🔥 Popular | Latest

America, Anaconda, and Life: Norway Democratic Socialism United States Unfettered Capitalism Poverty rate-10% Life expectancy of 81.7 years Infant mortality 2 per 1,000 births. A murder rate of 0.51 per 100,000. Incarcerations: 74 per 100,000. GDP of $75.500 per person 70% workers protected by Unions Ranks 2nd -Happiest Country Free Universal health care Free higher education Financial security for seniors 83% home ownership Living wage as minimum 8 weeks paid vacation per year 35 weeks paid parental leave Poverty rate-29% Life expectancy of 79.6 years. Infant mortality 5.7 per 1,000 births. A murder rate of 4.74 per 100,000. Incarcerations: 860 per 100,000. GDP of $59.500 per person 11.3% workers protected by Unions Ranks 14th-Happiest Country Unpaid/Insurance based health care Expensive higher education No security for seniors 63% home ownership Poverty wage as minimum No paid vacation per year No paid parental leave Average personal tax rate-37% Average personal tax rate-38.52% liberalsarecool: thatpettyblackgirl: It’s worth pointing out that the poverty rate mentioned in the picture is relative poverty. By law everyone in Norway is entitled to shelter and subsistence support including basic health care. Poor Norwegians, in other words, receive far more support from society than poor Americans do. Socialism works. The only reason republicans want capitalism is so the rich can hoard all the wealth while poor people suffer. Vote Bernie! EAT. THE. RICH. You pay the same tax rate, but in America you have to add your health care payments and tuition payments. That can be thousands a year. Plus, they get 8 weeks of vacation. They get 35 weeks of paid parental leave. We have to end siphoning all the surplus labor value to shareholders and give back profits as wages and benefits.

liberalsarecool: thatpettyblackgirl: It’s worth pointing out that the poverty rate mentioned in the picture is relative poverty. By law ...

Save
Community, Access, and Library: ultraviolet-techno-ecology An awful lot of housing clutter relates directly to the lack of community resources for temporary usage of occasional-use tools and supplies. The average kitchen for example contains a lot of appliances which are only used for special occasions, and a sort of Kitchen-Library could easily supply the necessary tool:s as-needed to an entire community without cluttering up everyone's individual homes In other words - Not every household requires access to a power drill every single day, but an awfully large number of households have had to make permanent space for a power drill they bought specifically for those rare days when they have been needed vighnantaka-bard This is a thought I've had in the past as well, it can be extended to many other specialized tools and other items. Even though I tend towards Thoreau-esque self-relianceI think that the general concept of a library can and should be extended much farther. There's a lot of potential yet to be tapped It's not a new idea either, the Haudenosaunee, also known as the Iroquois Confederacy implemented this practice extensively through what we could loosely call in English, "guilds." There are also some Amish communities who have an informal system for borrowing and passing along various building tools Contrary to popular belief, Amish people don't shun all modern technology and many of them today use power tools, albeit ones that are offgrid and meet specific requirements. The trope of barn-raising Amish people isn't very accurate these days, but cooperation, anti-consumption, and humility are still deeply ingrained their worldview Time to clear out our housing clutter.

Time to clear out our housing clutter.

