Lurker > Broken_Promise

Chicken posted...

what is this, some kind of toy story?

It had a really similar feel to 'Action League Now' (ALN). It would not surprise me if a a handful of people orginially created it to spoof ALN, actually.

...There was a really great episode/series of episodes that was done monumentary style where the other super heroes were talking about Batman and how he kept getting hurt/was not a real super hero. Was so hilarious I remember it over a decade later. And then there was an episode where everyone was saying Supean was dated and no longer relevant. But then something happened and everyone realized they needed Superman because he represented the ideal or something. Heady stuff.

...Hope to find it again, ha ha.

J

Guide posted...

They were toys? This sounds familiar as heck.

Yes. I tried to find it on Youtube again like 3-4 years ago and gave up after several hours of searching. Then it crossed my mind again tonight.

...Thought about creating a Reddit or maybe a not be namedChan account to ask about it there, but decided to start here as I figured there might be another elder millennial /young Xer here that knows what I'm talking about.

...There was a show I found on YouTube like 10+ years ago. It was similar to 'Action League Now' but featured the Super Friends/Justice League. It was a parody type of thing and I'm not sure it ever aired anywhere but as a YouTube upload.

There were two episodes that stuck with me -- one that made fun of Batman not being a real super hero and another that focused on how -- even though Superman was no longer as culturally relevant, he was still the ideal super hero.

Anyone ever seen / heard of this and if so do you know where I can find it?

J

Thanks all!

Apparently Bing and Google are no longer useful as search engines and spam you with ads no matter how many ways you ask the question 'What is the best free chat bot?'

...In the early 2000s I remember being able to jump online and ask an online chatbot lots of questions and seeing how smart it was. Good way to get 20 minutes of mindless fun.

...Tried to find the equivalent today and just got a bunch of ads on both Google and Bing trying to sell me products for my business.

Anyone have a name or direct link to a free chat bot I can screw around with and ask dump questions to?

Thanks!

J

Norman_Smiley posted...

Regular entrance = their typical entrance that plays with music, not a special Wrestle Mania entrance or a one off.

Left off Sting via the rafters, because that was more match interruption than match entrance.

Goldberg is the only answer.

https://youtu.be/8KnehdZ3bjQ

Chills even now.

Wherethisfeom posted...

https://www.nintendolife.com/news/2022/06/heres-how-much-nintendos-directors-made-this-year

Converted from yen:

Representative Director and President
Shuntaro Furukawa - $2.3 million

Representative Director and Fellow
Shigeru Miyamoto - $1.8 million

Director and Senior Managing Executive Officer
Shinya Takahashi - $1.4 million

Nintendo has always been one of the better devs for employees.

https://gamingbolt.com/nintendo-employees-work-less-than-8-hours-a-day-on-average-make-80000-annually
https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/6iakmn/til_when_nintendo_had_a_fall_in_revenue_from_the/

This is shamefully low for a ~$14B revenue company with a $50B market cap trading at just ~15:1. The CEO should make 8 figures as a floor (and would if it was a U.S. headquartered company).

J

AzNDarkSamurai posted...

its standard child characteristics tbh

hyper, noisy, trolls, etc. nothing really that you cant expect from most kids.

no valid reason to complain about my son and no valid reason for this lazy old hag not to do her job

It is very unprofessional to complain about the services you're being asked to render to your client. Against that context I agree with you (she shouldn't be complaining about sitting her kid to you). But everyone has parts of their job they dislike so I will challenge you there. :-)

J

FrozenTurkey posted...

Well when the userbase only consists of trash, then yeah they are getting rid of the userbase. Regular people have left the site a decade ago. The site has 10% of the userbase it had 10 years ago. Only the bottom of the barrel remains and those who enjoy seeing trash TV style entertainment.

This makes me think I need to reflect on my decisions lol.

J

This topic affirms for me that my 40s and 50s will be a period of enormous growth and understanding.

Like, I'm incredibly pro LGBTQIA (live uour best life). But this new trend of being offended at straight people aggressively denoting their straightness is new for me. I will try and continue to stay woke though.

J

MattcheteGuy posted...

which means what, 4 karma new user?

I think that people are choosing to move to the state despite the more conservative political bent?

TheGoldenEel posted...

The solution is to tax the rich

No it isn't. By itself this is just a punitive/hateful thing to do borne out of schadenfreude.

