First Time
First Time

First Time

Trial
Trial

Trial

Caught
Caught

Caught

Occupy Democrats
Occupy Democrats

Occupy Democrats

Loses Their Mind
Loses Their Mind

Loses Their Mind

Sething
Sething

Sething

grocery store
 grocery store

grocery store

faces
 faces

faces

meyer
 meyer

meyer

for the first time
 for the first time

for the first time

🔥 | Latest

Be Like, Children, and Detroit: WIZARU speedoweedo on a list of dumb shit i know: the grass in the original shrek movie is not grass. its hair. they used hair textures for the grass bc the actual grass for some reason in their computer modelling programs would not behave like grass so they used hair textures colored green. speedoweedo elvis presley was a registered DEA officer who asked nixon for the title and was awarded it. ndiecity What else? WIZARD speedoweedo the great escape artist houdini was living in a time period where mysticism, fortune telling, ouija boards, seances and etc were becoming very common place and trendy. and he fucking hated it so much. so much that he would go to seances in disguise and make some bullshit off the wall shit like "my son died last year can you let me talk to him" and the seance person would be like 'THIS IS YOUR SON HELLO FATHER then he'd rip off his disguise and be like YOU FRAUD I HAVE NO CHILDREN. He died on Halloween night in detroit and as far as i know every year they hold seances on halloween trying to get in contact with his spirit. If seances work i bet his ghost is just pissed off and not responding out of raw spite speedoweedo foxes cant snarl like dogs and wolves cus the muscles in their muzzle dont allowe it so they just drop their jaws and scream. simon-newman Brain: *An extremely obscure fact from the subject I never studied in my life* Me: How the f*ck do we know this? Brain: I don't know! Both: *Screaming* lolpics/AstroFunny I really like some of these.
Be Like, Children, and Detroit: WIZARU
 speedoweedo
 on a list of dumb shit i know:
 the grass in the original shrek movie is not
 grass. its hair. they used hair textures for
 the grass bc the actual grass for some
 reason in their computer modelling
 programs would not behave like grass so
 they used hair textures colored green.
 speedoweedo
 elvis presley was a registered DEA officer
 who asked nixon for the title and was
 awarded it.
 ndiecity
 What else?
 WIZARD
 speedoweedo
 the great escape artist houdini was living in
 a time period where mysticism, fortune
 telling, ouija boards, seances and etc were
 becoming very common place and trendy.
 and he fucking hated it so much. so much
 that he would go to seances in disguise
 and make some bullshit off the wall shit like
 "my son died last year can you let me talk
 to him" and the seance person would be
 like 'THIS IS YOUR SON HELLO FATHER
 then he'd rip off his disguise and be like
 YOU FRAUD I HAVE NO CHILDREN.
 He died on Halloween night in detroit and
 as far as i know every year they hold
 seances on halloween trying to get in
 contact with his spirit. If seances work i bet
 his ghost is just pissed off and not
 responding out of raw spite
 speedoweedo
 foxes cant snarl like dogs and wolves cus
 the muscles in their muzzle dont allowe it
 so they just drop their jaws and scream.
 simon-newman
 Brain: *An extremely obscure fact from the
 subject I never studied in my life*
 Me: How the f*ck do we know this?
 Brain: I don't know!
 Both: *Screaming*
 lolpics/AstroFunny
I really like some of these.

I really like some of these.

