantee the roof over her head and her education, which, to becky, is ultimately important. She’s in such a rough spot, but making the choice to make sure she survives another day vs morals has got to weigh on a teenagers mind. I wonder if Becky will frame it like that for Roz?
“Doing this guarantees that I, a homeless lesbian youth, will have a job, a home, money and education.” Kinda bomb right on Roz’s performative allyship
Roz is concerned because she is trying to prevent her sister from winning an election in Indiana—which, despite Becky’s literally completely clueless bravado, Robin has *every chance of doing*, because it’s in a rural district of *Indiana*. Becky doesn’t know politics. Roz does. I have a strong feeling Roz is about to point this out.
Robin is a national representative. She is voting on policy, and she plans to be a solid red vote—that’s a vote against gay rights, against health care, against the homeless, against trans people, against immigrants, against abortion, and so on, and so on.
Growling at Roz for being “performative” is frankly bizarre. This is politics. This is about the exercise of power and the consequences for our actions. Becky’s choices are totally, absolutely understandable, and maybe even fair, but she is gambling with a lot here. Roz has strong opinions about politics because politics get people killed. If Becky gets Robin elected—and Roz has every reason to be concerned that she will—that’s a vote against abortion access, against impeachment of any bad Republican president who happens to get elected, and so on and so on.
Becky is playing with fire. The “hierarchy of needs” is all very nice, but “I am doing [bad thing] because I need it to get by” is a very complicated and not-at-all easily defended justification.
Especially when you remember that Becky could have stayed on Leslie’s couch and at least extracted some campaign promises from Robin that might have mitigated potential damages later.
Becky’s made some really questionable choices here. Roz, love her or hate her, exists in the story to call people out.
Becky absolutely does know politics. Roz may know the mechanics of them better, but Becky’s actually lived them. She’s the one who will be directly impacted first if Robin gets elected and resumes her old policies. She knows what’s at stake on a personal level. She KNOWS politics can get people killed, because it very nearly happened!
And those promises she could’ve extracted wouldn’t have been worth squat. It’s not something that can be put into a legally binding contract, so there’s no way to hold her to it. By the time she found out if Robin was lying, the election would be over. It’s much safer to just half-ass the job so she loses
Roz is right to be concerned, as she doesn’t know Becky isn’t REALLY trying to help Robin win, but Becky’s got brains too
Yeah, if Robin wins, they’re both fucked. Becky on LGBT+ rights and women’s rights, Roz on women’s rights, reproductive rights (which would also screw Becky long term but isn’t a pressing concern for her right now) and whatever fresh hell the GOP feels like unleashing on Latina folks.
Also, worker’s rights and poverty rights for Becky.
I’m not at all sure what the political situation here is. Manley seemed somewhat competitive before the scandal and from a couple days back, Robin’s so far behind there’s no point in voting. (Which is a bad attitude of course, but hardly looks good for Robin.)
Becky’s efforts led to that. She helped break Robin from the party and cemented that break by continuing to tweet leftist policy statements. She was hired to continue that. It’s not at all clear to me that doing more of that will somehow win her nearly enough support to win. If it does, it’ll be by driving away her rural conservative support and somehow inspiring an “independent” leftist surge. Theoretically possible, I suppose, especially if Manley is one of those “I’m trying to be almost as conservative as the Republican to win in this red district” Democrats.
She could still win if the conservative base voters come home to her just to vote against the Democrat, but that will be despite Becky’s best efforts, not because of them.
Honestly Robin’s best strategy would have been to denounce everything she’s “said” in the past week or so and have Becky arrested for hacking her account, then go hard right again to pick up her old supporters. But she didn’t do that.
It’s also not at all clear to me that if Becky does pull off the miracle, despite not wanting to, that Robin will go back to being the reliable conservative vote. If she wins because of the popular ideas Becky’s been tweeting with a surge of pro-LGBTQ social and economic justice voters, won’t she see that as a means of staying in office? Especially with Becky still pushing her that way. (And it’ll appeal to Leslie?)
I’m also not at all sure
I think “guaranteed” is a bit of a stretch. She who can be appointed on a whim can be removed on a whim. Becky survives as long as she delivers results. If her actual usefulness (not just appearance of usefulness) ever falls below her expenses, she’ll be canned. Becky could make a useful scapegoat if things take a dive- De Santo can say she gave her an honest try, but she couldn’t deliver the numbers, then switch to whoever the next campaign manager is. Or Becky actually delivers the numbers. Win-win, it’s actually pretty shrewd.