Anyway, I'm not here to defend being Libertarian light or a David Portnoy/Rockefeller Republican. And I don't think I'm making any progress on the 'abortions in the 3rd trimester are wrong if not done to protect the life of the mother' front. So I will call it a night for now. :-)

TheGoldenEel posted...

the return on investment is the society you live in

Fine. Let's go with that. Put meaningful legislation forward with bi partisan support that improves the lives of the poor *and* pays for itself in the form of societal benefits that makes things better for everyone.

...It is easier to say 'tax the rich' than it is to actually deliver on the above. Which is why mostly I hear complaints about how unfair things are and how evil the rich are from populists (on both sides of the aisle) but solutions are scarce.

Tyranthraxus posted...

This is a muskrat talking point

Don't know who that is. Don't care. It's true. We spend more on military spending than the next five countries beneath us combined. We spend more on pharmaceutical drugs than any other country in the world. We incarcerate more people than any other developed country in the world at higher per person costs. We just had a trillion+ dollar pandemic spending bills in which both parties agree a large portion of the monies allocated were wasted or given to people fraudulently.

...We deficit spend on useless things over and over and over again and I am supposed to raise my hand and ask for a tax increase? Why? Because I am a high earner? So I should just give it to the government to waste? No sir, thank you. I will pass. Put meaningful legislation forward with bi partisan support that improves the lives of the poor *and* gives me some sort of ROI and I will fully support it.

QueenCarly posted...

freedom doesn't mean shit for people that do not have the economic ability to improve their lives

you're just wanting to not look like a bad person, but won't lift a finger or pay marginally more in taxes to actually do some fucking good for the people that need the help

You're right, I would not pay marginally more in taxes to help people that need the help. But not because I'm selfish -- but because I don't believe the government efficiently allocates the capital we do give them to the people and causes that need them most. If the government can learn to effectively use the money they are taking already I'd be happy to give more.

...Your other point is more interesting. I agree that freedom is a benefit disproportionately enjoyed by the economically privileged. And I also think we would both agree that economic investment in socioeconomically disadvantaged people contributes to their advancement. But where I imagine we disagree is what that says about what the role of government ought to be. Ultimately society needs to work for everyone -- the rich and the middle class and the poor... and taking and taking from the rich without giving them something in return doesn't work anymore than a system that only benefits the rich. If the government is going to increase my marginal tax rate 4%/whatever I should benefit from that in some way. And of course I'm okay with others benefitting as well. Economic liberals never understand that. They are too busy complaining about how unfair everything is and not taking agency of their own lives and understanding everything is a delicate balance of give and take.

...Back to the topic at hand. I believe in a woman's right to choose. And if something I said suggested otherwise I'm sorry. But third trimester abortions for most reasons that don't involve protecting the life of the mother are wrong. And they are unforunately happening today -- even though no one in this topic seems to be concerned about that. But I am. That doesn't make me a bad person. I understand you're all angry and maybe a bit jaded and that has made you hostile to any point of view that isn't belligerently progressive. Heck, it works for the Republicans so why not do the same thing? Everything or nothing right?

...But let me tell you something I have learned over time. It is not about being right. It is about doing right. If you focus on that -- both protecting viable lives and the rights of women to choose I suspect you will find a much broader coalition (and much easier path to codifying abortion rights in the legislature) than you think.

QueenCarly posted...

you can't be socially liberal if you don't support the very things that enable uplifting those that are worst off in society

economic conservatism is why there are massive wealth inequality issues, government needs to play an ACTIVE ROLE in lifting people up otherwise the most marginalized will continue to be pushed down

I am pro freedom as long as that freedom doesn't harm others. Most social policies that are pro freedom are also liberal.

Sephiroth exists and hates me? But $3.3M...

...How much does he hate me. Like Aerith levels of hate?

@DeathDeathSong sharing as info. Having educated myself on the topic I wanted to ensure you were similarly informed.

DeathDeathSong posted...

love that this guy is still pretending that "late term abortions for economic reasons" are a real thing
tc, youre real bad at this

https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2019/mar/07/abortion-late-term-what-pregnancy-stage

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/2/6/0/AASBEuAADaFM.jpg

...I'm not surprised at the hostility from posters here, but I will confess to be taken aback by it. What I'm saying is *not* crazy or even unreasonable.

DeathDeathSong posted...

love that this guy is still pretending that "late term abortions for economic reasons" are a real thing
tc, youre real bad at this

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/2/5/9/AASBEuAADaFL.jpg
https://theconversation.com/less-than-1-of-abortions-take-place-in-the-third-trimester-heres-why-people-get-them-182580

@DeathDeathSong

DespondentDeity posted...

