🔥 | Latest

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: ...

Bad, Children, and Crime: MAGA means bigotry MAGA means racism MAGA means homophobia MAGA means anti-semitism MAGA means divisiveness Hate crimes are on the rise because the tone is set from the top and Trump's tone is, "there are good people on both sides." Prayers to #JussieSmollett. La communalconcubine: tehgore: friendly-neighborhood-patriarch: libertarirynn: Too bad more and more of these “hate crimes“ are proven hoaxes. Will y’all ever learn to at least spend two seconds critically thinking about something before swallowing it as fact because “orange man bad”? That was a rhetorical question. MAGA MEANS ANY BAD THING EVER. MAGA IS MY SECULAR SUBSTITUTE FOR LITERAL SATAN If men were paid enough more women could stay home and be happy wives. Instead we all work and scrape by living as wage slaves, some unable to support kids and lead a full life.If we were allowed to talk about crime rates like how 13% of the population does about 55% of the violent crime we could talk about solutions; instead we pretend egalitarianism is good, deny reality, and create an unsafe society.Most gay people were victimized as children and many go on to victimize more children, much (not all) of this is learned behavior. Instead of protecting our children and enforcing some level of moral behavior we have pride parades and child drag queens.Jews…Globalist bankers who ruin countries, pornographers, drug pushers like the Sacklers, the root of Bolshevism AND Capitalism, a people who hate and subvert anything they can’t corrupt and enslave. Their behavior is always the same everywhere they are and in every time period in which they are studied. Blindness to their nature enables them to harm the entire world.Who built the most successful nations on Earth and who came later? What race of people is not allowed a country of their own?  What is the ONLY race of people not allowed to advocate for themselves? Who is discriminated against in schools and the workplace by institutionalized power? Diversity means we ALWAYS needs less of a certain specific race of people and more or ANYTHING else who suffers? Whites need their own space. Rading through this wall of text and finding, “jews… globlist bankers who own countries” This post went off the rails like the old 97
Bad, Children, and Crime: MAGA means bigotry
 MAGA means racism
 MAGA means homophobia
 MAGA means anti-semitism
 MAGA means divisiveness
 Hate crimes are on the rise because
 the tone is set from the top and
 Trump's tone is, "there are good
 people on both sides."
 Prayers to #JussieSmollett. La
communalconcubine:

tehgore:

friendly-neighborhood-patriarch:
libertarirynn:
Too bad more and more of these “hate crimes“ are proven hoaxes. Will y’all ever learn to at least spend two seconds critically thinking about something before swallowing it as fact because “orange man bad”? That was a rhetorical question.
MAGA MEANS ANY BAD THING EVER. MAGA IS MY SECULAR SUBSTITUTE FOR LITERAL SATAN

If men were paid enough more women could stay home and be happy wives. Instead we all work and scrape by living as wage slaves, some unable to support kids and lead a full life.If we were allowed to talk about crime rates like how 13% of the population does about 55% of the violent crime we could talk about solutions; instead we pretend egalitarianism is good, deny reality, and create an unsafe society.Most gay people were victimized as children and many go on to victimize more children, much (not all) of this is learned behavior. Instead of protecting our children and enforcing some level of moral behavior we have pride parades and child drag queens.Jews…Globalist bankers who ruin countries, pornographers, drug pushers like the Sacklers, the root of Bolshevism AND Capitalism, a people who hate and subvert anything they can’t corrupt and enslave. Their behavior is always the same everywhere they are and in every time period in which they are studied. Blindness to their nature enables them to harm the entire world.Who built the most successful nations on Earth and who came later? What race of people is not allowed a country of their own? 

What is the ONLY race of people not allowed to advocate for themselves? Who is discriminated against in schools and the workplace by institutionalized power? Diversity means we ALWAYS needs less of a certain specific race of people and more or ANYTHING else who suffers? Whites need their own space.