Save
Dad, Grandma, and Head: Stop taking people with dementia to the cemetery On yeah, every time that dad forgets mom is dead, we head to the cemetery so he can see her gravestone. WHAT I can't tell you how many times I've heard some version of this awful story. Stop taking people with dementia to the cemetery Seniously, I cringe every single time someone tells me about their plan" to remind a loved one that their loved one is dead I also hear this a lot: 1 keep reminding mom that her sister is dead, and sometimes she recalls it once I've said it. That's still not a good thing. Why are we trying to force people to remember that their loved ones have passed away? If your loved one with dementia has lost track of their timeline, and forgoten that a loved one is dead, don't remind them. What's the point of reintroducing that kind of pain? Here's the thing they will forget again, and they will ask again. You're never, ever, ever, going to "convince them of something permanently Instead, do this Dad, where do you think mom is? When he tells you the answer, repeat that answer to him and assert that it sounds correct. For example, it he says, "1 think mom is at work,"say, "Yes, that sounds right, I think she must be at work. it he says, 1 think she passed away say, Yes, she passed away People like the answer that they gave you. Also, it takes you off the hook to come up with something" that satisfies them. Then, twenty minutes later when they ask where mom is, repeat what they originally told you drgaellon I support this sentiment. Repeatedly reminding someone with faulty memory that a loved one has died isn't a kindness, it's a cruelty. They have to relieve the loss every time, even if they don't remember the grief 15 minutes later In other words, don't try to impose your timeline on them in order to make yourself feel better. Correcting an afflicted dementia patient will not cure them They won't magically return to your real world'. No matter how much you might want them to. It's a kindness of old age, forgetting. Life can be very painful. Don't be the one ripping off the bandage every single time prismatic-bell I used to work as a companion in a nursing home where one of the patients was CONVINCED I was her sister, who'd died 40 years earlier. And every time one of the nurses said דhat's not Janet, Janet is dead, Alice, remember?" Alice would start sobbing So finally one day Alice did the whole JANET IS HERE and this nurse rather nastily went Janet is dead and before it could go any furtherI said "excuse mer?? How dare you say something so horrible to my sister?" The nurse was pissed, because I was feeding Alice's delusions. Alice didn't have delusions. Alice had Alzheimer's. But I made sure it went into Alice's chart that she responded positively to being allowed to believe I was Janet. And from that point forward, only my specific patient referred to me as-Nina. in front of Alice-everyone else called me Janet. and when Alice said my name wasn't Nina I just said "oh, it's a nickname, that's all."It kept her calm and happy and not sobbing every time she saw me It costs zero dollars (and maybe a little bit of fast thinking) to not be an asshole to someone wah Alzheimer's or dementia. Be kind I wish I had heard this stuft when Grandma was still here satr9 I read once that you have to treat dementia patilents more like it's improv, like you have to take what they say and say to yourself ok, and" and give them more of a story to occupy them and not just shut it down with something super harsh A nurse I used to work with always told us: Tf a man with dementia is trying to get out of bed to go to work, don't tell him he's 90 and in a nursing home. Tell him it's Sunday and he can stay in bed. If a woman with dementia is trying to stand because she wants to get her husband's dinner out of the oven, don't tel her he's been dead for 20 years. Tell her you'll do for her and she can sit back down Always remembered that, always did it. Nothing worse than hearing someone with memory loss ask the same question over and over again only to be met with: "We already told youl" Just tell them again steel-phoenix I've worked with elderly dementia patients, and I agree with all the above. Treat them as you'd like to be treated in the same situation ruby-white-rabbit Same. I've worked with patients like these and even my grandma was convinced for a day that I was my aunt. Just roll with it lazulisong My go-to response to someone asking if I've seen a dead loved one is "I haven't seen them today, but if I do I'll let them know you were looking for them. Cause you know what, if I DID see them I wouild tell them, so it always comes out sounding truthtul Source dementiabyday.com 99.289 notes PSA for those whose loved ones have dementia
Save
