itscarororo:

gemfuck:

THE GODDESS OPAL

(via livingonsunshineandsprinkles)

23,821 notes

did-you-kno:

Source

did-you-kno:

Source

4,754 notes

skyrimconfessionss:

"I came home one day and found a strange man standing in my house. Lydia was no where to be seen, so he was alone in my home with my children. I put the strongest poison I had in his pocket and followed him around till he died. It took weeks in game, two days in real life, but I made sure he was dead. Leave my kids alone."
image credit [x]http://skyrimconfessionss.tumblr.com/

skyrimconfessionss:

"I came home one day and found a strange man standing in my house. Lydia was no where to be seen, so he was alone in my home with my children. I put the strongest poison I had in his pocket and followed him around till he died. It took weeks in game, two days in real life, but I made sure he was dead. Leave my kids alone."

image credit [x]
http://skyrimconfessionss.tumblr.com/

326 notes

mindpalce:

mindpalce:

huntereve18:

carry-on-my-wayward-butt:

mildly-intoxicated:

my favourite picture on tumblr ever

I AM LAUGHING SO HARD BECAUSE I THOUGHT OF 22 AND I SAID “TOOTY TWO” OUT LOUD AT 4AM OH GOD

Threety three

Fourty four

I have realized my mistake

mindpalce:

mindpalce:

huntereve18:

carry-on-my-wayward-butt:

mildly-intoxicated:

my favourite picture on tumblr ever

I AM LAUGHING SO HARD BECAUSE I THOUGHT OF 22 AND I SAID “TOOTY TWO” OUT LOUD AT 4AM OH GOD

Threety three

Fourty four

I have realized my mistake

(via loveyoubud)

704,365 notes

kneelbeforemistressphil:

kaalashnikov:

your-continuum:

kaalashnikov:

do you ever sit there and wonder what life must be like for people without anxiety

like they just

DO THINGS

without worrying about them first

wow

Anxiety is an excuse

I hope you walk barefoot on a world of legos for the rest of your life

The first time Tony Stark had an anxiety attack he thought he had been poisoned.

think about that

(via loveyoubud)

429,240 notes

ekki-neitt asked: How are the black panthers different from the KKK? Publicly shouting that we need to kill cracker babies is somehow okay because the group is black? Do you realize how fucking dumb you sound?

un3ndingtragedy:

torisoulphoenix:

sbrown82:

torisoulphoenix:

un3ndingtragedy:

nikkisshadetree:

whitepeoplesaidwhat:

When was the last time the Black panthers Lynched anyone?
-Elijah

When’s the last time the Black Panthers burned crosses in someone’s yard?

When’s the last time the Black Panthers completely destroyed white towns for fear of their prosperity?

Have the panthers ever burned down any white schools to keep white people “in their place”?

Are these white folks serious?! Please, please…do yourselves a favor and earn some citations on this country’s history. The Black Panthers were NOT like the Klu Klux Klan. Their objective was not to go around and terrorize and murder white people. The KKK however, was definitely a reactionary terrorist/extremist group. The Klan emerged during “The Nadir” (the lowest point) in 1877, after poor and disenfranchised whites stomped out Reconstruction and Blacks ultimately lost their civil rights. White people losing their mobility in this country was the core reason for terrorizing African Americans, but after that bullshit, 15 reels, massive 3-hour long movie “The Birth of a Nation" was released in 1915, now all of a sudden, Black people became barraged with this false image of themselves as threatening, violent, and barbaric, particularly to white women in society (The New Negro Crime) which ultimately led to hundred of thousands of lynchings and murders of Blacks in America. The Klan had one objective, to exterminate Black people. They spurred false rhetoric, hate, and violence…that’s it!

The Black Panthers was a revolutionary socialist organization that started in the mid-1960’s in Oakland, CA aiming to PROTECT the Black community. They were against police brutality, imperialism, capitalism or anything they felt was detrimental to Black Americans. They wanted Black people to fend for themselves, that’s why they carried guns, and they used them cautiously. They helped the sick, the poor, single mothers and their children, they even implemented a free ambulance and breakfast program in the community, yet they’re like the KKK?! Their goals were simple: quality education, housing, employment, and civil rights.They were not a violent group and neither was Malcolm X, contrary to popular opinion, they just believed in their right to self defense.The bottom line is, The Black Panther Party was a mobilization by African Americans, and people of the African descent across the world to break down institutionalized oppression by any means necessary. And FYI, many whites supported like Marlon Brando, and others.