Crime, Doctor, and Fake: Steven Russell was a con artist who escaped from prison by using laxatives to fake the symptoms of AIDS. He then called the prison, posing as a doctor, asking for prisoners interested in an experimental treatment, and volunteered. Once out of Texas, he sent death certificates to the prison stating he had died. Ultrafacts.tumblr.com monpetitcabbage: rainfallinhell: creppysponge: blackgirlsparadise: How….? STEVEN RUSSELL WAS A FUCKING GENIUS.  Originally arrested for Insurance Fraud, he met the love of his life Phillip Morris in prison He got out before Phillip, so he proceeded to GET PHILLIP OUT OF PRISON He wanted to give Phillip a glamourous life, so he got a big-name job, and then started embezzling funds he was arrested and then broke out TWICE MORE and kept busting out then he was arrested again, and the above happened while he was on the run from this, he was determined to get Phillip (who was in trouble for harboring him) out of prison so he pretended to be a lawyer and hit up Phillip’s jail 24/7. He tried to get Phillip moved to a prison closer to where he was hiding so he couLD VISIT HIM AND THEN he made a fake identity and tried to get a 75k loan, and was arrested AGAIN, but he FAKED A HEART ATTACK AND LEFT BEFORE HE WAS EVEN PLACED IN PRISON AGAIN There’s a movie about his life called “I love you, phillip morris” Starring Jim Carrey and Ewan McGregor Seriously go watch I Love You Philip Morris, it’s literally just a “be gay do crime” rom com there’s no killing your gays or angsty plot messes, the comedy is amazing and it’s sweet and I’d die for it guess what’s going on my to watch list now
Crime, Doctor, and Fake: Steven Russell was a con artist who
 escaped from prison by using laxatives
 to fake the symptoms of AIDS. He then
 called the prison, posing as a doctor,
 asking for prisoners interested in an
 experimental treatment, and
 volunteered. Once out of Texas, he
 sent death certificates to the prison
 stating he had died.
 Ultrafacts.tumblr.com
monpetitcabbage:

rainfallinhell:

creppysponge:

blackgirlsparadise:

How….?

STEVEN RUSSELL WAS A FUCKING GENIUS. 
Originally arrested for Insurance Fraud, he met the love of his life Phillip Morris in prison
He got out before Phillip, so he proceeded to GET PHILLIP OUT OF PRISON
He wanted to give Phillip a glamourous life, so he got a big-name job, and then started embezzling funds
he was arrested and then broke out TWICE MORE and kept busting out
then he was arrested again, and the above happened
while he was on the run from this, he was determined to get Phillip (who was in trouble for harboring him) out of prison so he pretended to be a lawyer and hit up Phillip’s jail 24/7. He tried to get Phillip moved to a prison closer to where he was hiding so he couLD VISIT HIM
AND THEN he made a fake identity and tried to get a 75k loan, and was arrested AGAIN, but he FAKED A HEART ATTACK AND LEFT BEFORE HE WAS EVEN PLACED IN PRISON AGAIN

There’s a movie about his life called “I love you, phillip morris” Starring Jim Carrey and Ewan McGregor


Seriously go watch I Love You Philip Morris, it’s literally just a “be gay do crime” rom com there’s no killing your gays or angsty plot messes, the comedy is amazing and it’s sweet and I’d die for it


guess what’s going on my to watch list now

monpetitcabbage: rainfallinhell: creppysponge: blackgirlsparadise: How….? STEVEN RUSSELL WAS A FUCKING GENIUS.  Originally arrested for...

Bad, College, and Driving: GOING To A PARTY WORST-CASE MGH, WHO INVITED BEST-CASE THAT SHIRTTHAI WAS A GOOD IDEA? WHAT'S MOST LIKELy TO HAPPEN I THINK IMIGHT HEAD HOME SOON NEAH ME TOO. College DRIVING WORST-CASE WHAT HAVE You DONE? BEST-CASE FREEDOMI WHAT'S MOST LIKELy TO HAPPEN UGH, I-65 TRAFFIC ALWAyS SUcKS AT THIS TIME AND uPAGAIN, THAT POP SONG YOU'RE INDIFFERENT TO! Colle GOING ON A FIRST DATE WORST-CASE BEST-CASE Well, hello there, Sabella Martinez who lives at 3b5 Sunse+ Avenve BEFORE TONIGHT THOUGHT THE DEA OF A SOULMATE WAS A MYTH WHAT'S MOST LIKELy TO HAPPEN OH, yOU HAVE TWO SISTERS? EAH, THEY'RE FINE oleaelHumon GIVING A SPEECH WORST-CASE BEST-CASE TECHNICAL ERROR: ERY THING IS BAD WORLD PROBLEMS OLVED. NOU'RE A FRAUD HERE'S A B00k DEAL 00! MANE My BABIES Ol WHAT'S MOST LIKELy TO HAPPEN IN CONCLUSION WE SHOULD CHANGE SOME THINGS, BUT NoT EVERYTHING. THAT SOUNDS REASONABLE. TIME paperparachute: castorochiaro: pr1nceshawn: Worst Case vs. Best Case Scenarios by Karina Farek. This is a great joke, but it’s also a wonderful strategy for reducing anxiety that I learned about in therapy. If you’re ever nervous about something, just ask yourself: what’s the best thing that can happen? What’s the worst thing? What will most likely happen? It does wonders for your nerves, really does. My counsellor walks me through this all the time and it works??
Bad, College, and Driving: GOING To A PARTY
 WORST-CASE
 MGH, WHO INVITED
 BEST-CASE
 THAT SHIRTTHAI
 WAS A
 GOOD IDEA?
 WHAT'S MOST LIKELy TO HAPPEN
 I THINK IMIGHT
 HEAD HOME SOON
 NEAH
 ME TOO.
 College