Anaconda, Crime, and Fail: 7 Ways Police Will Break the Law, Threaten, or Lie to You to Get What they Want Cops routinely break the law. Here's how. By Larken Rose / The Free Thought ProjectOctober 19, 2015 libertarirynn: gvldngrl: wolfoverdose: rikodeine: seemeflow: Because of the Fifth Amendment, no one in the U.S. may legally be forced to testify against himself, and because of the Fourth Amendment, no one’s records or belongings may legally be searched or seized without just cause. However, American police are trained to use methods of deception, intimidation and manipulation to circumvent these restrictions. In other words, cops routinely break the law—in letter and in spirit—in the name of enforcing the law. Several examples of this are widely known, if not widely understood. 1) “Do you know why I stopped you?”Cops ask this, not because they want to have a friendly chat, but because they want you to incriminate yourself. They are hoping you will “voluntarily” confess to having broken the law, whether it was something they had already noticed or not. You may think you are apologizing, or explaining, or even making excuses, but from the cop’s perspective, you are confessing. He is not there to serve you; he is there fishing for an excuse to fine or arrest you. In asking you the familiar question, he is essentially asking you what crime you just committed. And he will do this without giving you any “Miranda” warning, in an effort to trick you into testifying against yourself. 2) “Do you have something to hide?”Police often talk as if you need a good reason for not answering whatever questions they ask, or for not consenting to a warrantless search of your person, your car, or even your home. The ridiculous implication is that if you haven’t committed a crime, you should be happy to be subjected to random interrogations and searches. This turns the concept of due process on its head, as the cop tries to put the burden on you to prove your innocence, while implying that your failure to “cooperate” with random harassment must be evidence of guilt. 3) “Cooperating will make things easier on you.”The logical converse of this statement implies that refusing to answer questions and refusing to consent to a search will make things more difficult for you. In other words, you will be punished if you exercise your rights. Of course, if they coerce you into giving them a reason to fine or arrest you, they will claim that you “voluntarily” answered questions and “consented” to a search, and will pretend there was no veiled threat of what they might do to you if you did not willingly “cooperate.”(Such tactics are also used by prosecutors and judges via the procedure of “plea-bargaining,” whereby someone accused of a crime is essentially told that if he confesses guilt—thus relieving the government of having to present evidence or prove anything—then his suffering will be reduced. In fact, “plea bargaining” is illegal in many countries precisely because it basically constitutes coerced confessions.) 4) “We’ll just get a warrant.”Cops may try to persuade you to “consent” to a search by claiming that they could easily just go get a warrant if you don’t consent. This is just another ploy to intimidate people into surrendering their rights, with the implication again being that whoever inconveniences the police by requiring them to go through the process of getting a warrant will receive worse treatment than one who “cooperates.” But by definition, one who is threatened or intimidated into “consenting” has not truly consented to anything. 5.) We have someone who will testify against youPolice “informants” are often individuals whose own legal troubles have put them in a position where they can be used by the police to circumvent and undermine the constitutional rights of others. For example, once the police have something to hold over one individual, they can then bully that individual into giving false, anonymous testimony which can be used to obtain search warrants to use against others. Even if the informant gets caught lying, the police can say they didn’t know, making this tactic cowardly and illegal, but also very effective at getting around constitutional restrictions. 6) “We can hold you for 72 hours without charging you.”Based only on claimed suspicion, even without enough evidence or other probable cause to charge you with a crime, the police can kidnap you—or threaten to kidnap you—and use that to persuade you to confess to some relatively minor offense. Using this tactic, which borders on being torture, police can obtain confessions they know to be false, from people whose only concern, then and there, is to be released. 