*Don’t disrespect my people and Blackness!

image

GIRL, YOU BETTA SAY THAT SHIT!!!!!!

image

I love the dialogue that whitepeoplesaidwhat starts.

4,613 notes

lezbhonest:

by MyishaAshanta

lezbhonest:

by MyishaAshanta

(via livingonsunshineandsprinkles)

3,087 notes

(Source: panmforever, via thecapitolsucks)

16,938 notes

captainsart:

Here’s some tips, of course nothing professional, but things I’ve learned myself.

Hope it helps some of you guys. ovo

(via loveyoubud)

189,777 notes

the-treble:

thepeoplesrecord:

The 1% wants to ban sleeping in cars - it hurts their ‘quality of life’April 16, 2014
Across the United States, many local governments are responding to skyrocketing levels of inequality and the now decades-long crisis of homelessness among the very poor … by passing laws making it a crime to sleep in a parked car.
This happened most recently in Palo Alto, in California’s Silicon Valley, where new billionaires are seemingly minted every month – and where 92% of homeless people lack shelter of any kind. Dozens of cities have passed similar anti-homeless laws. The largest of them is Los Angeles, the longtime unofficial “homeless capital of America”, where lawyers are currently defending a similar vehicle-sleeping law before a skeptical federal appellate court. Laws against sleeping on sidewalks or in cars are called “quality of life” laws. But they certainly don’t protect the quality of life of the poor.
To be sure, people living in cars cannot be the best neighbors. Some people are able to acquire old and ugly – but still functioning – recreational vehicles with bathrooms; others do the best they can. These same cities have resisted efforts to provide more public toilet facilities, often on the grounds that this will make their city a “magnet” for homeless people from other cities. As a result, anti-homeless ordinances often spread to adjacent cities, leaving entire regions without public facilities of any kind.
Their hope, of course, is that homeless people will go elsewhere, despite the fact that the great majority of homeless people are trying to survive in the same communities in which they were last housed – and where they still maintain connections. Americans sleeping in their own cars literally have nowhere to go.
Indeed, nearly all homelessness in the US begins with a loss of income and an eviction for nonpayment of rent – a rent set entirely by market forces. The waiting lists are years long for the tiny fraction of housing with government subsidies. And rents have risen dramatically in the past two years, in part because long-time tenants must now compete with the millions of former homeowners who lost their homes in the Great Recession.
The paths from eviction to homelessness follow familiar patterns. For the completely destitute without family or friends able to help, that path leads more or less directly to the streets. For those slightly better off, unemployment and the exhaustion of meager savings – along with the good graces of family and friends – eventually leaves people with only two alternatives: a shelter cot or their old automobile.
However, in places like Los Angeles, the shelters are pretty much always full. Between 2011 and 2013, the number of unsheltered homeless people increased by 67%. In Palo Alto last year, there were 12 shelter beds for 157 homeless individuals. Homeless people in these cities do have choices: they can choose to sleep in a doorway, on a sidewalk, in a park, under a bridge or overpass, or – if they are relatively lucky – in a car. But these cities have ordinances that make all of those choices a criminal offense. The car is the best of bad options, now common enough that local bureaucrats have devised a new, if oxymoronic, term – the “vehicularly housed”.
People sleeping in cars try to find legal, nighttime parking places, where they will be less apparent and arouse the least hostility. But cities like Palo Alto and Los Angeles often forbid parking between 2am and 5am in commercial areas, where police write expensive tickets and arrest and impound the vehicles of repeat offenders. That leaves residential areas, where overnight street parking cannot, as a practical matter, be prohibited.
One finds the “vehicularly housed” in virtually every neighborhood, including my own. But the animus that drives anti-homeless laws seems to be greatest in the wealthiest cities, like Palo Alto, which has probably spawned more per-capita fortunes than any city on Earth, and in the more recently gentrified areas like Los Angeles’ Venice. These places are ruled by majorities of “liberals” who decry, with increasing fervor, the rapid rise in economic inequality. Nationally, 90% of Democrats (and 45% of Republicans) believe the government should act to reduce the rich-poor gap.
It is easy to be opposed to inequality in the abstract. So why are Los Angeles and Palo Alto spending virtually none of their budgets on efforts to provide housing for the very poor and homeless? When the most obvious evidence of inequality parks on their street, it appears, even liberals would rather just call the police. The word from the car: if you’re not going to do anything to help, please don’t make things worse.
Source

