Careercow Robert Chipman / Bob / Moviebob / "Movieblob" - Middle-Aged Consoomer, CWC with a Thesaurus, Ardent Male Feminist and Superior Futurist, the Twice-Fired, the Mario-Worshipper, publicly dismantled by Hot Dog Girl, now a diabetic

How will Bob react to seeing the Mario film?


  • Total voters
    1,451
Status
Not open for further replies.
I thought $500,000 wouldn't buy you a house in a major city. Why does Bob think that could get him a castle on an island?

$500K will get you something liveable in many major cities, but you won't be able to hold onto it unless your income can sustain the higher cost of everything and- this is important- property taxes. With a single lump sum, you'd be better off heading out to someplace like Idaho or Wyoming, getting something with two stories and a basement, and banking the difference.

But to answer your question, "because Bob is terrible at life in general and economics in particular."
 
$500K will get you something liveable in many major cities, but you won't be able to hold onto it unless your income can sustain the higher cost of everything and- this is important- property taxes. With a single lump sum, you'd be better off heading out to someplace like Idaho or Wyoming, getting something with two stories and a basement, and banking the difference.

But to answer your question, "because Bob is terrible at life in general and economics in particular."
In other words, he is the prototype of the modern leftist. He has no idea how the real world works, no idea how hard it really can be to make a decent living, and no clue how money works!
 
He will never respond to the "things change" question
bob faith.png
I once heard in a history class that early Islamic scholars made many advancements in medicine, such as building hospitals in clean areas and integrating lecture halls into said hospitals so prospective doctors could better learn from their more experienced peers.

But according to Bob's logic, things change. So I'm sure he won't mind seeing Muhammad being drug out of his mosque and being thrown in the same cattle car with Hershel and Jethro. If you want to make a Superior Future (tm), you have to break a few religions.
 
He will never respond to the "things change" question
View attachment 968500

There is a line that when arthur was found by social services he was chained up to a radiator and had a severe head wound. Its very likely that his laughing fits and other mental issues are, at least in part, a direct consequence of the abuse he suffered at the hands of his mother and her boyfriend.
Bob: "Science has always been at war with religion! They're the complete antithesis of each other! It's them or us! Reason uber alles!"
Rational, objective person: "What about all the devout religious people who have made important scientific discoveries?"
Bob: "Things change, LOL."

Saw the Joker movie, and in the context of the movie, Bob's comment that the message is "All your problems are the fault of a woman" actually translates to, "Fuck all you men out there who had abusive mothers, or mothers who enabled their abusive boyfriends to hurt you. Don't you dare bring it up because we've got a feminism/incel narrative to uphold!" Arthur has many problems in the movie, but the only one that comes from a woman is his mother allowing her boyfriend to tie him to a radiator and crack his skull open when he was little. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that it's perfectly appropriate for a movie to portray that as a bad thing that could fuck someone up. Controversial take, I know.
 
$500K will get you something liveable in many major cities, but you won't be able to hold onto it unless your income can sustain the higher cost of everything and- this is important- property taxes. With a single lump sum, you'd be better off heading out to someplace like Idaho or Wyoming, getting something with two stories and a basement, and banking the difference.

But to answer your question, "because Bob is terrible at life in general and economics in particular."


500K will buy you about 83,000 roasting chickens and 3000 bottles of Mountain Dew. Which would only be enough to sustain Bob for about a year or so. So clearly, the idea that he could afford to buy any kind of shelter at all is a mere pipe dream.

