98 3811

Five Six

So I do have an awesome announcement, which is Jessica will be slowly moving into this comic's role as colorist. Obviously this comic is really time consuming to make, and OBVIOUSLY that gets me behind on my posts. And obviously I don't expect to flounder forever with my schedule, nor test my reader's patience when my own expectations far exceed the hours in the day. Jessica has volunteered countless hours on maintaining this site over the past several years, and I'm pleased to announce I'm able to pay her something for it now. So welcome aboard Jessica, officially.. I guess. I'm working on a Patreon comic for tomorrow, and then I'll have one for Tuesday... THEN, you will see a comic she colored herself for Thursday. So this week, I had to prep double strips cause she needed SOMETHING to work on. So stick around for that. Long term goal, she's able to color all the comics, my load will be lightened, schedule becomes consistent, and, ah.. ah... Malcolm/ UPDATE: Next comic will be up as soon as it's done being colored. I struggled with the perspective of the last panel, so.. you'll see why when you see it.. DX

98 thoughts on “Five Six

  1. Thanks Chris! I hope everyone won’t even notice any difference between Chris’ coloring and my own (at least eventually). I will do my best.

    Added bonus: I get to see the comics sooner than everyone else…except without words so… I guess it’s a choose your own adventure sort of thing. Hurray!

    1. Congratulations, Ms. Jessica! I’m so glad you’re on board. Looking forward to seeing you work.

  2. Wow, he’s stronger than he looks if he can lift a jackass bigger than him up with just one arm. Is it the rage? Or are Canadians just better like that?

      1. It’s a Great Lakes thing. We can channel the Manitou of the waters to give us feats of strength.

        At least that’s the bullshit I’d spout when I was a bouncer. :-)

        1. Oh, I like that idea. I hail from Michigan myself, so I could also claim mighty Great Lakes powers.

        2. Same here, ( heel of the little finger ).

          When I moved to Buffalo they thought I was joking because I said I moved there for the better economy and milder winters.

        3. so, wow. Heal’ish of the pinky here as well. (I’m originally from ER, if you know where that is….) Now in Northern VA and people here just don’t understand snow.

        4. Currently living in Henrico, Va, I can say that everything shuts down with a light dusting and everyone panics

    1. Sheer power of rage, I’m thinking. You’ve heard those stories about adrenaline-fueled moms lifting cars off their kids, right? This is like that, only involving embezzlement.

      1. Embezzlement, a ruined reputation, possible extradition to an American injustice system… plenty of things there to add a little oomph. :P

    2. He’s clearly parodying Wolverine here. Short, Canadian, prone to fits of explosive rage, etc etc etc.

      1. Well I don’t kick everyone in the balls because not everyone has balls. Only the ones that have balls. The others are fine.

        1. You could always carry around say a soccer ball and a basketball and ask women you meet to hold them at arms length for a moment to avoid breaking your record.

        2. Doesn’t work. Since you’re the owner of the balls in question, you’re basically kicking your own balls.

        3. True. She could give them to people as a gift before kicking them, but then she’d need to carry way too many around to be feasible. And using something small like ping-pong balls would probably result in a lot of kicked fingers.

  3. *giggles uncontrollably* Oh my God, that is absolutely the dumbest thing to say in that situation! Danny, you are reliably idiotic.

    1. Nope. If he had added ” guess you can’t stack sh*t that high” that would of sealed the deal.

    2. Truth be told: It’s actually a very realistic and probable thing to be said by someone in that situation.

      1. It was a repeated line from the Patrick Swayze movie “Roadhouse” I am a little surprised I haven’t seen anyone mention it yet. Maybe the age range?

        1. Mentioning that movie to me back in the day was my cue to “Stop being nice”.

          ANY bouncer movie would have been better to reference than that one. Even “Brainsmasher: A Love Story”.

        2. Really, I always considered the brain matter dripping down the side of his head to improve his delivery in a way that put it a cut above the rest.

  4. Caleb: “Danny was more impressed, though, when I leveled his van with fire from my eyes and lightning from my arse.”

      1. That is still better than Juniper’s because it is at least all in one place. Juniper’s is spread out in little packets across all of Florida and portions of Georgia, and Alabama; residing on the walls of liquor stores. I do not want to imagine where the remaining portions of her soul reside.