Rading through this wall of text and finding, “jews… globlist bankers who own countries”

This post went off the rails like the old 97

communalconcubine: tehgore: friendly-neighborhood-patriarch: libertarirynn: Too bad more and more of these “hate crimes“ are proven hoaxes...

Anaconda, College, and God: PIRITS bookhobbit why is "olde vampires in high school" the big thing and not "olde vampires in college" everyone in college is eccentric. everyone you wanna wear full on Victorian suit? the girl in pajamas who clearly hasn't slept in three days supports you everyone is too preoccupied to care as long as you're polite and follow class etiquette multiple high school diplomas? eh. same stuff. multiple BAs? Enjoy learning chemistry AND art history! All in detail! wandering around campus at 3am? that's just the lifestyle tm * no matter how old or young you look it's not really that weird, there's sixteen year olds and sixty year olds doing BAs somewhere big schools are very anonymous so nobody's gonna bother to hassle you * anorthernskyatdawn the girl in pyjamas is the vampire themauvesoul Also: If u put ur blood in a water bottle ppl will assume it's juice and be Jealous "Oh god I'm a monster" 20 students who r all procrastinating big projects say "same simultaniousely and with the exact same tone Everything is a joke so if u say "I subsist on the lifeblood of mankind" someone will go "lol what a mood* It would take u like 100 years to major in everything Seen sucking the blood of a fellow classmate and u r instantly the campus Cryptid and Mascoft Listen. If u have an ethical dilemma go find a philosophy major that believes in ethical subjectivism and they'll make u so angry u forget abt whatever the fuck was bothering u College is the only acceptable place to get into fistfights over classical literature * e * iterally all u need to do to avoid suspicion is be the guy that alway:s has qum and a stapler If u have a majestic mustache ppl will just assume ur an English major Allergic to crosses? Cool. So r certain stem majors. e * College Vampires
Anaconda, College, and God: PIRITS
 bookhobbit
 why is "olde vampires in high school" the big thing and not "olde vampires
 in college"
 everyone in college is eccentric. everyone
 you wanna wear full on Victorian suit? the girl in pajamas who
 clearly hasn't slept in three days supports you
 everyone is too preoccupied to care as long as you're polite and
 follow class etiquette
 multiple high school diplomas? eh. same stuff. multiple BAs? Enjoy
 learning chemistry AND art history! All in detail!
 wandering around campus at 3am? that's just the lifestyle tm
 *
 no matter how old or young you look it's not really that weird, there's
 sixteen year olds and sixty year olds doing BAs somewhere
 big schools are very anonymous so nobody's gonna bother to hassle
 you
 *
 anorthernskyatdawn
 the girl in pyjamas is the vampire
 themauvesoul
 Also:
 If u put ur blood in a water bottle ppl will assume it's juice and be
 Jealous
 "Oh god I'm a monster" 20 students who r all procrastinating big
 projects say "same simultaniousely and with the exact same tone
 Everything is a joke so if u say "I subsist on the lifeblood of
 mankind" someone will go "lol what a mood*
 It would take u like 100 years to major in everything
 Seen sucking the blood of a fellow classmate and u r instantly the
 campus Cryptid and Mascoft
 Listen. If u have an ethical dilemma go find a philosophy major that
 believes in ethical subjectivism and they'll make u so angry u forget
 abt whatever the fuck was bothering u
 College is the only acceptable place to get into fistfights over
 classical literature
 *
 e
 *
 iterally all u need to do to avoid suspicion is be the guy that alway:s
 has qum and a stapler
 If u have a majestic mustache ppl will just assume ur an English
 major
 Allergic to crosses? Cool. So r certain stem majors.
 e
 *
College Vampires