And as for Bob's take on science and religion: from Wikipedia:

De-urbanization reduced the scope of education and by the 6th century teaching and learning moved to monastic and cathedral schools, with the center of education being the study of the Bible.[5] Education of the laity survived modestly in Italy, Spain, and the southern part of Gaul, where Roman influences were most long-lasting. In the 7th century, learning began to emerge in Ireland and the Celtic lands, where Latin was a foreign language and Latin texts were eagerly studied and taught.[6]

The leading scholars of the early centuries were clergymen for whom the study of nature was but a small part of their interest. They lived in an atmosphere which provided little institutional support for the disinterested study of natural phenomena. The study of nature was pursued more for practical reasons than as an abstract inquiry: the need to care for the sick led to the study of medicine and of ancient texts on drugs,[7] the need for monks to determine the proper time to pray led them to study the motion of the stars,[8] the need to compute the date of Easter led them to study and teach rudimentary mathematics and the motions of the Sun and Moon.[9] Modern readers may find it disconcerting that sometimes the same works discuss both the technical details of natural phenomena and their symbolic significance.[10]

Around 800, Charles the Great, assisted by the English monk Alcuin of York, undertook what has become known as the Carolingian Renaissance, a program of cultural revitalization and educational reform. The chief scientific aspect of Charlemagne's educational reform concerned the study and teaching of astronomy, both as a practical art that clerics required to compute the date of Easter and as a theoretical discipline.[11] From the year 787 on, decrees were issued recommending the restoration of old schools and the founding of new ones throughout the empire. Institutionally, these new schools were either under the responsibility of a monastery, a cathedral or a noble court.


In other words, science and religion often evolved and developed together, as science was seen as a tool to aid religious practice. Ancient peoples studied astronomy so they knew when to sacrifice to their gods or how to align their tombs so their leader's souls reached the Heavens. They studied mathematics so they could perform religious ceremonies at the proper times of the year, and they studied alchemy to purify metals or make medicines. "Things may change," but people's desire to use accurate, practical science as a tool to remake the universe according to their values is a thing that will probably never change. If something IS changing, it's modern Leftist academia's willingness to reject actual hard science and embrace fake science that reinforces their quasi-religious beliefs about "systemic oppression" and "52 different genders". I would much rather live in a society that has kooky religious beliefs, but which ultimately accepts what science has to say about the world, than live in a society that has kooky ideological beliefs about how society should function, and pushes only kooky, made-up science that justifies those beliefs.
 
Thinking on it Bob probably doesnt like joker because he relates to Thomas wayne vs the the plebian Arthur. On reflection the idea of the "people who don't matter." is pretty well exemplefied in the film except they drag his superior future into the abyss.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Koby_Fish
It's funny because Lenin specifically said that he didn't trust Stalin at all to rule the country. And of course they expect 1910's Leftists to act like 2010's progressives. Even if you are not a commie, you have to admit this is a pretty ignorant approach to Soviet history. Not suprising tbh

Screenshot_2019-10-13-11-33-51-1.png
 
It's funny because Lenin specifically said that he didn't trust Stalin at all to rule the country. And of course they expect 1910's Leftists to act like 2010's progressives. Even if you are not a commie, you have to admit this is a pretty ignorant approach to Soviet history. Not suprising tbh

View attachment 969375

More accurate, neither Lenin nor Trotsky trusted Stalin. Because he was indeed a backstabbing prick, smart yes, but still a backstabbing prick. Lenin pretty much begged Trotsky NOT to let Stalin get power, as he suspected the guy would build a cult of personality rather than go with ideas of communism. Trotsky course gets bumped off, Lenin dies and Stalin takes place via some elaborate moves (one of which involved doing a photo-manipulation to make it seem like him and Lenin were best buds)
 
It's funny because Lenin specifically said that he didn't trust Stalin at all to rule the country. And of course they expect 1910's Leftists to act like 2010's progressives. Even if you are not a commie, you have to admit this is a pretty ignorant approach to Soviet history. Not suprising tbh

View attachment 969375

I mean, Communism in general didn't exactly have a particularly progressive position on...well anything by modern standards. The Marxist concept of the "lumpenproletariat" basically means that people who are really poor aren't technically part of the working class and are too stupid and degenerate to be organized. Marx himself thought prostitutes and other assorted "dregs of society" were fundamentally reactionary class enemies because they were morons that were easily manipulated by capitalists.

