I titled it

ambelies:

jennileerose:

ambelies:

jennileerose:

lettersfromtitan:

valkyrierisen:

shorm:

Oops. (x)

Just laughed soooo much

*headesk*

I don’t see it?

Look at the scars/wounds on the chest. they’re exactly the same.

I saw that, but why is it funny?

I think it’s just because someone took the idea and used it as their own, without thinking anyone would notice.

It’s fan art.
http://www.themarysue.com/amell-manganiello-fan-art-abs/

sosuperawesome:

Catherina Türk on Etsy

madamethursday:

dollsahoy:

yourcrystalgirl:

asian:

i just saw a woman pull food stamps out of her louis vuitton purse to pay for her groceries

but that’s none of my business

It was probably a fake.
Or an inheritance. Or a gift. I have a coach purse my auntie gave me but that means she’s the one with money, not me.

Or how about this: say she’s on food stamps and Medicaid. You have to keep a minimum amount in your bank account to keep qualifying for your health care (oh, and you’re also disabled, so that health care is important.) maybe she decided a designer purse would make a nice investment.

Maybe she bought herself a nice purse and then she lost her job and while she ‘s looking for a new one she, you know, kept carrying her purse to feel professional and look good at job interviews.

You don’t know her. You don’t know her story.

I’m sure the American public would rather have people in impoverished situations all get matching jumpsuits, a big red P embroidered on the back, and everyone would have to carry their keys and wallets and Chapstick in those thin throwaway plastic sacks you get buying your groceries in the dollar store. That way these people could be even MORE easily identified and discriminated against.

And remember, we’re living in an economy where a recently built WalMart had a higher rejection rate of applicants than Harvard University. That’s right. It’s easier to get admitted to Harvard than get a job at a brand new WalMart.

Judge not lest ye be judged.
And don’t be an asshole.

Um…food stamps, as an actual, physical bunch of stamps, don’t exist anymore.  It’s now EBT, which looks just like a debit card, unless you’re close enough to read it, or unless you’re familiar enough with them to recognize them from a distance.  According to Wikipedia, physical food stamps were phased out in the US in 2004. (And it’s not called the food stamp program anymore, either.)

Now, maybe you really did see this just happen, because maybe you’re not in the US, or maybe they were actually WIC vouchers, or maybe you’re a time traveller, in which case all of the previous comment applies.

All of this. God all of it is true. Not to mention that yes, thank you. I love (read: hate) how the people who so often complain loudest about food stamps don’t realize they aren’t even stamps anymore. Gee, I can see how informed they are on the situation if they’re repeating a meme from the Reagan administration. Just with a different object that people needing assistance don’t get to have. 

And yeah, OP, it ISN’T your business at all. I don’t care how many goddamn taxes you think you pay, it’s not your business. 

You need to think about the fact that you’d only make that post if you were working under the theory that there are some circumstances where people don’t deserve to buy food. You are saying that in this circumstance, a person who obviously needed EBT and/or WIC, which ever it was, shouldn’t get to buy food BECAUSE THEIR PURSE WAS TOO NICE FOR YOUR LIKING. A purse disqualifies them from getting help getting food. 

Really, OP? That’s where you’re at? That a goddamn accessory means a person shouldn’t get help to get BASIC SUSTENANCE? 

Not enough fuck you in the world.

allonsymate:

aedisons:

(x)

we have found our next chosen one

allonsymate:

aedisons:

(x)

we have found our next chosen one

copperbadge:

knitchick1979:


One time Deadpool was arrested in Illinois because he was eating inside a burning building. He was too shocked that there was a law about eating in a place that is on fire that he accepted the charges without argue

Is it sad I can TOTALLY see this happening for realz? This is the kind of stupid crap my state pulls.

On the other hand, living in Chicago, I have seen people refuse to join fire drills because they needed to photocopy something, and I was once in a train station that was literally on fire but people could see the train down the track so they didn’t leave. (I left.) 
Deadpool probably wasn’t even the only person arrested. 

copperbadge:

knitchick1979:

One time Deadpool was arrested in Illinois because he was eating inside a burning building. He was too shocked that there was a law about eating in a place that is on fire that he accepted the charges without argue

Is it sad I can TOTALLY see this happening for realz? This is the kind of stupid crap my state pulls.

On the other hand, living in Chicago, I have seen people refuse to join fire drills because they needed to photocopy something, and I was once in a train station that was literally on fire but people could see the train down the track so they didn’t leave. (I left.) 

