No Questions Asked
No Questions Asked

No Questions Asked

I Dont
I Dont

I Dont

To Look
To Look

To Look

I Have
I Have

I Have

A Good
A Good

A Good

The
The

The

You Are
You Are

You Are

Not
Not

Not

But
But

But

That
That

That

🔥 | Latest

Apparently, Beautiful, and Children: Seanan McGuire @seananmcguire Oh, wow. Little girl in full meltdown because when her mom packed movies for the trip, she only packed the little boy's favorites 6/13/17, 4:02 PM 460 RETWEETS 1,625 LIKES Seanan McGuire@seananmcguire 1h Replying to @seananmcguire "FINDING NEMO is just as good," says Mom "DORY IS A GIRL LIKE ME AND YOU ONLY BROUGHT BOYS LIKE HIM," wails the girl I feel you, kiddo わ2 51 925 Mom is now asking girl to be reasonable, as apparently boy gets mad when he has to watch "girl" movies, and "You're more mature." わ35 42 620 Seanan McGuire@seananmcguire 1h I am so on this kid's side right now you have no idea 28 1,121 Seanan McGuire@seananmcguire 1h Little boy has joined conversation: "I like MOANA she likes MOANA we should do MOANA." A protest singalong has begun h1 56 931 Seanan McGuire@seananmcguire 1h Mom: "Don't disturb the other--" Both kids: "YOU'RE WELCOME YOU'RE WELCOME YOU'RE WELCOME." Mom--passengers. わ2 다 47 902 YOU SCREAM LIKE THE VENGEFUL MONSTERS YOU ARE, CHILDREN. YOU SCREAM ロ61 1,149 Seanan McGuire@seananmcguire 1h Update: l am now on the mom's shit list for helping with the lyrics to "Shiny." Both children now shriek-singing "SHIIIINYYYYYY." I wirn 24 54 Seanan McGuireネ@seananmcgure·1h Little girl now singing "How Far l'll Go" while little boy has launched into "Let It Go." Mom appears to need a drink. YOU EARNED THIS, MOM 12 46 1,047 Seanan McGuire@seananmcguire 1h Mom: You're disturbing people! Older woman with German accent: Do you want to know how the song goes in German? GERMAN GRANDMOTHER NOW TEACHING US DISNEY SONGS IN GERMAN. JAPANESE GRANDMOTHER INCHING CLOSER 15 136 Seanan McGuire@seananmcguire 1h MOM LOOKS TRAPPED, CHILDREN ARE DELIGHTED, THIS IS THE BEST DAY EVER 13 47 1,428 Seanan McGuire@seananmcguire 1h I am like, 95% sure both of these grandmothers would adopt these children if given half a chance 29 1,026 Seanan McGuire @seananmcguire·1h Japanese grandmother has a beautiful singing voice, and is teaching us "Do You Want To Build A Snowman?" 10 52 Seanan McGuire@seananmcguire 1h We have attracted several more children and three more grandparents. I feel my work here is done peaceheather: linssweater: This thread omg ALWAYS reblog
Apparently, Beautiful, and Children: Seanan McGuire
 @seananmcguire
 Oh, wow. Little girl in full meltdown
 because when her mom packed movies
 for the trip, she only packed the little boy's
 favorites
 6/13/17, 4:02 PM
 460 RETWEETS 1,625 LIKES
 Seanan McGuire@seananmcguire 1h
 Replying to @seananmcguire
 "FINDING NEMO is just as good," says
 Mom
 "DORY IS A GIRL LIKE ME AND YOU ONLY
 BROUGHT BOYS LIKE HIM," wails the girl
 I feel you, kiddo
 わ2
 51
 925

 Mom is now asking girl to be reasonable,
 as apparently boy gets mad when he has
 to watch "girl" movies, and "You're more
 mature."
 わ35
 42
 620
 Seanan McGuire@seananmcguire 1h
 I am so on this kid's side right now you
 have no idea
 28
 1,121
 Seanan McGuire@seananmcguire 1h
 Little boy has joined conversation: "I like
 MOANA she likes MOANA we should do
 MOANA." A protest singalong has begun
 h1
 56
 931
 Seanan McGuire@seananmcguire 1h
 Mom: "Don't disturb the other--"
 Both kids: "YOU'RE WELCOME YOU'RE
 WELCOME YOU'RE WELCOME."
 Mom--passengers.
 わ2
 다 47
 902

 YOU SCREAM LIKE THE VENGEFUL
 MONSTERS YOU ARE, CHILDREN. YOU
 SCREAM
 ロ61
 1,149
 Seanan McGuire@seananmcguire 1h
 Update: l am now on the mom's shit list for
 helping with the lyrics to "Shiny." Both
 children now shriek-singing
 "SHIIIINYYYYYY." I wirn
 24
 54
 Seanan McGuireネ@seananmcgure·1h
 Little girl now singing "How Far l'll Go"
 while little boy has launched into "Let It
 Go." Mom appears to need a drink. YOU
 EARNED THIS, MOM
 12
 46
 1,047
 Seanan McGuire@seananmcguire 1h
 Mom: You're disturbing people!
 Older woman with German accent: Do you
 want to know how the song goes in
 German?