 DRIVING
 WORST-CASE
 WHAT HAVE
 You DONE?
 BEST-CASE
 FREEDOMI
 WHAT'S MOST LIKELy TO HAPPEN
 UGH, I-65 TRAFFIC
 ALWAyS SUcKS
 AT THIS TIME
 AND uPAGAIN, THAT
 POP SONG YOU'RE
 INDIFFERENT TO!
 Colle

 GOING ON A FIRST DATE
 WORST-CASE
 BEST-CASE
 Well, hello there,
 Sabella Martinez
 who lives at 3b5
 Sunse+ Avenve
 BEFORE TONIGHT THOUGHT
 THE DEA OF A SOULMATE
 WAS A MYTH
 WHAT'S MOST LIKELy TO HAPPEN
 OH, yOU HAVE
 TWO SISTERS?
 EAH, THEY'RE
 FINE
 oleaelHumon

 GIVING A SPEECH
 WORST-CASE
 BEST-CASE
 TECHNICAL
 ERROR:
 ERY THING
 IS BAD
 WORLD
 PROBLEMS
 OLVED.
 NOU'RE A
 FRAUD
 HERE'S A
 B00k DEAL
 00! MANE My
 BABIES
 Ol
 WHAT'S MOST LIKELy TO HAPPEN
 IN CONCLUSION
 WE SHOULD CHANGE
 SOME THINGS, BUT
 NoT EVERYTHING.
 THAT SOUNDS
 REASONABLE.
 TIME
paperparachute:

castorochiaro:

pr1nceshawn:



Worst Case vs. Best Case Scenarios by Karina Farek.

This is a great joke, but it’s also a wonderful strategy for reducing anxiety that I learned about in therapy. If you’re ever nervous about something, just ask yourself: what’s the best thing that can happen? What’s the worst thing? What will most likely happen?
It does wonders for your nerves, really does.

My counsellor walks me through this all the time and it works??

paperparachute: castorochiaro: pr1nceshawn: Worst Case vs. Best Case Scenarios by Karina Farek. This is a great joke, but it’s also a ...