Robin doesn’t have a next campaign manager – nobody wants her after the endorsement dropped. She said her options are pretty much Becky or nothing.
Huh. I wonder if “tage” is even a term.
Google… Wiktionary… huh, it’s a German word.
….
….. nope, nope, nope, walking away now.
What, it’s just a euphemism for menstruation.
And any joke I make about it is therefore a joke specifically targeting (biological) women.
I’m disappointed in you. Like, Georgia just handed itself on a silver platter to you on this matter.
Yeah, what do they have to do? Throw wooden shoes at you?
People other than cis women do have periods though, like some trans men and nonbinary people. Also to be nitpicky not all people with a uterus do have periods and the term (biological) women especially in a parenthetical like that is not the most correct and inclusive way to refer to such. Afab women or cis women is better if you want to talk specifically about that group of peeps.
Its also a pretty common name for older swedish men.
Including a PM
(Merriam Webster Dictionary)
Sabotage: “early 20th century: from French, from saboter ‘kick with sabots, wilfully destroy’ (see sabot).”
Sabot:
“A kind of simple shoe, shaped and hollowed out from a single block of wood, traditionally worn by French and Breton peasants.”
Thus proving Star Trek 6’s definition is correct, and that German words about biological processes, while phonetically similar, are not relevant.
You’re welcome. 🙂
The real question is would Roz be happy if Robin wins but decides to stand behind her 180 because that policy got her elected.
Probably not, because Robin’s about as trustworthy as a stereotypical used car salesperson.
*Slaps roof of Congress*
This bad boy can fit so many self-serving jerkwads in it
you. you, i like.
The lack of upvotes in this comment engine is a crime against quality.
+1
I can’t remember. Was Becky allowed to watch “un-Christian” media?
Either way, I’m willing to bet Roz has seen the Producers and Becky hasn’t.
More not allowed than Joyce probably, but more likely to sneak it.
Becky unwittingly counters Roz’s sabotage by making a pro-Robyn sex tape.
Ah, Perry the Platypus, what sabotage! And by sabotage I mean COMPLETELY TAGE!
Personally I kind of stay away from most cable news, I prefer to get my news feed from website articles like vox & Huffington post or YouTube news channels like The Young Turks or the Humanist report.
Internet journalism can be just as slanted as cable TV, or even more heavily biased.
The important thing to watch out for is the presentation of opinion-based tabloid editorial content as legitimate journalism. The heavily advertised networks with big-name personalities are terrible about this. The actual news organizations behind them (CBS News, NBC News, PBS, AP, Reuters, etc) are usually better to read, and that’s where a lot of content creators get their reporting from in the first place. They just chew it up, spit it out on a plate, spice it up a bit, and serve it to hungry eyeballs that find their spices palatable.
I agree with this, article sites like the New York Times and politico are very well plugged in but they can seem really heavily biased and have a nasty case I’m trying to push a narrative first before straight up reporting a factual story.
Yeah, Cheddar is pretty decent, as well. They ARE a touch left-leaning, but they present the whole truth.
I don’t trust most corporate-owned news companies these days. While I still use them occasionally, I get a lot more of my news from more lefty news sites like Common Dreams, Paste magazine’s politics section, and sometimes Jacobin magazine. I also like The Young Turks and Secular Talk on Youtube.
That’s equal but opposite to saying “I don’t trust the liberal mainstream media, I only get my news from Drudge Report and Breitbart”. At best you’re getting a slanted perspective, at worst you’re getting opinions masquerading as journalism.
A big part of the issue is media outlets presenting us with what they say our opinions should be, instead of presenting what’s actually happening. Hard news should be as unprocessed as possible, and in an ideal world that’s what we’d see on TV. Unfortunately the biig cable news stations with big-name faces exist on advertising revenue, and hard news is very dry viewing material. Bored eyeballs change the channel, but entertained, placated eyeballs keep watching. To keep the viewers engaged they have to spice their productions up with hotheaded bickering pundits and newsreaders who stare into the camera like they’re watching someone eat a bucket of mayonaise with their bare hands. As a result, these opinion shows have taken more and more air time away from hard fact based news reporting, and the line between them has been blurred in the public perception.