      2. I think you have that wrong. All her pictures would be posted on America’s Least Wanted. #2, behind Alex. Possibly just demoted to #3, behind Danny, but time will tell.

        1. I believe the grandpost is referring to panel 3 of comic Hidden Agenda Part IV (current post date 29 Aug 1014).

        2. Sorry, paid improper attention to indentation and thought you were replying to CivD666 rather than Caven. My bad.

    1. Yay! Today we celebrate the 2015th anniversary of the day we rode giant eagles to defeat Queen Napoleon and the Germans in the battle of Endor! All hail our country’s glorious history!

      1. What? You idiot, that never happened. We didn’t fight Queen Napoleon until the War of 1812, where we tried to get Abraham Lincoln’s head back from the Italians!

        1. Oh Ye of little knowladge…that was queen tut and we were trying to get his head back from the prussians in the french indian war

        2. Are you sure? I could’ve sworn we were at something like the negative 50th anniversary of finally formally declaring the world’s independence from pants.

        3. the difference between people who are on the internet for amusement and the ones who are here to rant about how but hurt they are

        4. Seriousness should only be partaken of in measured amounts, and too much is worse than too little.

  5. Just a friendly reminder that the only reason we celebrate the fourth is because a bunch of slave owning aristocratic white guys didn’t want to pay their taxes.


    1. Actually, they wouldn’t have objected (so much) to the taxes if they’d had a say in the governing of the place. “No taxation without representation” was the slogan of the times. Don’t oversimplify the situation… even if it does seem appropriate to the current era.

      1. Well, they got the same amount of say as the Irish, any given African colony, Indian holdings, Pacific ones and the Spice Isles… In short: being a normal colony of the period. One arguably better off than e.g. ones mismanaged by the Spanish Crow. :/

        1. The way the colonies wanted it to work was that they would be given an amount to be payed to the Crown, and the colonies would handle the taxing to get that amount. The population had little cash, but had goods that could be used in lieu of it. The colony would convert the goods to credit, which would have been turned over to the Crown. In this way, they would have been represented by their local legislatures, and would have payed as loyal citizens.

          But, the officials from Britain refused to do it that way. They wanted individuals to pay cash, which they didn’t have. The taxes were placed on manufactured goods, that were normally purchased by barter for raw goods. So, in effect, this barred the population from buying the tools they needed, as they had to have cash on hand to pay taxes (no barter or credits accepted by the Crown officials), yet no one had cash, or any way to get it, as they could only get bartered goods in trade for their raw materials (see the logical loop problem here?). The tax collectors saw all this as evasion, and treated the colonists as criminals. As everyone was doing it, it must be a form of rebellion, so the Army was brought in. And the rest is history.

    2. I tend to assume periods in history with a lack of skeletons in the closet are actually periods in history with some damned solid closet doors. Not to say we should give the mistakes of the past a pass, just not pretend we ever have been or will be squeaky clean and aim for a little better in the grand scheme of things. Then again I’m a pessimist.

      I don’t remember my history well enough, but were all the founding father slave owners? I had thought that the North/South divide on slavery had existed even then and it was only the Southerners. I know Jefferson was a slave owner, but I didn’t think that, say, Ben Franklin was.

      I do think that the makeup of the US founding fathers was somewhat unique and that it’s given us, as a country, the odd idea that a popular revolution equals a better outcome. I look at the goings on in the Middle East at the moment and feel we didn’t really think about all the necessary preconditions for revolutions to end in something better as opposed to chaos with a crapshoot after it.

      1. Slave owning was more prevalent and larger scale in the South, but still present in the North well into the 19th century.

        Those who think all was sweetness and light after the end of the American Revolution are forgetting (or never studied) Shay’s Rebellion and the Whiskey Rebellion, and if they think that a popular revolution equals a better outcome are completely ignoring the near-contemporary French Revolution, which led to the Reign of Terror.

        1. Thanks on the correction. Tech occupies more of my brain space and the history sometimes is more around the edges and is less complete.

