Facebook will never reach Peak Evil.

BBC News - Facebook apologies for dating ad showing Rehtaeh Parsons

INFINITE IMPROBABILITY: Superior Spider-Man, worse storyline - The Weekender

INFINITE IMPROBABILITY: Superior Spider-Man, worse storyline - The Weekender

No. 700 brings about yet another death in the Marvel Universe.

When you’re writing a film, there’re only a few endings you can give your character. One of those possible conclusions is killing them off.

When you’re writing a continuing comic book series, however, that’s usually not an option, particularly when it’s your title character. Marvel Comics, yet again, is scoffing at that notion, for better or worse. Actually, it’s just for the worse.

After 50 years, and just before co-creator Stan Lee’s 90th birthday, “The Amazing Spider-Man” comic series is ending with issue No. 700.

This is a big deal, but almost all major comic characters have had their comics restarted at No. 1 over the years, mainly to sell more books (first issues are usually very collectible) and to give new readers a good jumping on point if they hadn’t been following along and didn’t know where to start. This is probably not a good time for any jumping, other than up and down angrily.

You see, the long-running story of Peter Parker is ending with his death in this issue, and it doesn’t happen in that “heroic sacrifice” kind of way that you would assume it would. You know, giving the character some sort of justice after all this time. Instead, his mind is stuck in the body of his dying his arch nemesis, Dr. Octopus, and Otto randomly decides once he inherits Peter’s memories that he’s going to stop being a bad guy after a lifetime of crime and devotes himself to being a better Spider-Man, re-launching the series as “The Superior Spider-Man” in January.

Yeah, I actually read comics and it doesn’t really make any sense to me either.

I realize that Marvel was bought out by Disney a few years back, but is this take-off of “Freaky Friday” really the best way to end this beloved series?

It’s interesting as a “What If…?” story, but for writer Dan Slott to actually end the life of one of the greatest superheroes ever just to experiment with this idea seems a bit excessive, particularly since Marvel contends that this is a “permanent change.”

 History says differently.

Gillard: Australia's own stuttering clusterfuck of a malignant failure.

Gillard is a classical fabian- childless, intellectually stunted, highly opinionated, psychopathic, relentlessly hostile to normal people and their nuclear families, a tainted monster literally hell bent on a luciferian dominion on earth.

2013 is not just the opportunity to throw this evil bitch out of office, but it must also be the opportunity we take to cleanse the country of fabians, Gramsci-media and their cultural war enablers.

If we don't, we are FUCKED.

DC new 52: prehistoric

DC gave it the old college try, but the new 52 concept, whilst structurally sound enough, lacks commitment to its cause.

Its main characters have long since been chewed up and excreted as "brands" that lack soul and creativity. So it's silly to bother with popularity contests about them. Superman and Batman aren't going anywhere.

What is remarkable is how the topicality of the original golden age and silver age characters has become fossilised.

Hal Jordan as a test pilot in the space age was brilliant. Hal Jordan as... what exactly? In the 21st century is stupid.

But not as stupid as millionaire (now promoted to billionaire- inflationary spiral much?) playboys, journalists and even cops as alter ego professions.

No billionaire can be remotely clean, let alone heroic. Journalists are part of the political class or they end up murdered. Cops... Well if anyone simultaneously knows five or more cops and four clean ones they don't live on planet Earth. Smallville had to acknowledge these points directly with how it dealt with its superheroes' alter egos. And it was well done for its part.

The Brave and the Bold cartoon played around with the existing universe brilliantly, acknowledging apparent contradictions and blending it into a wholesome and relatively harmonious whole. Smallville simply started again, and I think to the extent it failed it wasn't the cornball and soap opera- that's what fans liked- it was shoehorning existing DC comics elements into it without fully Smallvillising them.

Probably the single most silly and old fashioned thing of all in the new DC 52 however is its political correctness. We've had it proven now for years that cultural marxism is not only ridiculous and a failure, it's also a direct attack on the real value system of our civilisation. To let the freaks and deviants run the funnybooks and write sheer perversity on a daily basis is just so clunky and prehistoric. Diversity, as a healthy outgrowth of the mixing of originally isolated populations, is a normal natural outcome. But the hidden agenda driving DC's witless shoehorning of "minority" characters as though they're so many unpopular types of nut included with the cashews and macadamias to pad out the bag is retarded. It's also highly demeaning to everyone but they have zero interest in that.

At some point the trademarks will reduce in value to the point that they melt like ice cubes... Not yet, and not particularly soon either... But it is as inevitable as entropy itself. We will see genuinely new characters again, but it will take the next Stan Lee to do it.

And he or she is not working for Warner or Disney, by definition.

Gillard and the other socialist puppets on Hookergate, HSUgate, AWUgate, Cattlegate, BERgate, Battsgate, ... ...