Read the news wire services. Look for consistency between multiple sources, because that’s where your facts are. Most of the media outlets spinning the news get their starting off point from a “corporate” outlet anyway. Don’t take processed news at face value, it’s all tainted with varying amounts of filler and other peoples’ opinions.
Perpendicular sabotage? What does that even mean?
sabotage running alongside but not crossing Roz’s sabotage
that sounds sort of like I sarcastically defined perpendicular but actually, like, sabotage that runs it’s course at the same time as Roz’s but shouldn’t interfere with it.
Although she might have just meant that it won’t interfere.
Actually, you defined parallel… Perpendicular does, in fact, cross – it’s at a 90 degree angle.
Becky probably meant parallel, since their respective sabotages shouldn’t cross paths, though.
Sorry, my head is not clear lately.
Running alongside without crossing would be parallel. Perpendicular would be crossing in completely different directions.
Orthogonal might be a better description of what Becky means.
Also ninjas.
Aaaaagh. Also spell-miscorrected.
That’s only in a single plane, where parallel or intersecting are your only two options. In 3-d space, Becky’s line of sabotage could be skew to Roz’s (i.e., neither intersecting nor parallel).
Becky’s comment in panel 4 is the funniest thing I’ve heard all day. I’m not even 100% why. But it’s hilarious. Sick burn!
Her line comes out extra snappy since she’s calmly disregarding Roz’s hostility as she says it over panels 2 and 4. I agree, s’real good.
I normally hate Rox for all she has done and her phony liberalism, but I agree that Becky shouldn’t help Robin even if she is using Robin… Oh my stars that makes Becky look worse.
Oh, DO tell how Roz engages in “phony liberalism”.
As Leslie pointed out, it is hipocritical that Roz doesn’t allow other people (Joyce) to change and that she is being rude to a gay person (Leslie). She also uses her sex life as an excuse of being liberal, made a sex video to sabotage her own sister, used Joe as a tool (he doesn’t mind), and even the dean (who isn’t Big Boss in this universe) said that she has the right to her body but not the right to use the installations of the school for porn. Also, she is a sociopath like Robin, and her exchanges with Dorothy show she is a populist that uses her own popularity to get what she wants. She reminds of the current president of my country, but as a hyper sexual college girl.
By my country I mean Mexico.
Joyce has barely changed and is still a very toxic person.
Sabotaging Robin was a good thing.
She’s not a sociopath.
Dorothy is, frankly, incompetent at politics, and Roz being better than her at it isn’t a fault of hers.
Joyce has changed a lot in just three months. That is better than her gradual and slow change in the years of Walkyverse.
I agree with the sabotage, but it could have been handled in a better way.
I can dabet a lot about Roz’s behavior but I will restrain myself.
Dorothy is just starting at college and needs more experience outside the classroom, but the way Roz compares herself to Bane makes her look like a narcisistic manchild that focuses more on charisma than actual political activities. She was wearing a cowboy hat like if she were Cheney’s wife campaigning for him in southern states.
No, please, do not hold back! I really want to know how exactly is Roz a sociopath and why Dorothy has the excuse of “just starting college and needs more experience” but not Roz, even though they’re both the same age.
Roz and Becky could really work together here
I’m not sure that this is a conversation that one wants to have in a hallway.
Hmm, if Becky is going to run her own sabotage campaign shouldn’t it be parallel sabotage instead of perpendicular?
But I think she is really going for orthogonal, in a completely different direction having nothing in common.
Becky’s homeschooled, forgive her
I asked for Roz freaking out. I’m not surpised
I’m not DISAPPOINTED!
The Willis giveth and the Willis sets thee up for the feels.
Seteth -> sets Really?
The autocorrect definitely does some taketh-ing away of it’s own.
What Roz is saying is, if Becky doesn’t increase her sabotage, she may become a victim of STABotage.
…Eh? Eh?
Heh
*takes a bow*
Is Becky going to be any good at this? Does de Santo expect her to be? Is she just going to be a scapegoat? Maybe Becky is savvy enough to reach people who will actually turn out to vote. Maybe not. I don’t remember a lot of 20somethings voting or even being registered to vote last time I checked, let alone in local/state elections.
Becky doesn’t want people to turn out to vote.