College Vampires

Being Alone, Anaconda, and Best Friend: rapid-artwork Movie Pitch A strict all girls boarding school is across a river from a strict all boys boarding school Boys and girls are forbidden from fraternizing, but they find sneaky ways to form friendships and even date. I assume there is heavily monitored internet and phones are for emergencies only so they have to resort to more unconventional methods of communication. (Messages in bottles, a system of mirrors, writing on chalkboards and putting them in the windows ect.ect.) Until one day a shy boy at the boys boarding school tells his best friend (and the leader of a resident well meaning bovs gang) that he actually feels more like a girl The gang leader contacts the leader of a girl gang across the river and they begin to plan an overly elobrate heist to smuggle the shy trans girl across the river in exchange for a chill tomboy and the two will assume each other's lives until they graduate. Hijinks ensue as they pull a 'Great-Esacpe' style mission to avoid detection from the overly strict headmasters and an overly passionate team of campus security guards. Friendships are tested, there is lots of home alone style logic to outsmart the adults, and there is romantic tension between the leaders of the gangs as they put aside their differences to help their two friends find a place to be themselves. It is light-hearted in tone but is also over the top and everyone plays it way too serious to the point of comedy. The two kids swapping places have classic "parent trap" style hijinks pretending to be the other person and avoid detection. Think "kids next door""recess" but shot like a heist movie. Add a funny character actor as a dopey but well meaning janitor and you got a stew going. sleephawhoneedsit As a parent of two young impressionable children l 100% would take them to see this movie 19,090 notes “Kids Next Door + Reccess Heist Movie”
Being Alone, Anaconda, and Best Friend: rapid-artwork
 Movie Pitch
 A strict all girls boarding school is across a river
 from a strict all boys boarding school
 Boys and girls are forbidden from fraternizing,
 but they find sneaky ways to form friendships
 and even date. I assume there is heavily
 monitored internet and phones are for
 emergencies only so they have to resort to
 more unconventional methods of
 communication. (Messages in bottles, a system
 of mirrors, writing on chalkboards and putting
 them in the windows ect.ect.)
 Until one day a shy boy at the boys boarding
 school tells his best friend (and the leader of a
 resident well meaning bovs gang) that he
 actually feels more like a girl
 The gang leader contacts the leader of a girl
 gang across the river and they begin to plan an
 overly elobrate heist to smuggle the shy trans
 girl across the river in exchange for a chill
 tomboy and the two will assume each other's
 lives until they graduate.
 Hijinks ensue as they pull a 'Great-Esacpe'
 style mission to avoid detection from the overly
 strict headmasters and an overly passionate
 team of campus security guards.
 Friendships are tested, there is lots of home
 alone style logic to outsmart the adults, and
 there is romantic tension between the leaders
 of the gangs as they put aside their differences
 to help their two friends find a place to be
 themselves. It is light-hearted in tone but is
 also over the top and everyone plays it way too
 serious to the point of comedy. The two kids
 swapping places have classic "parent trap"
 style hijinks pretending to be the other person
 and avoid detection.
 Think "kids next door""recess" but shot like
 a heist movie.
 Add a funny character actor as a dopey but
 well meaning janitor and you got a stew going.
 sleephawhoneedsit
 As a parent of two young impressionable
 children l 100% would take them to see this
 movie
 19,090 notes
“Kids Next Door + Reccess Heist Movie”

“Kids Next Door + Reccess Heist Movie”