Deadpool probably wasn’t even the only person arrested. 

bregma:

kevinrfree:

charlienight:

commanderbishoujo:

bogleech:

prokopetz:

johnlockinthetardiswithdestiel:

truthandglory:

assbanditkirk:

whoa canada
someone needs to turn down that sass level

Two things to know about Canada!
We are smart enough to know hot things should be hot.
We are sorry if you don’t

fun story about the reason they do that (at least in America)
once this lady spilled her McDonald’s coffee on herself and ended up getting like 3rd degree burns and since there was no warning on the cup she was able to claim she didn’t know it would be hot (or at least that hot) and won a lawsuit against McDonald’s for $1 million

That’s what the media smear campaign against her would have you believe, anyway. The truth of the matter is that the McDonald’s in question had previously been cited - on at least two separate occasions - for keeping their coffee so hot that it violated local occupational health and safety regulations. The lady didn’t win her lawsuit because American courts are stupid; she won it because the McDonald’s she bought that coffee from was actively and knowingly breaking the law with respect to the temperature of its coffee at the time of the incident.
(I mean, do you have any idea what a third-degree burn actually is? Third-degree burns involve “full thickness” tissue damage; we’re talking bone-deep, with possible destruction of tissue. Can you even imagine how hot that cup of coffee would have to have been to inflict that kind of damage in the few seconds it was in contact with her skin?)

Yeah I’m tired of people joking about either the “stupid” woman who didn’t know coffee was hot or the “greedy” woman making up bullshit to get money.
She was hideously injured by hideous irresponsibility, it was an absolutely legitimate lawsuit and the warning on the cups basically allows McDonalds to claim no responsibility even if it happens again. Every other company followed suit to cover their asses.
So they can still legally serve you something that could sear off the end of your tongue or permanently demolish the front of your gums and just give you a big fat middle finger in court. “The label SAID it would be HOT, STUPID.”

obligatory reblog for the great debunking of the usual ignorance spouted about this case
obligatory mention that the media smear campaign to twist teh facts on this case and get public opinion against the victim was deliberate and fueled by the right wing tort reform movement
it was seized upon to limit the rights of consumers to hold giant corporations accountable for wrongdoing
watch the documentary Hot Coffee, it lays out all of the facts and examines the response to this case and explains why everything you think you know about this case is bullshit, and explains why tort reform is bullshit in an entertaining and informative manner

The woman injured in Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants was 79 years old at the time of her injuries, and suffered third-degree burns to the pelvic region (including her thighs, buttocks, and groin), which in combination with lesser burns in the surrounding regions caused damage to an area totaling a whopping 22% of her body’s surface. These injuries that required two years of intensive medical care, including multiple skin grafts; during her hospitalization, Stella Liebeck lost around 20% of her starting body weight.
She was uninsured and sued McDonald’s Restaurants for the cost of her past and projected future medical care, an estimated $20,000. The corporation offered a settlement of $800, a number so obviously ridiculous that I’m not even going to dignify it with any further explanation.
The settlement number most often quoted is not the amount that the corporation actually paid; the jury in the first trial suggested a payment equal to a day or two of coffee revenues for McDonald’s, which at the time totaled more than $1 million per diem. The judge reduced the required payout to around $640,000 in both compensatory and punitive damages, and the case was later settled out of court for less than $600,000.
Keep in mind that at the time, McDonald’s already had over 700 cases of complaints about coffee-related burns on file, but continued to sell coffee heated to nearly 200 degrees Fahrenheit (around 90 degrees Celsius) as a means of boosting sales (their selling point was that one could buy the coffee, drive to a second location such as work or home, and still have a piping hot beverage). This in spite of the fact that most restaurants serve coffee between 140 and 160 degrees Fahrenheit (60 to 71 degrees Celsius), and many coffee experts agree that such high temperatures are desirable only during the brewing process itself.
The Liebeck case was absolutely not an example of litigation-happy Americans expecting corporations to cover their asses for their own stupidity, but we seem determined to remember it that way. It’s an issue of liability, and the allowable lengths of capitalism, and even of the way in which our society is incredibly dangerous for and punitive towards the uninsured, but it was not and is not a frivolous suit. Please check your assumptions and do your research before you turn a burn victim’s suffering into a throwaway punchline.

#don’t fricking get me started on Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants the level of misinformation floating around is staggering#I know that it’s an older case but it still makes me really mad that people treat it as this big dumb thing?#the fact that the media took a serious case and turned it into what it is to us today should piss people off#the level of distortion of facts is astonishing and upsetting and nobody seems to hear about it?#sorry I’m done I just#it upsets me when a legal travesty like this is just dragged out for some#’haha americans are sOOOOOOOo dumb!!1!’ humor#I MEAN GODDAMN IF YOU’RE GOING TO MAKE FUN OF AMERICANS AT LEAST MAKE FUN OF US WITH FACTS OKAY

jesus, i actually didn’t know about any of this, thanks for clearing that up

bregma:

kevinrfree:

charlienight:

commanderbishoujo:

bogleech:

prokopetz:

johnlockinthetardiswithdestiel:

truthandglory:

assbanditkirk:

whoa canada

someone needs to turn down that sass level

Two things to know about Canada!