Wait it’s illegal to sleep in your car in Palo Alto?
Well, I’ve been breakin’ the law.

the-treble:

thepeoplesrecord:

The 1% wants to ban sleeping in cars - it hurts their ‘quality of life’
April 16, 2014

Across the United States, many local governments are responding to skyrocketing levels of inequality and the now decades-long crisis of homelessness among the very poor … by passing laws making it a crime to sleep in a parked car.

This happened most recently in Palo Alto, in California’s Silicon Valley, where new billionaires are seemingly minted every month – and where 92% of homeless people lack shelter of any kind. Dozens of cities have passed similar anti-homeless laws. The largest of them is Los Angeles, the longtime unofficial “homeless capital of America”, where lawyers are currently defending a similar vehicle-sleeping law before a skeptical federal appellate court. Laws against sleeping on sidewalks or in cars are called “quality of life” laws. But they certainly don’t protect the quality of life of the poor.

To be sure, people living in cars cannot be the best neighbors. Some people are able to acquire old and ugly – but still functioning – recreational vehicles with bathrooms; others do the best they can. These same cities have resisted efforts to provide more public toilet facilities, often on the grounds that this will make their city a “magnet” for homeless people from other cities. As a result, anti-homeless ordinances often spread to adjacent cities, leaving entire regions without public facilities of any kind.

Their hope, of course, is that homeless people will go elsewhere, despite the fact that the great majority of homeless people are trying to survive in the same communities in which they were last housed – and where they still maintain connections. Americans sleeping in their own cars literally have nowhere to go.

Indeed, nearly all homelessness in the US begins with a loss of income and an eviction for nonpayment of rent – a rent set entirely by market forces. The waiting lists are years long for the tiny fraction of housing with government subsidies. And rents have risen dramatically in the past two years, in part because long-time tenants must now compete with the millions of former homeowners who lost their homes in the Great Recession.

The paths from eviction to homelessness follow familiar patterns. For the completely destitute without family or friends able to help, that path leads more or less directly to the streets. For those slightly better off, unemployment and the exhaustion of meager savings – along with the good graces of family and friends – eventually leaves people with only two alternatives: a shelter cot or their old automobile.

However, in places like Los Angeles, the shelters are pretty much always full. Between 2011 and 2013, the number of unsheltered homeless people increased by 67%. In Palo Alto last year, there were 12 shelter beds for 157 homeless individuals. Homeless people in these cities do have choices: they can choose to sleep in a doorway, on a sidewalk, in a park, under a bridge or overpass, or – if they are relatively lucky – in a car. But these cities have ordinances that make all of those choices a criminal offense. The car is the best of bad options, now common enough that local bureaucrats have devised a new, if oxymoronic, term – the “vehicularly housed”.

People sleeping in cars try to find legal, nighttime parking places, where they will be less apparent and arouse the least hostility. But cities like Palo Alto and Los Angeles often forbid parking between 2am and 5am in commercial areas, where police write expensive tickets and arrest and impound the vehicles of repeat offenders. That leaves residential areas, where overnight street parking cannot, as a practical matter, be prohibited.

One finds the “vehicularly housed” in virtually every neighborhood, including my own. But the animus that drives anti-homeless laws seems to be greatest in the wealthiest cities, like Palo Alto, which has probably spawned more per-capita fortunes than any city on Earth, and in the more recently gentrified areas like Los Angeles’ Venice. These places are ruled by majorities of “liberals” who decry, with increasing fervor, the rapid rise in economic inequality. Nationally, 90% of Democrats (and 45% of Republicans) believe the government should act to reduce the rich-poor gap.