7) “I’m going to search you for my own safety.”Using so-called “Terry frisks” (named after the Supreme Court case of Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1), police can carry out certain limited searches, without any warrant or probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed, under the guise of checking for weapons. By simply asserting that someone might have a weapon, police can disregard and circumvent the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches. U.S. courts have gone back and forth in deciding how often, and in what circumstances, tactics like those mentioned above are acceptable. And of course, police continually go far beyond anything the courts have declared to be “legal” anyway. But aside from nitpicking legal technicalities, both coerced confessions and unreasonable searches are still unconstitutional, and therefore “illegal,” regardless of the rationale or excuses used to try to justify them. Yet, all too often, cops show that to them, the Fourth and Fifth Amendments—and any other restrictions on their power—are simply technical inconveniences for them to try to get around. In other words, they will break the law whenever they can get away with it if it serves their own agenda and power, and they will ironically insist that they need to do that in order to catch “law-breakers” (the kind who don’t wear badges). Of course, if the above tactics fail, police can simply bully people into confessing—falsely or truthfully—and/or carry out unconstitutional searches, knowing that the likelihood of cops having to face any punishment for doing so is extremely low. Usually all that happens, even when a search was unquestionably and obviously illegal, or when a confession was clearly coerced, is that any evidence obtained from the illegal search or forced confession is excluded from being allowed at trial. Of course, if there is no trial—either because the person plea-bargains or because there was no evidence and no crime—the “exclusionary rule” creates no deterrent at all. The police can, and do, routinely break the law and violate individual rights, knowing that there will be no adverse repercussions for them having done so. Likewise, the police can lie under oath, plant evidence, falsely charge people with “resisting arrest” or “assaulting an officer,” and commit other blatantly illegal acts, knowing full well that their fellow gang members—officers, prosecutors and judges—will almost never hold them accountable for their crimes. Even much of the general public still presumes innocence when it comes to cops accused of wrong-doing, while presuming guilt when the cops accuse someone else of wrong-doing. But this is gradually changing, as the amount of video evidence showing the true nature of the “Street Gang in Blue” becomes too much even for many police-apologists to ignore. http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/7-ways-police-will-break-law-threaten-or-lie-you-get-what-they-want One of the biggest realizations with dealing with cops for me was the fact that they CAN lie, they are 100% legally entitled to lie, and they WILL whether you’re a victim of crime, accused of committing a crime or anything else Everyone needs to reblog this, it could save a life. Important Seriously if you ever find yourself in custody don’t say shit until you’ve got some counsel with you. No cop is your friend in that situation.
Save
Animals, Cats, and Dogs: gokuma: callmebliss: knightless: dakrolak: owlbear33: chibisquirt: why-animals-do-the-thing: maythefoxbewithyou: allmyeggmateshateyou: c0ffeecunt: vvhatmighthavebeenlost: joannanullo: betweenlinebreaks: Are we sure that foxes are canines? Are we sure they aren’t just big stupid cats? Ugh what a cutie I NEED IT I need 12 foxes aren’t canines… WELL, they’re certainly not felines. I’m going to textgrab from this post by prokopetz: I often see foxes referred to as “catdogs” on Tumblr, but I wonder if folks realise how true that really is. There’s a phenomenon called convergent evolution that occurs when two taxonomically unrelated species exploit the same ecological niche. The features that are needed to best take advantage of a given niche are pretty much the same everywhere you go; thus, over time, those species will become anatomically and behaviourally similar, even though they’re completely unrelated. And foxes? Foxes are what you get when an ecosystem has no native small felines, so a canine species evolves to take advantage of the ecological niche that would have been exploited by a small feline, if one existed. In other words, a fox is literally what you get when a dog tries to cat. So, in a way… #omg #I knew I had a huge reason for loving foxs #other than #you know #loving fox on a similar note, hyenas are what happens when there are no dogs so felines fill that niche, Hyenas particularly spotted hyenas are wolfcats *mind blown* @captainchibale One time I saw someone refer to foxes as “cat software installed on dog hardware” and yeah *pounce* *POUNCE* *POUNCE!*
Save