 GERMAN GRANDMOTHER NOW
 TEACHING US DISNEY SONGS IN
 GERMAN. JAPANESE GRANDMOTHER
 INCHING CLOSER
 15
 136
 Seanan McGuire@seananmcguire 1h
 MOM LOOKS TRAPPED, CHILDREN ARE
 DELIGHTED, THIS IS THE BEST DAY EVER
 13 47
 1,428
 Seanan McGuire@seananmcguire 1h
 I am like, 95% sure both of these
 grandmothers would adopt these children
 if given half a chance
 29
 1,026
 Seanan McGuire @seananmcguire·1h
 Japanese grandmother has a beautiful
 singing voice, and is teaching us "Do You
 Want To Build A Snowman?"
 10
 52
 Seanan McGuire@seananmcguire 1h
 We have attracted several more children
 and three more grandparents. I feel my
 work here is done
peaceheather:

linssweater:
This thread omg
ALWAYS reblog

peaceheather: linssweater: This thread omg ALWAYS reblog

Tumblr, Blog, and Com: judgmentfist: the kollector! a horrible little gremlin, I like him already 
Tumblr, Blog, and Com: judgmentfist:

the kollector! a horrible little gremlin, I like him already 

judgmentfist: the kollector! a horrible little gremlin, I like him already 

Clothes, Money, and Old Man: See this old man? Here's why he is one of the best people in the world... This is 99 year old Dobri Dobrev, a man who lost most of his hearing in the second World War, has spent decades traveling 25 kilometers by foot every day, decked in his homemade clothes and leather shoes, from his village to the city of Sofia, Bulgaria, where he spends the day begging for money. Strangely enough, Dobrev isn't begging for himself He manages to live with an 80 euros pension (rougly 100 usd) a month. All the money that he has collected over the years (an estimated 40.000 euros) have been donated by him to orphanages unable to pay their bills. He doesn't keep a cent of the money he receives. Everything is for the orphanages. Some call him "The saint of Baylovo", his place of birth. This year he will be 100 years old. ARS ParaHecilrioc A SP CAPHI CT IOCTHNCT YPABO BECENCT CCPMO HEHO 6:Ba IPENANST borA TEHN WiseCT As one might expect, he is cherished by everybody. They call him Dyado Dobri (Grandpa Dobri) and he represents the good that can be done in the most selfless way possible. So, if you're in need of a role model, here's one. Just by being a little bit like him, the world will be a much better place. thebikingviking: useless-bulgariafacts: Dobri Dobrev passed away yesterday. He was 103 years of age. RIP Grandpa Dobri, you will be remembered. 1914-2018
Clothes, Money, and Old Man: See this old man? Here's why he is one
 of the best people in the world...
 This is 99 year old Dobri Dobrev, a man who lost most of his hearing in
 the second World War, has spent decades traveling 25 kilometers by
 foot every day, decked in his homemade clothes and leather shoes,
 from his village to the city of Sofia, Bulgaria, where he spends the day
 begging for money.

 Strangely enough, Dobrev isn't begging for himself
 He manages to live with an 80 euros pension (rougly 100 usd) a month.
 All the money that he has collected over the years (an estimated 40.000
 euros) have been donated by him to orphanages unable to pay their bills.

 He doesn't keep a cent of the money he receives.
 Everything is for the orphanages.
 Some call him "The saint of Baylovo", his place of birth.
 This year he will be 100 years old.

 ARS ParaHecilrioc
 A SP
 CAPHI CT
 IOCTHNCT
 YPABO
 BECENCT
 CCPMO
 HEHO
 6:Ba
 IPENANST
 borA
 TEHN
 WiseCT
 As one might expect, he is cherished by everybody. They call him
 Dyado Dobri (Grandpa Dobri) and he represents the good that can be
 done in the most selfless way possible.
 So, if you're in need of a role model, here's one. Just by being
 a little bit like him, the world will be a much better place.
thebikingviking:
useless-bulgariafacts:

Dobri Dobrev passed away yesterday. He was 103 years of age.
RIP Grandpa Dobri, you will be remembered.


1914-2018

thebikingviking: useless-bulgariafacts: Dobri Dobrev passed away yesterday. He was 103 years of age. RIP Grandpa Dobri, you will be remembe...

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: ...