          I’m certainly not suggesting kittens and rainbows, more that it seems that amongst our founding fathers the prevailing desire was preserving their own freedom rather than gaining power over others. It generally doesn’t seem to work out that way. Frankly I think our country was astonishingly lucky, in many ways.

          Sadly enough, I think the French Revolution will end up looking like a brighter period than what we’re seeing at least in Syria, probably Iraq, with lots of others possible. Afghanistan was a “we got hurt and we’re hurting them back” sort of thing, so follow-through for it being a screw-up doesn’t seem that unexpected (even though the people we went in to take out were the ones set up by us in a power imbalance left over from a Cold War pissing contest). However Iraq & Libya, at the very least, do seem like places where we stuck our noses in with the naive view that “better must follow” and it’s not looking like that’s going to be the case.

        2. Also, the American Revolution wasn’t really a revolution in the same sense that the French one was (it was a war for independence, the American colonies already had a great degree of self-government so other than appointed governors being replaced with elected ones, there wasn’t much change in government in the transition from colony to state.)

          The aftermath of the French Revolution transformed a bankrupt state that had been one of the most powerful in Europe into a state that conquered most of Europe, in wars that were originally self-preservation against frightened monarchical states but became wars of aggression. None of the Islamic states have the underlying strength that France had, but there’s the additional religious factor that introduces added ugliness.

        3. I was mainly thinking immediate consequences within France rather than Napoleon in the comparison. I certainly don’t see any of the Middle Eastern empires spreading beyond central Asia down to say mid-Africa.

          I suspect most of the terrorism we’ll see in the west is probably going to be mostly a wash in terms of just slight differences between what indigenous wackos would do with or without encouragement and any increases offset by decreases due to terrorism-related enforcement catching the occasional other wacko.

          The two things that I consider more troubling coming out of that are:

          1) The continually increasing willingness to give up real freedom for perceived safety that we’ve been seeing in the US for the past 14 years seems more likely to continue rather than rebound the longer the public at large believes in a credible threat and at a certain point most of our population won’t even remember the jokes about lack of freedom in the USSR that we now accept as perfectly fine and normal here in the US. Not sure how prevalent the prior attitude was elsewhere in the west, though it seems the lessening of freedom is a trend elsewhere as well.

          2) I’ve read several news stories that seem to consider it known that Pakistan, nuclear power that is not an NPT signatory, has agreed to provide nukes to Sunni nations if Iran builds one (I haven’t looked up how much that’s reporter hyperbole versus formal and acknowledged international treaty). At that point, it’s just a matter of time until they’re used again, if not by the nation that possesses them than by a zealot who slipped through their military’s psych testing. From what I understand the environmental fallout of such can be pretty severe, even if it’s just a couple between Shiite & Sunni confined to the Middle East gets that directly nuked. I don’t think we really understand the weather to have much idea how much things would rebound versus irrevocably change from that scenario, which has lots of nasty possibilities all over the world in that scenario.

        4. It’s long been considered a truism that if Iran gets nukes, then Saudi Arabia (at the least) will seek to get nukes, and given our Fearless Leader’s wishy-washy negotiations with Iran, the likelihood that they will develop and deploy nukes is very high. (Assuming the Israelis don’t find a way to take out the Iranian nuke program, but theirs is more hardened and dispersed than Iraq’s was.)

          Interesting times, to say the least.

        5. Though you’d have to use a rather high number of nukes for more than just the wider region of the impacts to suffer from direct effects. The consequences farther away would be felt by way of commercial and political earthquakes though.

          And the possibility of stray extremists stealing one set aside, right now I’m actually more worried about Israel misusing one of their bombs than Iran, should the latter get some. There are some political groups in the former with quite a lot of power that really worry me. Even more so than their counterparts in Iran, considering that those seem to constantly be losing power. While the extremists in Israel have been on the up again for a while now.

        6. I consider it unlikely that more than a couple of nukes could get used in the Middle East before Israel decides it’s time to join the party in force, even if otherwise uninvolved. Considering that Iran always makes a point that “destruction of Israel” is a nonnegotiable item of national policy, and they’d likely be on one side of using them, it seems unlikely that any use of nukes by Iran would be seen as anything but a direct existential threat. That’s the point when I’d expect that there would be enough nukes flying to make a dent in global weather patterns fairly certain. Since Israel keeps mum about what they’ve got, it’s hard to say, but I’d bet they’ve got more than enough to decimate Iran.