Ass, Dumb, and Fucking: O 75or older 51. Are you male or female? o Male a 0 2 Ơ Fernale/genderqueer. 56 52. What is the highest grade or level of school that you have completed? ina care O 8th grade or less + high school, but did not in-d0g xeansan Just filled out my health insurance forms! yeah!l!l fucking around with health insurance forms!!!! I hate when people complain about "oh health forms are stupid they want my biological sex instead of my gender!! or they only have male or female!!" There's a reason for that, you dumb fucks, and they're referring to biological sex Different health risks are present in different sexes, and whatever gender is in your head does not change the fact that if you were born female, you have a higher risk for certain cancers and osteoporosis, and if you were bom male you have a higher risk for heart disease and often a shorter lifespan than a female In other words, your biological sex is an important factor in health and health insurance, and your special snowflake status doesn't change that. Coulda said it nicer but it's true; its about health No. There gets a point where nice doesn't work. There's too many stupid ass angsty teens on here that are gonna get themselves seriously hurt or sick because they wanna be a special fucking snowflake. Lemme tell you a thing. Doctors don't give a fiying fuck what you identify as. All they want to know is do you have two X chromosomes or an XY? Because cancer and lupus and certain medicines don't give a flying fuck what pronouns you use. This is about your fucking LIFE. stop being angsty for TWELVE SECONDS because when you're in an ambulance or going into cardiac arrest or whatever the situation may be, it's ESSENTIAL that you get your head out of your ass long enough to tell them your BIOLOGICAL SEX that you were BORN WITH. It literally may save your life. 156,710 notes When the brain wants to be a LeSBian, gAY, bI SexUAL, and tRANS. But your Genes says no
Save
Being Alone, Dude, and Food: Professor: Wings-Eating Show Hot Ones Is Problematic for Women By KATHERINE TIMPF July 12, 2018 6:33 PM oo O O O Hot Ones host Sean Evans (YouTube screengrab via First We Feast) A YouTube show that challenges contestants to eat increasingly spicy chicken wings has raised the ire of a Tulsa media-studies professor. ccording to a professor of media studies at the University of Tulsa, the YouTube show Hot Ones is problematic because it "manipulates inequitable gender hierarchies." In case you aren't familiar with Hot Ones, it's a show where the host challenges his guests to eat increasingly spicy chicken wings. Seems pretty harmless, right? An innocent chicken-eating show couldn't possibly be something that's actually hurting women, could it? Well, Professor Emily J. H. Contois thinks it could. According to her paper, "The spicy spectacular food, gender, and celebrity on Hot Ones," published in the journal Feminist Media Studies, the show "creates, maintains, and manipulates inequitable gender hierarchies through the interrelated performances of gender, food consumption, and celebrity." In other words: According to Contois, society just doesn't accept the idea of women eating spicy foods, and that is the reason that only eleven women have appeared as contestants on the show so far. Women, she argues, know that they don't really stand a chance on Hot Ones, because gender binaries "create power hierarchies by feminizing dainty, light, and sweet flavors and foods, eaten in small portions with restraint." The paper goes on to claim that society conditions people to believe that "real men" are supposed to "seek out and conquer" spicy foods, and that "being the type of dude who loves hot sauce is part of performing conventional masculinity.. through actions like disregarding risk and facing danger fearlessly" Women, on the other hand, aren't supposed to eat messy foods like wings, or to discuss topics such as the effects that spicy foods might have on their digestive tracts, because these topics are "often considered taboo for women to openly discuss, let alone as part of a celebrity persona" without adopting a sort of "cool girl" persona, which some women might not want to do. <p><a href="https://feminismisahatemovement.tumblr.com/post/175942345598/alaija-mogai-watch-oh-my-god-stop-a" class="tumblr_blog">feminismisahatemovement</a>:</p> <blockquote><p><a href="http://alaija.tumblr.com/post/175942082248/mogai-watch-oh-my-god-stop-a-woman-who" class="tumblr_blog">alaija</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a href="https://mogai-watch.tumblr.com/post/175941005491/oh-my-god-stop-a-woman-who-eats-hella-spicy" class="tumblr_blog">mogai-watch</a>:</p> <blockquote><p>Oh<br/> My<br/> God.<br/> Stop.<br/> -A woman who eats hella spicy wings and doesn’t appreciate this kind of nonsense “academia” getting funded while departments contributing more than virtue-signaling and divisive dreck are chronically under-funded.</p></blockquote> <p>Some brave woman just needs to smash the piquant ceiling!!!</p> <p><br/></p> <p>Or just have a Thai woman go on there…</p> </blockquote> <p>Go easy on them, feminists ran out of things to be plausibly outraged about in around 1982. This is what they’re left with now.<br/></p></blockquote>

feminismisahatemovement: alaija: mogai-watch: Oh My God. Stop. -A woman who eats hella spicy wings and doesn’t appreciate this kind of non...