Probably a terf too

That is a bit much. I believe transwomen are women and support their rights to be treated as women. I don't even know why you would say something like this.

QueenCarly posted...

Also good, should be no restrictions

???

QueenCarly posted...

Id you are economically conservative, you are not socially liberal.

I am pro legalization of Marijuana. I'm pro gay marriage. I'm pro choice up to the point of fetal viability. I'm pro gender pay equity, believe in keeping religion out of schools, am a believer in climate change and in general don't believe in legislating morality. Only you can say if I am part of your political tribe... but while I may not be as socially liberal as you I'm definitely to the left of the Republican party and most conservatives. I identify as socially liberal.

That said, I also don't believe that food stamps, universal healthcare, tax credits / housing for the poor etc are human rights that should be funded by other tax payers. I like Grover Norquist's comment that government should be small enough to drown in the bathtub.

CyricZ posted...

How about we do that first and give women opportunity.

Instead of first telling them what they can't do with their own bodies.

I feel this is legislating because you feel icky.

Ideally we would do both. Protect fetuses at the point of viability federally (giving women the right to choose in all other instances) and giving women resources to care for children so that (late term) abortions for economic reasons are never a thing. However, now that abortion rights have been unfortunately stripped away we might as well fix the broken abortion laws in states like Vermont at the same time that we codify the right federally.

Ruvan22 posted...

So a few thoughts:
A) What makes you confident abortion rights will be codified again? Given the extreme amount of gerrymandering and judicial control the Republicans/right have on the electoral and policy process?
B) You said absolutes are bad but then agreed that sometimes they are appropriate (gay marriage). So (if I'm following you correctly), your issue is not with people having absolutes, but drawing absolutes about THIS issue?
C) Where did you see that there many of the 6k were done for non medical reasons? The poster that claimed that linked a study about racial stats...
D) You seem to be very focused on this new discovery as you call it... What exactly are you asking people to say on CE?

@Broken_Promise

A.) I don't know how long it will take, but given health majorities want abortion legalized I'm Hugh confidence abortion will be legalized again. But you are correct that I'm not 100% certain.

B.) Correct. Mt exact words were that I said that absolutism in any form is rarely useful.Not that it never is. But things like "it is wrong for an adult to have sex with a prepubescent child" and "it is wrong to deny two people the right to marriage because of their political ideology would be absolutes I am okay with. Women should be able to have an abortion at any stage in a pregnancy is not an absolute I am okay with.

C.) I didn't say that 6K abortions a years are done for non medical reasons. I responded to the poster's comment that 6K abortions a year are performed in the third trimester. My comment was saying that those are 6K lives (not a trivial #), and if 100% of those abortions are being done to save the live of the mother then a law only allowing third trimester abortions to save a mother's life will allow those women the same freedoms they currently enjoy. But if there are third trimester abortions happening for other reasons then those fetuses deserve some sort of protection under the law.

D.) Initially I was just asking if it was really true that under the law women can abort a fetus at any stage of the pregnancy (e.g. even at 8.5 months) for any reason in 6 states+ DC or if I was misinterpreting. I was asking because I couldn't believe laws that draconian exist on our books and was asking someone to confirm I was wrong. However, it appears I was not misinterpreting based on the responses I've gotten so far. The rest of the topic as far as I can tell has just been people calling me a concern troll and making derisive comments on my point of view here while I've defended my position.

@Ruvan22

fire_bolt posted...

Agreed. Anybody who says differently isn't a Libertarian at all, they're just trying to mask their true agenda.

Yup. Human life is one of the most abundant fucking resources on the planet. No idea why people try to act like its something sacred

I'm glad we got this right in the open. We need to have exactly this debate as we are refining abortion legislation.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


This is my favorite post in the topic lol.

_HayleyWilliams posted...

Buddy, every issue does not have a sensible middle ground. Would you say that about legalizing gay marriage? About sexual assault? And what is the point in trying to find it when one party might ban abortion nationwide without exception by the time you get the chance? Are you implying the Republican uncompromising agenda is a response to someone else's refusal to act with nuance?

...Actually, I am trying to urge everyone to not abandon their nuance because of the caveman Republican approach to abortion rights. They got it wrong. Abortion is a right all women should have. And it was stolen from us. But that also gives us a chance to fix broken state laws and make things better when we codify abortion rights at the federal level. Let's protect viable fetuses (which I just learned we are not doing). And let's also provide resources to women that are socioeconomically disadvantaged.