          As for Iran’s program, I don’t recall which one it was, but I have a hazy recollection of reading about a malware campaign that seemed to be targeting Iran and anything around the negotiations for information and the general belief was that it was Israel behind it. Past that, you’ve got both Israeli sympathizers and people who are terrified of Iran having the bomb in other governments that would be happy to pass them whatever info they could to assist in taking them out (how many would be officially sanctioned versus illegal espionage is hard to say, though). There’s also the question of the Russians, while Iran’s allies may not want Iran to go nuclear yet not want to be tied to the action and they could leak, additionally with the problems Russia is having with the West at the moment along with Israel’s anger with the US, might be a good diplomatic salvo to do them a favor. So I expect Israel will end up with quite a large portion of the intelligence the rest of the world has on Iran’s nuclear program, one way or another.

          As for taking out foreign nuclear facilities, what Israel did to Syria was the one I recall reading about somewhere that I thought was pretty impressive (granted, as I recall Syria just handed everything not destroyed to Iraq…).

          As for Israel’s extremists, I really think the main danger of them to those outside the Middle East is the environmental impact of some carpet nuking and some spillover of random Islamic extremists attacking people that they deem to support Israel. So I’m not going to say they’re a good thing, but I think the best way to muzzle them is to muzzle all the other groups in the area that attack both them and a lot of other countries as well.

        7. Slavery was a failing system before the Revolution happened. Washington would have done away with it, if he could have, either economically or politically. But he couldn’t. He was stuck with it, and it was a drain on him financially for most of his life. He was forced to accept slaves in barter for debits owed to him, slaves he didn’t need, and had to feed and cloth. Slaves didn’t work as hard, or as willingly as free men and women did for pay in the north.

          The vast majority of slave ownership was held by a tiny minority of rich elite, who modeled themselves on medieval nobility. This made manual labor jobs both unattainable, and beneath the dignity, of the majority of southerners. Many in the south were homeless and jobless, and only had the fact that they were better than slaves to keep there pride up.

          The issue of slavery was brought up in the Declaration of Independence, but was largely pushed down the road in favor of unity against Britain. When the Constitution was hammered out, it was one of the great sticking points. Once again, this was kicked along for later, with temporary compromises made.

          There were a lot of heroes, villains, and people that were equal measures of both.

        8. I do recall reading somewhere that indentured servants paying off the cost of their passage were much more cost efficient than slaves were. Can’t remember where. Seemed to make sense when I read it, though I don’t recall much of it at the moment.

      2. I’d say periods in history with a lack of skeletons in the closet usually are those periods where people didn’t even care trying to hide them. Otherwise, there’s pretty much always something.

        1. Agreed, though I do still hold that sometimes better hiding (or misattribution) can distort the apparent number of skeletons as well.

        2. That is true. Thanks to the possibilities of modern technology however, nowadays those very skeletons seem to develop the ability to dance on your front porch rather sooner than later.

  6. JANOBII makes some ill-considered remarks. Replies to Janobii’s remarks are thoughtful. Janobii needs to read them

    1. She’s probably just feeling like a snarky teenager. She’s been around the comments here long enough that I doubt she believed it’d start anything past the sort of conversation it did.

  7. So, knowing that very little (as in none) of everything in this strip is done without purpose, wouldn’t Caleb’s other hand be a fist … >_> Maybe he really isn’t interested in Vu….

  8. Pictures steal your soul? Is this guy living in the 18th Century? Are we sure he does website computer work? Sounds more like a witch doctor.

    1. I’ll use any excuse I can to get out of pictures. Additionally random, obviously false statements are a good way to try to side track someone elsewhere.

  9. lol yeah thats the thing u say to the person who despite being smaller than u can hold u in the air by your neck ….lol thought u’d be taller…and he probably thought you’ would wear glasses plaid long pants and be a shut in ……the marajuana well that’s always 50/50

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.