Save
Facebook, Lgbt, and News: l Three WiFi Call20:36 * 25%10, pinknews.co.uk Share on facebook Now transgender people are being blamed for turning fish trans 15th June 2018, 6:58 PM Ella Braidwood b.0 A woman said trans people are "forcibly trans-ing fish" in a meeting held by a trans-exclusionary radical feminist group. (We Need To Talk/Facebook) Write Off Unaffordable Debts Without Bankruptcy! www.moneysolve.co.uk Do You Qualify? .Three WiFi Call 20:35 pinknews.co.uk 25%LO. Share on facebook A woman speaking at a controversial feminist meeting has claimed that trans people are responsible for polluting the rivers and seas - causing fish to "forcibly" change gender, and damaging crocodiles and alligators. The woman, known only as Elizabeth, who claimed to be an "environmentalist and eco-activist" was speaking at a meeting called Inconvenient Women hosted by lesbian trans-exclusionary radical feminists Sheila leffreys and Nicole Jones on Wednesday Read this next Rabbi says LGBT-inclusive education plan is an 'eviction notice for Orthodox Jews' www.pews.co.dR +AddThis plantanarchy: youareagoodperson: apiapicka: sleepy-space-princess: radical feminists are claiming transgender people are turning fish transgender now wtf This is literally “Chemicals Making Frogs Gay: The Sequel”, I can’t believe this. it’s almost like TERFs are conservatives or something I think what may be being referenced is the study that have found that certain areas with endocrine-disrupting pollution in the water have affected amphibian sex determination? Some people have theorized that human medications that contain estrogen are part of the problem because they’re excreted in waste but like… a lot of fertilizers can be endocrine disrupters. Agricultural and lawn runoff and general pollution from farms, big business, etc is a WAY more likely culprit in affecting the health of amphibian and fish populations than like… a handful of trans women and boatload of older cis women taking a piss.In other words, it’s a confusion similar to the “the phytoestrogens in soy turns you into a man-boobed manlet”, where folks see something about hormones and freak the fuck out for the wrong reasons.
Save
Apparently, Arguing, and Complex: STEPHEN HAWKINGS LAST WORDS WELIVEINTHEMATRI If you asked an astrophysicist today to describe what happened after the Big Bang, he would likely start with the concept of “cosmic inflation.” Cosmic inflation argues that right after the Big Bang — we’re talking after a teeny fraction of a second — the universe expanded at breakneck speed like dough in an oven. But this exponential expansion should create, due to quantum mechanics, regions where the universe continues to grow forever and regions where that growth stalls. The result would be a multiverse, a collection of bubblelike pockets, each defined by its own laws of physics. “The local laws of physics and chemistry can differ from one pocket universe to another, which together would form a multiverse,” Hertog said in a statement. “But I have never been a fan of the multiverse. If the scale of different universes in the multiverse is large or infinite the theory can’t be tested.” Along with being difficult to support, the multiverse theory, which was co-developed by Hawking in 1983, doesn’t jibe with classical physics, namely the contributions of Einstein’s theory of general relativity as they relate to the structure and dynamics of the universe. “As a consequence, Einstein’s theory breaks down in eternal inflation,” Hertog said. Einstein spent his life searching for a unified theory, a way to reconcile the biggest and smallest of things, general relativity and quantum mechanics. He died never having achieved that goal, but leagues of physicists like Hawking followed in Einstein’s footsteps. One path led to holograms. Instead of the 'standard' description of how the 'universe' unfolded (and is unfolding), the authors argue the Big Bang had a finite boundary, defined by string theory and holograms. The new theory - which sounds simplistically like the world of the red-pill-blue-pill Matrix movies - embraces the strange concept that the universe is like a vast and complex hologram. In other words, 3D reality is an illusion, and that the apparently "solid" world around us - and the dimension of time - is projected from information stored on a flat 2D surface.