When old school commies talked about the "working class" they fucking meant the working class. People who were economically BELOW the working class (hookers, vagabonds, homeless people, people without stable jobs) were degenerate reactionary scum who were too stupid to avoid being hoodwinked by capitalists.

More on topic, why is Bob such a weird stalker of Aimee Terese? It seems like 80% of the time when he's complaining about people to his left, it's either Terese herself or people he pulled from her mentions. Is it because she's a woman to his left who dares to criticize him?
 
Thinking on it Bob probably doesnt like joker because he relates to Thomas wayne vs the the plebian Arthur. On reflection the idea of the "people who don't matter." is pretty well exemplefied in the film except they drag his superior future into the abyss.
Replace Thomas with Murray Franklin and you hit it square on the money.
 
Since 9-11.

The GOP scored MASSIVE hits on the Democrats for dropping the ball on catching Bin Ladin before the 9-11 attacks in it's wake and as a result, the Democrats collectively took a vow to be fore Forever War in order to ensure they never get blamed for another 9-11 style attack.

It's the same reason Obama kept hedging his anti-war talk in disclaimers where he was "against the Iraq war but Afghanistan is the "GOOD WAR" I'm going to keep going on with no withdrawal in sight", why the Democrats didn't kill the Patriot Act when they had the chance, and why Hillary brazenly voted for the Iraq War for no other reason than because she thought that a pro-Iraq War vote would help her in running for the President in 2008 in relations of robbing the GOP of that line of attack.
Vietnam? Korea? What's that?
 
  • DRINK!
Reactions: Koby_Fish
Marx himself thought prostitutes and other assorted "dregs of society" were fundamentally reactionary class enemies because they were morons that were easily manipulated by capitalists.

Pretty much, although I do find it ironic that Lenin was both a Marxist and a whoremonger.

Despite his rhetoric, Lenin actually loosened the laws on prostitution in Russia because he was boinking whores left and right, enough to cripple him with syphilis.

A lot of queer commies like to say that Lenin was pro-LGBT because he overturned sodomy laws in Russia, but the laws he overturned weren't laws that prohibited homosexuality, but prostitution and "unnatural" hetero sex. Keep in mind that in old-time legal jargon, "sodomy laws" covered a broad category of sex crimes, including prostitution and infidelity.

Ol' Vlad Lenin was a big time sex pest and a murderous tyrant as well.
 
Is anyone else really curious as to what Bob's academic qualifications actually are?

He claims to have a " B.A. in Interactive Multimedia Art with a minor in Film Studies Communications," which is presumably a four year degree.
I just broke out the .pdf copy of Bob's book (I love torturing myself) and the in the period between when Bob mentions the years (1996, when Bob was a High School Sophomore, and 2005 when Bob worked at Best Buy and started playing Mario again) college is sparsely mentioned.

The only real mention of Bob's college experience is that he had to commute to a "local state college" from his parent's house and that he had bought a camcorder to use for some classes. He goes on for paragraphs about how working at Blockbuster gave him skills to talk about movies in a professional manner, but not once about how his Multimedia and Films Studies classes might have done the same.
No mention of any specific college, or graduating college, or any specific experiences. Bizarre.

People don't usually try to hide where they went to college like this. So two possibilities, either Bob didn't graduate and avoids giving out information so people can't call up the college and check his record, or he is ashamed that he wasn't recognized for his superior mind and went to a school he considers substandard.
 
Last edited:
It's funny because Lenin specifically said that he didn't trust Stalin at all to rule the country. And of course they expect 1910's Leftists to act like 2010's progressives. Even if you are not a commie, you have to admit this is a pretty ignorant approach to Soviet history. Not suprising tbh

View attachment 969375
If Bob was half the intellectual he thinks he is, he'd know far better than to commit the historian's fallacy.
 
Remember guys, Bob is a person who values human decency and is morally superior to the majority of the general public. Indeed, noting screams "human decency" like openly celebrating the idea of the majority of the working class not being to able to earn a living and hoping that they won't vote.
1570986556715.png
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back