Being Alone, America, and Click: Jason Fuller, Contributor Working to bring about the best in America, both on-line and off. Impeachment Is No Longer Enough; Donald Trump Must Face Justice Impeachment and removal from office are only the first steps; for treason and-if convicted in a court of law-executed. 06/11/2017 10:39 pm ET for America to be redeemed, Donald Trump must be prosecuted Donald Trump has been President of the United States for just shy of six months now. I think that most of us among the electorate knew that his presidency would be a relative disaster, but I am not sure how many among us expected the catastrophe our nation now faces. friendly-neighborhood-patriarch: hominishostilis: abstractandedgyname: siryouarebeingmocked: mississpithy: bogleech: notyourmoderate: angrybell: thinksquad: http://archive.is/5VvI5 Huffpo, everybody. Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Or is the HuffPo just publishing outright fantasies? God dammit, I’m now in the position of defending Huffington. I didn’t want to be here. Okay, @angrybell … actually, @ literally everyone who reblogged this uncritically as a tacit endorsement and agreement. Such as @the-critical-feminist that I reblog this from.My first question has to be: are you serious? Don’t read that with a tone, don’t read that as an attack. That’s my first question: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Are you asking a sincere question or is this the sort of rhetoric that doesn’t translate well into text? And, if you are actually asking this question, are ou going to hear the answer or are you going to immediately start concocting your counter-argument because you just know in your heart that anyone who disagrees with you must be wrong, so you start formulating a plan to prove them wrong before you actually hear what they have to say?Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets and simply believe that the author’s reasoning does not hold up for whatever reasons you have chosen not to state, and you believe their source information is falsified for whatever reason you have chosen not to state, I will move on. After I have given you and yours every conceivable benefit of the doubt and every charitable assumption. Because if the article itself doesn’t convince you, there’s the fact that Donald Trump has broken literally every federal law against corruption and conflict of interest. Not one or two, not most, not all but a few. Literally every single law we have against corruption, from the Constitution to the informal guidelines circulated as a memo from the White House ethics scholars. He’s broken literally every one of those rules. He’s openly traded favors for money and favors for months now. Hell, that Chinese influence-peddler that paid him off for sixteen million dollars should have been enough to get him convicted of treason. Sharing code-word level classified information with a government on the opposite side of an ongoing military conflict isn’t *necessarily* treason, unless the information was part of a share program with an allied nation and wasn’t his to distribute. That’s aiding a foreign aggressor at the expense of a military ally, and that’s treason. Giving aid and comfort to enemies of the nation. Obstruction of justice is pretty clear-cut, that’s an impeachment, except that the justice in question is also a matter of national security, so that’s treason. Again. Defaming the former president? Misdemeanor, impeachable. The way he drags his heels nominating posts in Justice and State could be prosecuted as dereliction of duty. If he has tapes of Comey, he’s on the hook for contempt, if he doesn’t then he’s on the hook for witness tampering. Hell, deleting the covfefe tweet is destroying federal records, which is a misdemeanor, and impeachable. The man doesn’t go a week without bringing on an impeachable offense. Strictly speaking, every time he goes to Mar-A-Lago he’s committing grand larceny by fraud, because he’s taking millions of dollars of American funds for his own benefit, after promising not to do that. There are dozens, hundreds maybe, of impeachable offenses already in this 140 days, “high crimes and misdemeanors”. Actual counts of treason, punishable by death by hanging, is probably only five or six counts. Only five or six counts of high treason by our sitting president. His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job. Trump’s supporters probably believe he’s done nothing impeachable or treasonous because they spent eight years claiming on no grounds whatsoever that Obama was impeachable and treasonous, just because they didn’t like him. They now probably convince themselves that these facts about Trump are as fake as their Obama theories and they’ve ruined the gravity of these terms for themselves. “ His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job. “ I like how Bogleech doesn’t know many Trump supporters are former Obama supporters. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/04/us/obama-trump-swing-voters.html https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/16/17980820/trump-obama-2016-race-racism-class-economy-2018-midterm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama-Trump_voters It’s not even a secret. But why am I not surprised bogleech - that intellectual titan - failed to do basic research? And last time I checked, no nation required their politicans to be perfect. Which is what NYM is asking for with that quote; perfection. That’s what ‘above reproach’ means. An impossible standard, considering people “reproach” Trump for feeding fish wrong, for his skin color, for any and every little thing, even if they have to twist reality into a pretzel to do it. In fact, I’ve seen people take pictures of kids in cages from 2014, and blame Trump for it. So this: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Is a question of this: Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Seems you missed the part that says “merits this”. Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? (The underlined is in the subtitle, not the headline.) Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets… Context? Central tenets? Do you not know how highlighting works? You don’t need to know the context, or any other point, when you’re indicating a specific, explicit, and isolated quality. The subtitle called for Trump’s execution, we’re 5 paragraphs in and you haven’t even acknowledged that part yet. Or at all, I’m guessing, because I’m not reading further. You keep talking around it. You accuse others, preemptively, of not hearing the answer and pre-”concocting” a response, and yet you’re waffling on about shit around the one, sole, isolated thing that was indicated in the first place. This isn’t about ignoring context, this is about criticising one thing. Which is a thing people are allowed to do, by the way, just because people criticise one thing, doesn’t mean they’re criticising everything about the everyone involved, and everything said before, adjacent to, and after that one thing, and therefore are required to include all of those things in their consideration and assessment of this one thing. The specific criticism of the indicated quality is the advocation of Trump’s execution. That’s it. No context is needed to understand that this is what was said, especially since that which was said, which is being criticised, is explicit. No amount of, “So, click-bait subtitle that you don’t see until you’ve already clicked on the article link out of the way, here’s what I actually meant when I said I wanted this person tried and executed,” could excuse the use of that language, let alone actually believing in it. It’s like… it’s like if someone makes a typo, someone else is like, “Oh, seems you made a typo,” you’d jump in like, “But what about they’re perfectly reasonable spelling everywhere else? Hm? Forced to ignore contextual perfect spelling I see. They’re lack of typos everywhere else explains this typo, and vindicates it”. You and what’s his face, James, fuckin ReasonAndEmpathy or whatever now, y’all keep saying “but what of the context?” when the criterion of criticism is isolated, atomic, specific, and/or explicit. No amount of context invalidates the very specific, singular words explicitly spoken. “Sure he called for Trump to be executed, but he explains himself.” Fucking and? When did the death sentence become ok? When did that happen? Moderates are ok with the death sentence now? Aight, weird. Man this fucking post aged like fine wine, take a SIP Delicious This was quite a ride
Being Alone, America, and Click: Jason Fuller, Contributor
 Working to bring about the best in America, both on-line and off.
 Impeachment Is No Longer Enough;
 Donald Trump Must Face Justice
 Impeachment and removal from office are only the first steps;
 for treason and-if convicted in a court of law-executed.
 06/11/2017 10:39 pm ET
 for America to be redeemed, Donald Trump must be prosecuted
 Donald Trump has been President of the United States for just shy of six months now. I
 think that most of us among the electorate knew that his presidency would be a relative
 disaster, but I am not sure how many among us expected the catastrophe our nation now
 faces.
friendly-neighborhood-patriarch:

hominishostilis:

abstractandedgyname:
siryouarebeingmocked:

mississpithy:

bogleech:

notyourmoderate:

angrybell:

thinksquad:


http://archive.is/5VvI5


Huffpo, everybody. 




Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Or is the HuffPo just publishing outright fantasies?

God dammit, I’m now in the position of defending Huffington. I didn’t want to be here. Okay, @angrybell … actually, @ literally everyone who reblogged this uncritically as a tacit endorsement and agreement. Such as @the-critical-feminist that I reblog this from.My first question has to be: are you serious? Don’t read that with a tone, don’t read that as an attack. That’s my first question: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Are you asking a sincere question or is this the sort of rhetoric that doesn’t translate well into text? And, if you are actually asking this question, are ou going to hear the answer or are you going to immediately start concocting your counter-argument because you just know in your heart that anyone who disagrees with you must be wrong, so you start formulating a plan to prove them wrong before you actually hear what they have to say?Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets and simply believe that the author’s reasoning does not hold up for whatever reasons you have chosen not to state, and you believe their source information is falsified for whatever reason you have chosen not to state, I will move on. After I have given you and yours every conceivable benefit of the doubt and every charitable assumption. Because if the article itself doesn’t convince you, there’s the fact that Donald Trump has broken literally every federal law against corruption and conflict of interest. Not one or two, not most, not all but a few. Literally every single law we have against corruption, from the Constitution to the informal guidelines circulated as a memo from the White House ethics scholars. He’s broken literally every one of those rules. He’s openly traded favors for money and favors for months now. Hell, that Chinese influence-peddler that paid him off for sixteen million dollars should have been enough to get him convicted of treason. Sharing code-word level classified information with a government on the opposite side of an ongoing military conflict isn’t *necessarily* treason, unless the information was part of a share program with an allied nation and wasn’t his to distribute. That’s aiding a foreign aggressor at the expense of a military ally, and that’s treason. Giving aid and comfort to enemies of the nation. Obstruction of justice is pretty clear-cut, that’s an impeachment, except that the justice in question is also a matter of national security, so that’s treason. Again. Defaming the former president? Misdemeanor, impeachable. The way he drags his heels nominating posts in Justice and State could be prosecuted as dereliction of duty. If he has tapes of Comey, he’s on the hook for contempt, if he doesn’t then he’s on the hook for witness tampering. Hell, deleting the covfefe tweet is destroying federal records, which is a misdemeanor, and impeachable. The man doesn’t go a week without bringing on an impeachable offense. Strictly speaking, every time he goes to Mar-A-Lago he’s committing grand larceny by fraud, because he’s taking millions of dollars of American funds for his own benefit, after promising not to do that. There are dozens, hundreds maybe, of impeachable offenses already in this 140 days, “high crimes and misdemeanors”. Actual counts of treason, punishable by death by hanging, is probably only five or six counts. Only five or six counts of high treason by our sitting president. His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job. 