If you asked an astrophysicist today to describe what happened after the Big Bang, he would likely start with the concept of “cosmic inflati...

Save
Apparently, Bad, and Children: <p><a href="http://redbloodedamerica.tumblr.com/post/173399100807/brainhousinggroup-brother-asleep" class="tumblr_blog">redbloodedamerica</a>:</p> <blockquote><p><a href="http://brainhousinggroup.tumblr.com/post/173394541001/brother-asleep-redbloodedamerica" class="tumblr_blog">brainhousinggroup</a>:</p><blockquote> <p><a href="https://brother-asleep.tumblr.com/post/173386074494/redbloodedamerica-nbcnightlynews-president" class="tumblr_blog">brother-asleep</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a href="http://redbloodedamerica.tumblr.com/post/173375884017/nbcnightlynews-president-moon-of-south-korea" class="tumblr_blog">redbloodedamerica</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a href="http://nbcnightlynews.tumblr.com/post/173367124048/president-moon-of-south-korea-and-north-koreas" class="tumblr_blog">nbcnightlynews</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p>President Moon of South Korea and North Korea’s Kim Jong Un signed the historic Panmunjom Declaration, pledging “Peace, Prosperity and Unification” of the Korean Peninsula.</p> <p>“Let’s meet people’s expectations to make a better world. I promise we will do well in the future,” Un said.<br/></p> <p>For more on this story: <a href="https://nbcnews.to/2Hyy2pI">https://nbcnews.to/2Hyy2pI</a></p> </blockquote> <p>I know that the majority of North Koreans do not have real broadcast television, but surely the word of this is going to spread amongst all the starving peasants of that communist hellhole.  My question is, so are the last remaining brainwashed plebeians finally going to realize that Kim Jong Un is not actually a holy, divine monarch now that he has capitulated on his promise of conquering the West and taking over South Korea?  In other words, he is now just a mortal walking among other soggy, weak mortals.  The charade must be over.  Now, would be the ideal strategic time for a revolt of the peasantry and the mislead apparatchiks to storm fat boy’s palace and crush his wretched family’s legacy for good.</p> </blockquote> <p>You’re about as predictable as the fucking sunrise, you know that?</p> </blockquote> <p>People like RBA were rattling their sabers and foaming at the mouth to invade North Korea not that long ago. Of course it wouldn’t be their children sent to do the fighting so who gives a fuck. Must be so disappointing to not get your big war you wanted so fucking bad. </p> <p><br/></p> <p>I truly hope this ushers in unification and the poor NK’s who have been crushed under the yoke of socialism can find a new life in all of this. Probably too optimistic, but I hope the prisons, labor camps, re-education camps, and gulags are emptied, too. </p> </blockquote> <figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="229" data-orig-width="540"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/7c191311d93199b0d765e1ec82a8be79/tumblr_inline_p7x5kuNUdW1r1jtxd_540.gif" data-orig-height="229" data-orig-width="540"/></figure><p>I don’t know where anyone  is coming up with these accusations that I’m somehow in favor of invading North Korea.  That has never been true.  My stance has always been been purely defensive.  And I made that evidently clear what that means <a href="http://redbloodedamerica.tumblr.com/post/173328514867/krungle-redbloodedamerica-krungle">in this post</a>.  But feel free to search <a href="http://redbloodedamerica.tumblr.com/search/north+korea">my 140 posts</a> about North Korea to find where I have personally ever advanced that kind of interventionist strategy. </p><p>“rattling their sabers and foaming at the mouth,” what a complete unsubstantiated lie.  Where do people come up with this garbage?<br/></p></blockquote> <p>I was accused of wanting to invade North Korea countless fucking times simply for criticizing the regime. Apparently you can’t criticize something without wanting to invade it.</p>
Save