Vogue , New York Oktober - Carl “Eric” Erickson , 1932.
American, 1891-1958
10 x 5 cm.

#batman#dc comics#bruce wayne#dc#tim drake#batfamily#batfam#dc fanart#dick grayson





seen from United States

seen from Netherlands

seen from United States
seen from China
seen from China
seen from Greece
seen from Italy
seen from United States
seen from China
seen from China

seen from Malaysia
seen from China

seen from United Kingdom

seen from Germany

seen from United States

seen from Australia
seen from Germany
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
Vogue , New York Oktober - Carl “Eric” Erickson , 1932.
American, 1891-1958
10 x 5 cm.
@kenmarlenn
Virgil can only imagine terrible outcomes, Eric/Host fusions can actually predict the worst possible outcomes and cry in advance about them
Still updating, here’s a lovely Eric Derekson (?) in a suit. What a swell guy! I might color him later, I’m thinking maybe orange?
That’s all, scroll on
Does bim trimmer work here ?
Ed Edgar works here
Okay this is Eric as a sign no one can convince me otherwise
Dumbest Thing I've Ever Heard: 7/31/2023
Fifth Place: Erick Erickson
On 7/30/2023, Mr. Erickson tweeted the following:
Starting to see more and more progressives demand public swimming pools. Get ready for the next entitlement program.
Not public swimming pools! Anything but public swimming pools!
By the way, the top reply is somebody pointing out that the city Erickson lives in--has multiple public swimming pools:
I'm sorry, I can't get over this: Erickson is seriously concerned that progressives are going to--what exactly? Use tax payer dollars to make the community better? That's really something you view as a concern? As one Twitter user put it:
i like that the worst thing this guy can imagine is americans collectively deciding to use the wealth they produce and the taxes they pay to give themselves something nice
Fourth Place: Stephen Strang
Right-wing watch posted a clip of him on Friday talking about allowing drag queens to read to children, he says "They would not let someone dressed up in a Nazi uniform go in and read stories to children."
First off, who exactly is the "they" in this case? Second off, there is obviously no comparison between the ideology of the most genocidal and murderous regime of the twentieth century and people dressing in drag, and the fact that you think these two things are on even remotely the same level shows there is something wrong with you.
Third Place: Donald Trump
NBC reached out to forty-four of Trump's former cabinet officials to see how many of them would support his 2024 run for re-election--only four did. Those four, for those curious, are Mark Meadows, Ric Grenell, Matthew Whitaker, and Russ Vought. A Tea Party holdover who played a key role in the Freedom Caucus until he was made Trump's Chief of Staff and who appeared in a debunked creationist propaganda film, a small time ambassador who once got into a fight with Nick Fuentes over if he was immoral for being a homosexual, a failed Congressional candidate turned Attorney General, and a man who is only known for hindering Biden's transition to the Presidency, respectively.
What I find funny though is not that this group of nitwits have endorsed Trump's re-election, but that they are the only ones who worked with Donald Trump to have done so. If so few of the people who were around Donald feel comfortable giving him a second term, what should that say to the rest of us?
Second Place: Jonathan Chait
What's wrong with this picture?
If you said the fact that it implies the corruption of a Supreme Court Justice is on the same level as the corruption of the son of the President despite one actually having the power to impact people's lives and the other not, you'd be correct. However, this false comparison is the entire basis of New York Magazine's article "The Sleaze Problem: How Democrats can clean up the Supreme Court and address the Hunter Biden affair." Why Democrats need to address the Hunter Biden affair--which is little more than trumped up charges against a private system--I'm not sure.
The column even sees its author admitting that nothing Hunter Biden did was illegal while also accepting the incorrect notion that nothing Clarence Thomas did was illegal.
The article proposes that Democrats should propose an ethics code for the Supreme Court while aiming for Republican support through also creating a stricter ethics code around the actions of family members of politicians. Of course, Chait admits this wouldn't actually work because doing so would indict the Trump kids even more than Hunter Biden--but on the bright side, at least the Democrats now have an answer for the irrational and nonsensical charges against Hunter Biden. If only Democrats would play into GOP talking points, that would show them.
Winner: Samuel Alito
Did you know that nothing in the Constitution gives Congress the power to regulate the Supreme Court? Well that's what Samuel Alito thinks--of course, it isn't actually true. Congress specifically has the power to stop courts from ruling on specific issues, to determine who is on the Supreme Court, and various other forms of regulation--but Alito doesn't want to mention that, because that could get in the way of his power grab.
Samuel Alito, you've said the dumbest thing I've ever heard.
It is wild to me that Erickson died in 1994.
I tend to think of him as having been around in the 1800’s for some reason.
He saw the moon landing. He knew what a TV was.
Glenn Beck and Erick Erickson have both written pieces in response to this week’s meeting with Facebook. These are the complaints of useful idiots.
...These are the complaints of useful idiots. They are stupid and both men should be ashamed at their dull-witted retromingency in making them. Facebook is not being shaken down in any capacity. It is being criticized not as a corporation, but in its chosen role as a media entity. Facebook curates the news; it is a news source for the vast majority of Americans. It put its trending algorithm forward as a source of news, with the false impression given that it accurately represented the trending topics of the Facebook community. Instead, it warped these results according to their ideological framework and their biases to falsely represent the top stories of the day. This is a serious accusation and one Facebook has admitted to as a problem. Yet Beck and Erickson are arguing against Mark Zuckerberg when they say that it doesn’t matter.