It is easy to be opposed to inequality in the abstract. So why are Los Angeles and Palo Alto spending virtually none of their budgets on efforts to provide housing for the very poor and homeless? When the most obvious evidence of inequality parks on their street, it appears, even liberals would rather just call the police. The word from the car: if you’re not going to do anything to help, please don’t make things worse.

Source

Wait it’s illegal to sleep in your car in Palo Alto?

Well, I’ve been breakin’ the law.

(via loveyoubud)

6,496 notes

(Source: tastefullyoffensive, via loveyoubud)

55,789 notes

instinctbluestoo:

descentintotyranny:

Iceland grieves after police kill a man for the first time in its history
Dec. 3 2013
"The nation was in shock. This does not happen in our country," said Thora Arnorsdottir, news editor at RUV, the Icelandic National Broadcasting Service. 
She was referring to a 59-year old man who was shot by police on Monday. The man, who started shooting at police when they entered his building, had a history of mental illness. 
It’s the first time someone has been killed by armed police in Iceland since it became an independent republic in 1944. Police don’t even carry weapons, usually. Violent crime in Iceland is almost non-existent.
"The nation does not want its police force to carry weapons because it’s dangerous, it’s threatening," Arnorsdottir says. "It’s a part of the culture. Guns are used to go hunting as a sport, but you never see a gun."
In fact, Iceland isn’t anti-gun. In terms of per-capita gun ownership, Iceland ranks 15th in the world. Still, this incident was so rare that neighbors of the man shot were comparing the shooting to a scene from an American film. 
The Icelandic police department said officers involved will go through grief counseling. And the police department has already apologized to the family of the man who died — though not necessarily because they did anything wrong.
"I think it’s respectful," Arnorsdottir says, “because no one wants to take another person’s life. “
There are still a number of questions to be answered, including why police didn’t first try to negotiate with man before entering his building.
"A part of the great thing of living in this country is that you can enter parliament and the only thing they ask you to do is to turn off your cellphone, so you don’t disturb the parliamentarians while they’re talking. We do not have armed guards following our prime minister or president. That’s a part of the great thing of living in a peaceful society. We do not want to change that. " 

How hard is it to learn Icelandic?

instinctbluestoo:

descentintotyranny:

Iceland grieves after police kill a man for the first time in its history

Dec. 3 2013

"The nation was in shock. This does not happen in our country," said Thora Arnorsdottir, news editor at RUV, the Icelandic National Broadcasting Service. 

She was referring to a 59-year old man who was shot by police on Monday. The man, who started shooting at police when they entered his building, had a history of mental illness. 

It’s the first time someone has been killed by armed police in Iceland since it became an independent republic in 1944. Police don’t even carry weapons, usually. Violent crime in Iceland is almost non-existent.

"The nation does not want its police force to carry weapons because it’s dangerous, it’s threatening," Arnorsdottir says. "It’s a part of the culture. Guns are used to go hunting as a sport, but you never see a gun."

In fact, Iceland isn’t anti-gun. In terms of per-capita gun ownership, Iceland ranks 15th in the world. Still, this incident was so rare that neighbors of the man shot were comparing the shooting to a scene from an American film. 

The Icelandic police department said officers involved will go through grief counseling. And the police department has already apologized to the family of the man who died — though not necessarily because they did anything wrong.

"I think it’s respectful," Arnorsdottir says, “because no one wants to take another person’s life. “

There are still a number of questions to be answered, including why police didn’t first try to negotiate with man before entering his building.

"A part of the great thing of living in this country is that you can enter parliament and the only thing they ask you to do is to turn off your cellphone, so you don’t disturb the parliamentarians while they’re talking. We do not have armed guards following our prime minister or president. That’s a part of the great thing of living in a peaceful society. We do not want to change that. "

How hard is it to learn Icelandic?

(via loveyoubud)

11,637 notes

blainetabulous:

If you can’t handle me randomly blurting out song lyrics that relate to what you just said, we can’t be friends

Why can’t we be friends?

(via moonlit0masquerade)

53,841 notes

starbuckers:

splantamello:

starbuckers:

Look at this house we found by the river today

That’s a murder scene not a house

Look at this murder scene we found inside a house today

(via livingonsunshineandsprinkles)

86,102 notes