  1. We are smart enough to know hot things should be hot.
  2. We are sorry if you don’t

fun story about the reason they do that (at least in America)

once this lady spilled her McDonald’s coffee on herself and ended up getting like 3rd degree burns and since there was no warning on the cup she was able to claim she didn’t know it would be hot (or at least that hot) and won a lawsuit against McDonald’s for $1 million

That’s what the media smear campaign against her would have you believe, anyway. The truth of the matter is that the McDonald’s in question had previously been cited - on at least two separate occasions - for keeping their coffee so hot that it violated local occupational health and safety regulations. The lady didn’t win her lawsuit because American courts are stupid; she won it because the McDonald’s she bought that coffee from was actively and knowingly breaking the law with respect to the temperature of its coffee at the time of the incident.

(I mean, do you have any idea what a third-degree burn actually is? Third-degree burns involve “full thickness” tissue damage; we’re talking bone-deep, with possible destruction of tissue. Can you even imagine how hot that cup of coffee would have to have been to inflict that kind of damage in the few seconds it was in contact with her skin?)

Yeah I’m tired of people joking about either the “stupid” woman who didn’t know coffee was hot or the “greedy” woman making up bullshit to get money.

She was hideously injured by hideous irresponsibility, it was an absolutely legitimate lawsuit and the warning on the cups basically allows McDonalds to claim no responsibility even if it happens again. Every other company followed suit to cover their asses.

So they can still legally serve you something that could sear off the end of your tongue or permanently demolish the front of your gums and just give you a big fat middle finger in court. “The label SAID it would be HOT, STUPID.”

obligatory reblog for the great debunking of the usual ignorance spouted about this case

obligatory mention that the media smear campaign to twist teh facts on this case and get public opinion against the victim was deliberate and fueled by the right wing tort reform movement

it was seized upon to limit the rights of consumers to hold giant corporations accountable for wrongdoing

watch the documentary Hot Coffee, it lays out all of the facts and examines the response to this case and explains why everything you think you know about this case is bullshit, and explains why tort reform is bullshit in an entertaining and informative manner

The woman injured in Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants was 79 years old at the time of her injuries, and suffered third-degree burns to the pelvic region (including her thighs, buttocks, and groin), which in combination with lesser burns in the surrounding regions caused damage to an area totaling a whopping 22% of her body’s surface. These injuries that required two years of intensive medical care, including multiple skin grafts; during her hospitalization, Stella Liebeck lost around 20% of her starting body weight.

She was uninsured and sued McDonald’s Restaurants for the cost of her past and projected future medical care, an estimated $20,000. The corporation offered a settlement of $800, a number so obviously ridiculous that I’m not even going to dignify it with any further explanation.

The settlement number most often quoted is not the amount that the corporation actually paid; the jury in the first trial suggested a payment equal to a day or two of coffee revenues for McDonald’s, which at the time totaled more than $1 million per diem. The judge reduced the required payout to around $640,000 in both compensatory and punitive damages, and the case was later settled out of court for less than $600,000.

Keep in mind that at the time, McDonald’s already had over 700 cases of complaints about coffee-related burns on file, but continued to sell coffee heated to nearly 200 degrees Fahrenheit (around 90 degrees Celsius) as a means of boosting sales (their selling point was that one could buy the coffee, drive to a second location such as work or home, and still have a piping hot beverage). This in spite of the fact that most restaurants serve coffee between 140 and 160 degrees Fahrenheit (60 to 71 degrees Celsius), and many coffee experts agree that such high temperatures are desirable only during the brewing process itself.

The Liebeck case was absolutely not an example of litigation-happy Americans expecting corporations to cover their asses for their own stupidity, but we seem determined to remember it that way. It’s an issue of liability, and the allowable lengths of capitalism, and even of the way in which our society is incredibly dangerous for and punitive towards the uninsured, but it was not and is not a frivolous suit. Please check your assumptions and do your research before you turn a burn victim’s suffering into a throwaway punchline.

jesus, i actually didn’t know about any of this, thanks for clearing that up

nothingsrealbutallispossible:

ineedy0un0w:

mpaq:

prettybluescarf:

“The collapse of a shark tank at The Scientific Center in Kuwait. Share this because it’s probably the only time in your life you will see something like this.”

omg i love this

best thing ever omfg

Pretty damn amazing.


NOPEhttp://www.snopes.com/photos/animals/sharktank.asp

nothingsrealbutallispossible:

ineedy0un0w:

mpaq:

prettybluescarf:

“The collapse of a shark tank at The Scientific Center in Kuwait. Share this because it’s probably the only time in your life you will see something like this.”

omg i love this

best thing ever omfg

Pretty damn amazing.

NOPE

http://www.snopes.com/photos/animals/sharktank.asp

gayisthenewokay:

just-a-little-stump:

trauntwave:

a transgender person has a child

they are now transparent

I almost thought there was gonna be something mean at the end of that. Nope. Just a pun

i think i just peed