Ass, Dude, and Energy: Countess Von Fingerbang @HeatherApplebum Men who feel the need to quiz women when we show any interest in something that they deem "theirs" are fucking annoying. Cut it the fuck out, suck a dick "With all the six stones I can simply snap my fingers, they will all cease to exist. I call that...mercy"-Thanos Replying to @MajinCheeks But can you name all the stones according to color? 5/11/18, 3:22 PM 1 Retweet e r Bluffy Spice @MajinCh... . 17h Replying to @themanstre Let's play! Space Mind Power 5/12/18,6:43 AM 78.9K Retweets 216K Likes oh-the-mess-i-make: madamehearthwitch: evilkillerpoptarts: momo-de-avis: cumaeansibyl: a) do you really think someone would put all that time and energy into making an infinity stone jewelry piece if they didn’t know all about the infinity stones b) I don’t see you putting all that time and energy into making an infinity stone jewelry piece, what have you contributed lately besides being a dick to people for no reason c) who gives a shit if you can’t name all the stones, you’re allowed to enjoy the shit you enjoy without some whiney ass loser quizzing you to the smallest detail I will NEVER FORGET my first convention.  A table was doing Transformers trivia and you could win a prize.  The men in front of me were asked fairly difficult questions.   Then I rolled up.  Dressed as Thrust because buttwings, damnit. “Oh, we’ll go easy on you,” the dude said in the most condescending, smarmy tone.  “Name one of the dinobots.” I rattled all five off in alphabetical order, and demanded that they tell me all six Constructicons. There were several guys at the table.  They managed five. “You forgot Bonecrusher,” I said sweetly and walked off.  I didn’t want the prize I’d rightfully earned.  Their spluttering was all I wanted. If you’re gonna gatekeep, I’m gonna DESTROY YOU. Great story BUT… You shouldn’t have to destroy them!! You don’t have to love something in a ridiculously obsessive way that knows every tiny fucking detail for your love of it to bring you joy. If that’s how they get joy, cool, nice for them. But you don’t have to. You can casually love a thing, cosplay as a thing, go to cons for a thing, without dissecting it into little pieces. Women do not have to be exceptional in order to belong. WOMEN DO NOT HAVE TO BE EXCEPTIONAL IN ORDER TO BELONG
Ass, Dude, and Energy: Countess Von Fingerbang
 @HeatherApplebum
 Men who feel the need to quiz women
 when we show any interest in something
 that they deem "theirs" are fucking
 annoying. Cut it the fuck out, suck a dick
 "With all the six stones I can simply
 snap my fingers, they will all cease to
 exist. I call that...mercy"-Thanos
 Replying to @MajinCheeks
 But can you name all the stones
 according to color?
 5/11/18, 3:22 PM
 1 Retweet
 e r Bluffy Spice @MajinCh... . 17h
 Replying to @themanstre
 Let's play!
 Space
 Mind
 Power
 5/12/18,6:43 AM
 78.9K Retweets 216K Likes
oh-the-mess-i-make:
madamehearthwitch:

evilkillerpoptarts:

momo-de-avis:

cumaeansibyl:

a) do you really think someone would put all that time and energy into making an infinity stone jewelry piece if they didn’t know all about the infinity stones
b) I don’t see you putting all that time and energy into making an infinity stone jewelry piece, what have you contributed lately besides being a dick to people for no reason

c) who gives a shit if you can’t name all the stones, you’re allowed to enjoy the shit you enjoy without some whiney ass loser quizzing you to the smallest detail

I will NEVER FORGET my first convention.  A table was doing Transformers trivia and you could win a prize.  The men in front of me were asked fairly difficult questions.  
Then I rolled up.  Dressed as Thrust because buttwings, damnit.
“Oh, we’ll go easy on you,” the dude said in the most condescending, smarmy tone.  “Name one of the dinobots.”
I rattled all five off in alphabetical order, and demanded that they tell me all six Constructicons.
There were several guys at the table.  They managed five.
“You forgot Bonecrusher,” I said sweetly and walked off.  I didn’t want the prize I’d rightfully earned.  Their spluttering was all I wanted.
If you’re gonna gatekeep, I’m gonna DESTROY YOU.

Great story BUT… You shouldn’t have to destroy them!!
You don’t have to love something in a ridiculously obsessive way that knows every tiny fucking detail for your love of it to bring you joy. If that’s how they get joy, cool, nice for them. But you don’t have to.
You can casually love a thing, cosplay as a thing, go to cons for a thing, without dissecting it into little pieces.
Women do not have to be exceptional in order to belong.

WOMEN DO NOT HAVE TO BE EXCEPTIONAL IN ORDER TO BELONG

oh-the-mess-i-make: madamehearthwitch: evilkillerpoptarts: momo-de-avis: cumaeansibyl: a) do you really think someone would put all that...