...Also. for avoidance of doubt gay marriage should be legal in all cases always. And rape is wrong. I have no idea what those things have to do with this and why I have to say it. But I will.

daynlokki posted...

Libertarians should be pro mind your own fucking business here.

I am libertarian light, to be fair. In college I was a Ron Paul Libertarian.

...Nowadays I am a 'I make $400K a year leave my money alone but also I think everyone should be able to do their own thing as long as they aren't harming others' Libertarian

_HayleyWilliams posted...

Spoilers: No one that wants to ban most abortions wants to put a penny into helping the children if the parents forced to birth them are poor or unfit. They want to punish the mothers far more than protect innocent life.

This is like saying banning gay marriage and sodomy is ok if those states fund moving LGBTQ+ people to safe states and promise not to prosecute.

These two things are not at all the same. Banning Sodomy or gay marriage is bigoted behavior or at best borne out of ignorance.

I don't agree with pro life advocates... but I also don't think all of them are pro life out of hatred of women (although I will agree with you that many -- perhaps even most pro life people think this way).

....That said, regardless of their motivations we will codify abortion rights at a federal level again. As part of that I would like to see federal protections for viable/third trimester fetuses and also real financial resources and support for mothers giving birth in those situations if they otherwise have economic hardships and want to keep their babies instead of giving them up for adoption.

_HayleyWilliams posted...

Actually no, you can't be left-leaning and think there is any scenario where a woman loses her bodily autonomy to a fetus. Or if you fall for the late-term abortion conspiracies the right pushes. Those aren't done as birth control or on some whim. There is a serious reason for them. Also, many of those are called "labor"

I will just say that on most social issues I identify with progressives (including a woman's right to choose if you actually read what I'm saying). Call me left leaning or right leaning or whatever you want. I can identify however I like, but only you can say if I'm part of your tribe (which is true of any two people determining where they stand on issues).

...That said, I will say that absolutism in any form is rarely useful. What I am hearing from many in this topic is unequivocal endorsement of abortion rights in all cases. And if that is coming from a place of pain or belief that you need to adopt the tactics of the opposition I *understand it*. But I also want to tell you that you are wrong. There is room for nuance. And we will need it to pass legislation codifying abortion rights in both houses of congress.

kelemvor posted...

TC, you are in the wrong place if you want to talk about abortion. I've seen people here repeatedly say fetuses aren't children and have no rights. My Son was born premature at 36 weeks. A fetus can be 40 weeks and aborted legally in some places. And yes, it does happen rarely even if the Mother's life isn't in danger. It's usually poor, women of color who do this when the baby daddy skips town. The abortion rate of black mothers is 5 times the rate of white women.

And you can be left leaning and be against 3rd trimester abortions (in most cases). I am and It's not a controversial opinion at all.

I may be in the wrong place. But -- sad or not -- Gamefaqs is a community that is important to me. Yes, I talk with my very close friends and very close family about topics like this. But when I want to share an idea or get thoughts on a topic important to me this place is a sounding board that I value.

I'm sorry to hear that abortions take place at 40 weeks for non medical reasons. ...If that really is the case I think we need to dedicate *real* financial resources to ensure women aren't in positions where they feel they need to make that choice. And they need to go hand in hand with the codification of abortion rights. But aborting a viable fetus for non health related reasons should not be legal. Pre viability it absolutely should be legal. But not after unless the mother's health is at risk. Call me a crazy troll or Republican or whatever you like. But I'm legitimately shocked the law allows for this today and still processing it tbqh.

TheGoldenEel posted...

https://twitter.com/edhelms/status/1315744436895113216

Honest response to this? If those 6,000 a year third trimester abortions are all happening because of a risk to the mother's health/life then a law saying that abortion can only happen in such cases is not going to make a difference.

1% or not, though, 6K lives (and at that point we can call them that) is not a trivial number. They deserve the dignity of debating what should happen to them and win. And I believe that should be codified into the new statue that we will need to have written now that Roe v Wade has been overturned.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/5/6/9/AASBEuAADZ6Z.jpg

KobeSystem posted...