Trump’s supporters probably believe he’s done nothing impeachable or treasonous because they spent eight years claiming on no grounds whatsoever that Obama was impeachable and treasonous, just because they didn’t like him. They now probably convince themselves that these facts about Trump are as fake as their Obama theories and they’ve ruined the gravity of these terms for themselves.





“

His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job.


“






I like how Bogleech doesn’t know many Trump supporters are former Obama supporters.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/04/us/obama-trump-swing-voters.html
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/16/17980820/trump-obama-2016-race-racism-class-economy-2018-midterm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama-Trump_voters
It’s not even a secret. But why am I not surprised bogleech - that intellectual titan - failed to do basic research?
And last time I checked, no nation required their politicans to be perfect. Which is what NYM is asking for with that quote; perfection. That’s what ‘above reproach’ means. An impossible standard, considering people “reproach” Trump for feeding fish wrong, for his skin color, for any and every little thing, even if they have to twist reality into a pretzel to do it. In fact, I’ve seen people take pictures of kids in cages from 2014, and blame Trump for it.

So this:


Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated?


Is a question of this:


Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this?


Seems you missed the part that says “merits this”.


Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? 


(The underlined is in the subtitle, not the headline.)


Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets…
Context? Central tenets? Do you not know how highlighting works? You don’t need to know the context, or any other point, when you’re indicating a specific, explicit, and isolated quality.
The subtitle called for Trump’s execution, we’re 5 paragraphs in and you haven’t even acknowledged that part yet. Or at all, I’m guessing, because I’m not reading further. You keep talking around it. You accuse others, preemptively, of not hearing the answer and pre-”concocting” a response, and yet you’re waffling on about shit around the one, sole, isolated thing that was indicated in the first place.
This isn’t about ignoring context, this is about criticising one thing. Which is a thing people are allowed to do, by the way, just because people criticise one thing, doesn’t mean they’re criticising everything about the everyone involved, and everything said before, adjacent to, and after that one thing, and therefore are required to include all of those things in their consideration and assessment of this one thing.
The specific criticism of the indicated quality is the advocation of Trump’s execution. That’s it. No context is needed to understand that this is what was said, especially since that which was said, which is being criticised, is explicit. No amount of, “So, click-bait subtitle that you don’t see until you’ve already clicked on the article link out of the way, here’s what I actually meant when I said I wanted this person tried and executed,” could excuse the use of that language, let alone actually believing in it.
It’s like… it’s like if someone makes a typo, someone else is like, “Oh, seems you made a typo,” you’d jump in like, “But what about they’re perfectly reasonable spelling everywhere else? Hm? Forced to ignore contextual perfect spelling I see. They’re lack of typos everywhere else explains this typo, and vindicates it”.
You and what’s his face, James, fuckin ReasonAndEmpathy or whatever now, y’all keep saying “but what of the context?” when the criterion of criticism is isolated, atomic, specific, and/or explicit. No amount of context invalidates the very specific, singular words explicitly spoken. “Sure he called for Trump to be executed, but he explains himself.” Fucking and? When did the death sentence become ok? When did that happen? Moderates are ok with the death sentence now? Aight, weird.


Man this fucking post aged like fine wine, take a SIP 

Delicious

This was quite a ride

friendly-neighborhood-patriarch: hominishostilis: abstractandedgyname: siryouarebeingmocked: mississpithy: bogleech: notyourmoderate: ...