Becky’s job is basically to raise Robin’s popularity by continuing to do what she was doing, since her tweets were the only thing popular about Robin right now.
I have absolutely no problem with Becky continuing to push pro-LGBTQ and leftist policies as Robin’s official positions. Mostly I think it’ll hurt her politically and if it does help her win then she’s got reasons to stick with it.
I do not trust Robin at all once she’s in office. Robin’s an unreliable asshole.
I don’t trust her either.
I don’t think Becky’s approach would help her win and if it somehow does I think she’d be less likely to go back to hardline conservative than if she won because of the peeps that used to back her.
I agree she’s (hopefully) unlikely to win, but Robin not going back to the party line I’m less certain about.
So this is similar to LGBT For Trump, except with an actual L and slightly more liberal.
Kind of. Except they were only a tiny part of a campaign overwhelmingly in the other direction.
Here, it’s the entire campaign.
It’s worth adding that ‘wrangled’ is entirely the wrong word and probably completely inverts the real current power dynamic between Robin and Becky. Oh, Robin wanted to wrangle her but instead, has found herself basically being wrangled herself!
How?
She has an openly gay youth running as her campaign manager, someone who can completely rebrand her image. A delay on the payment until the end of winter (ie after the polls close) and access to someone who’s in direct contact with her main crush.
And all she has to do is let her stay in her apartment.
And pay for her tuition. And pay for the gifts with which she wants to shower her girlfriend. And fundamentally change her political platform.
Robin hasn’t done that last one. She’s not committed to change at all and still doesn’t understand what the problem with her policies was before. She’s unreliable af.
I love Roz but I dread seeing her show up and saying anything vaguely related to politics. I know the comments are going to be exhausting and the words “performative ally/performative allyship” are going to show up multiple times.
Engaged in acts of Diabolical Sa-Bo-Ta-Gee!
-Bugs Bunny
On one hand, I agree with Roz’s principles. On the other though, Becky was pretty low on the hierarchy of needs being met. Can’t blame her for taking the money. And once again, Roz seems myopic when it comes to actually understanding peoples’ motivations.
I know nobody cares, but I just want to say I really like Roz’s pose in the last panel.
That is all.
agreed
Or right, that’s why she uploaded herself to the internet, didn’t it ?
Yay, my second-favorite character returns!
After letting the comic build up a backlog for nearly 18 months due to a long and boring reason, I’ve spent the past week and a half catching up. I don’t know what I’m going to do with myself now that I’m used to reading 30 strips a day…
You could run for president of the United States. I hear there’s going to be an opening. And all the cool kids are doing it.
You could keep reading 30 strips a day, but just read different comics.
Only 30? You feeble noob!
I kid, of course.
Why can’t the two older DeSantos just obsess over cereal like Good Ol’ Cereal McCerealface?
Riley is the best of them.
Agreed! She’s easily the best of the McCerealfaces.
… DeSantos. I said DeSantos.
Oh honey,
Robin’s clearly playing you.
Listen to the sibling on this.
“I won’t let you sabotage my sabotage!”
“Hey now, this is complementary sabotage!”
This ends one of two ways. Either Roz fights Becky hard on this and ends being antagonistic towards Becky for weeks in comic time and years in outside time, or Becky explains herself and convinces Roz what she’s doing isn’t a bad thing and they end up…not friends per say, but perhaps pals? Buds? Comrades? What word works best for “not friends but more than aquaintances”?
GALS BEING PALS!!!
(OK, that was probably not what you were going for.)
Allies?
I don’t get the “morning at the airport” reference. Is it related to the TSA & a possible body cavity search or something? Can anyone explain?
In airports, TVs are often tuned to CNN, because a) it’s a cable news channel, which is b) not Fox News, and c) not MSNBC, so it draws fewer complaints from the air-traveling public than either of the latter two would.
Or at least that used to be the case. In my recent experience (mostly limited to SJC, ELP, and PHX), airports mostly don’t have TVs in public anymore, except in bars, where the TVs are usually tuned to sports channels. No real demand for them anymore, since most people use their phones/tablets/laptops for entertainment.
CNN also runs CNN Airport, a channel exclusively available at airport gates and boarding areas:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNN_Airport
The TV screens in public places tend to be set to stuff like cable news.
It’s been nearly 24 hours and Im still not over that SNARK