Kobe would be ashamed

How is someone as smart as you not getting it

Ur strawmans are so bad crows are starring to nest

I actually do get it. A fundamental right that women have had (and should continue to have) for 50 years has been stolen away by a politicized right wing Supreme Court. Progressives are angry and adopting the absolutist political posturing adopted by conservatives in the fight to restore those shamefully stolen rights.

...What I'm saying is that as someone fully researching the topic at a level I previously hadn't in my adult life now that I have had rights taken from me...there are some things we need to button up about the law when we get it codified as a right federally via the congress. Because I'm uncomfortable with a law that theoretically allows abortions at any point of a fetus's life cycle for any reason. And you should be too.

KobeSystem posted...

The worst part is she is a woman

There we are. ;-)

TheGoldenEel posted...

Also youve never spoken to a woman in your life

This is funny for reasons I won't explain. Better if someone that knows who I am tells you. :-)

billcom6 posted...

They're not happening.

You can stop posting now.

Maybe they aren't. I'll continue to research the prevalence of abortions after 24-28 weeks and report my findings.

But when we pass a law protecting a woman's right to choose in the legislature it *does* need to ban abortions after viability. And viability needs a definition. Up until today I thought all of us pro choice folks were operating under that assumption but apparently not.

DespondentDeity posted...

Im not a concern troll I swear I just ignored the part where people addressed my points so I could double down and attempt to make everyone else look like psychos who revel in terminating pregnancies.

Look, I get that this is a left leaning message board. Cool.

But I'm not crazy for saying that if abortions are not happening at 8.5 months that there is nothing wrong with the law explicitly outlawing them as illegal unless the mother's life is at risk. I am too old (35) and educated for you to convince me I am wrong with thinly veiled posts that I am crazy.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


It isn't. If I wanted to troll you would have no idea I was trolling tbqh.

I actually started looking this up because I saw an episode of Politically Incorrect recently where someone pointed out that the abortion limit in Germany (a country trumpeted as an example of progressivism) is actually 12 weeks -- less than Mississippi's 15 week ban being hailed as Draconian. It made me want to better understand abortion laws in the country and around the world period. In the process I learned that the definition of 'life' and 'viability' is incredibly broad around the world.

...I am still pro choice. But I will also say I am less clear on exactly what I think that means than I used to. I would have previously said that means abortions should be legal up to 24 weeks unless the mother's life is in danger (in which case it is case by case). But now that I understand that isn't the legal standard around the globe and wasn't the standard in the U.S pre Roe v Wade, I think that a lot more discussion is probably needed as we codify a woman's right to choose into law. Women should be able to choose. But viable fetuses also should not be aborted. And the law needs to say that the same way the law says murder is illegal.

J

All of the responses in this topic are legitimately alarming.

An abortion should not be legal at 8.5 months. I'm not a concern troll. I'm a Libertarian/east coast Republican.

If I give you all the benefit of the doubt you're just jaded and too used to partisan bickering to realize this is alarming. If I don't give you the benefit of the doubt you actually think abortions at 8 months are okay.

Neither are good. And I am a bit scared for our country to find that I correctly interpreted the law here.

J

Reading further: https://lozierinstitute.org/six-states-and-their-radical-approaches-to-abortion-law/

^From what I can tell Vermont is the only 'get an abortion absolutely whenever you want regardless of gestational period' state.

J

...So I've been learning more about abortion rights since Roe v Wade was overturned.

...I like to fancy myself extremely socially liberal (and equally economically conservative), but this table gave me chills.

https://www.businessinsider.com/latest-point-in-pregnancy-you-can-get-abortion-in-50-states-2019-5?amp

^6 states including DC apparently have no limit on abortions (i.e. a woman could get an abortion at 8.5 months).

...As someone that would have described themselves as unapologetically pro choice this makes me (really) sick to my stomach. Can someone confirm to Mr I'm misunderstanding this article and that all 50 states + DC have limits on the date at which point a woman can have an abortion (sometime before ~28 weeks).

J

RobertDoback posted...

Definitely down to take them if it means my fiance doesn't have to take her BC anymore.

You're so sweet. :-)

itachi15243 posted...

What is your most consumed luxury food item

What is one this you enjoy about your workplace not involving breaststroke or asses

90-130k

What do you find most helpful about you coworkers above and below you in general?

Tie between Otoro Sashimi (shipped or when I go to Chicago) and Ribeye steak (from Mortons, LeMoo and Ruth Chris depending on the week).

...It occurs to me I could do this with an obscene level of accuracy if I could ask 4 questions instead of 1, ha ha.

J

Go for it. :-)