Atlas Carson

In Vegas the sports book punters would tip $ 1 for the free drinks If at all. Some would tip $5. Me? I would tip $20, $50 even $100 depending. Why would I do that?Wwell for one thing I got good service. The girls got to know me as a good tipper friendly guy. Some would take a short break and ask about me. If i felt there was an interest i would go for it. Success rate was low because they have heard it all and some were married or had a live in BF. But occasionally she was in between relationships or was playing the field and a diner date was easy to close and go from there. A thousand dollars is nothing if your cash flow is 100k a month. Especially if she is a looker. Why not?

Man tipped $1k to shoot his shot at a waitress and this was her response 😭

@jojomybearbear @mattvanswol Are you in Chicago?

@mattvanswol All the white taxpayers living and working in Charlotte should move away. That's what happened to Chicago and now Chicago is an abject failure of a city and horrible dangerous place to be.

🚨WHAT ON EARTH?!!! The Charlotte NC NAACP President says it's "seriously disturbing" that white people are being considered for interim mayor. "Why would we replace the Black outgoing Mayor with a white person?"

@BowTiedPassport The Japanese Samurai were in Mexico? Nah.

Samurai were walking through the streets of Mexico City while Shakespeare was still alive.

@EthanLevins2 It’s water. He can toast without spoiling the moment or drinking alcohol. This has been documented for years.

Trump has never had alcohol in his life. China gave him a beverage to toast, and Trump drank it. This is a very subtle, but STRONG statement on who’s really in charge.

On the rare occasion that journalism breaks out when the MSM is interviewing a Democrat with late stage TDS and the ask is what their platform is to win back the House and Senate, they look like Cadaver Joe Biden and that blank stare of being completely lost. Hating Trump is not a plan to reduce inflation and why Republicans will retain majorities.

In less than 6 months, we’ll find out if Americans don’t mind inflation as long as it’s lower than peak inflation rates during the Biden administration.

Fresh vegetables cost 11.5% more than they did a year ago. Seafood prices are up 6.2% over the same time. 📈

Yeah, being shitty is definitely justifiable homicide. Betty Broderick turned down monthly alimony of 20k a month—or 60k in 2026 money—as her divorce payout. She wasn’t interested in moving on; she was only obsessed with making sure her husband, who was the first and only man in history before or since to seek a divorce and fall in love with somebody else, never had a moment of peace. Watch any documentary or celluloid reenactment and it’s obvious she was stark raving mad. Dan Broderick was at his wit’s end and went nuclear in his dealings with her, which added fuel to the blazing fire. His mistake was discounting the fact that she would resort to murder and leaving his home vulnerable. A client of mine was a prosecutor for the Houston, Texas DA’s office who tried about 30 murder cases. He successfully convicted 10 women for killing their husbands. I asked him what he could share that could be of benefit to men or husbands in general. He said that when your wife is pointing a gun at you, do not say “go ahead and shoot, bitch.” Solid advice. 😩

@AtlasCarson @kortney_anne That’s a ridiculous statement. I had plenty of friends and I bounced back. Her husband was a shitty man. Period.

Betty Broderick died yesterday (May 8, 2026) at age 78 while still incarcerated at the California Institution for Women. She had served roughly 36 years of a 32-years-to-life sentence for the 1989 double murder of Dan and Linda Broderick. Betty Broderick was a radiant college student when she first met her future husband, Dan Broderick. Having served as the primary breadwinner throughout his medical school and law school years—supporting the family until he established himself as a successful attorney—she later lost the youthful beauty that had once defined her. She grew obese and became virtually unrecognizable from the striking young woman of her prime. Dan Broderick, by contrast, remained handsome and physically fit; as such matters often unfold, he became smitten with a much younger, equally beautiful and athletic woman. In my lifetime, few cases have illustrated the adage “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned” more vividly than this one. Here are the details of the case. Betty Broderick (née Bisceglia) did financially support Dan Broderick throughout his higher education. After they married in 1969, she worked multiple jobs—teaching, selling Avon and Tupperware, and taking other part-time work—while raising their four children. Dan first completed medical school at Cornell (M.D. in 1970), then attended Harvard Law School. During the law-school years, Betty was the primary breadwinner for the household (Dan received some student-loan assistance, but she covered living expenses and family needs). After Dan graduated from Harvard Law in 1973, the family relocated to San Diego (La Jolla). He joined a prestigious firm, then left to open his own boutique practice specializing in medical-malpractice plaintiff work. His dual M.D./J.D. credentials made him highly successful; within a few years the couple had become millionaires. Betty continued part-time work initially but eventually became a stay-at-home mother and socialite once Dan’s income soared. Once Dan was established and wealthy, he began an affair with his much younger office assistant, Linda Kolkena (roughly 22 years his junior). He divorced Betty in 1985–1986, married Linda in 1989, and the couple moved into the former family home. The divorce and financial settlement became bitterly contested; Betty felt she had been cast aside after investing her prime years and earnings in his success.

@pulicepeter @guideforlovers How old were you when you got married?

@AtlasCarson @guideforlovers I never have in my life. Not once

Her friends know more about you than you ever will

@YouGottaDoItMan @guideforlovers That is quite the percentage 90/5.

@AtlasCarson @guideforlovers Only the 5% of guys who 90% of women chase after do this.

@johnforchione @JohnMcCloy Bullfeathers.

@JohnMcCloy Nobody cares bro. Open the Strait! Trump lost his own war. Trump is being a lil bitch over there as expected. MAGA IS DEAD.

🔥🤔 WOW.. MUST WATCH. HOURS AFTER JACK POSOBIEC INTERVIEWED THE AMBASSADOR OF TAIWAN… XI JINPING OPENLY THREATENED THE UNITED STATES WITH WAR OVER TAIWAN. “This is the most STRIKING I have ever heard a Chinese leader speak to a U.S. President.. this is the most escalatory language we have ever seen while a POTUS is in the room before him” -@JackPosobiec Jack is right that Xi was saying they are the rising power and we are the fading power/Hegemony. Xi was calling us a fading nation & discusses the meetings with BRICS ministers are holding. The CEOS TRUMP BROUGHT OVER were tossed out of the meeting.. Jack says it’s because when it comes down to POWER or MONEY that power always wins. Jack says this is NOT the decoupling we saw in the first term. I want everyone to remember that for months Jack has been discussing the parallels with the Roman Empire for years with WARS AND THE EXHAUSTION OF BLOOD AND TREASURE.

China has held the same position regarding Taiwan for as long as I can recall. Reiterating the same position while also stating how both China and USA can grow and make each other great again by being friends and avoiding conflict is a leap forward for relations not backwards and just common sense diplomacy. As far as non elected, non cabinet members or citizen business titans not allowed into private talks between Xi and Trump, what is odd about this?

@AttorneyCrump The public also deserves to be safe from animals.

In 2025, 21-year-old Victoria Lang was pinned to the ground, grabbed by the neck, and dragged across a parking lot by police in Wichita Falls, Texas! Now, a former officer has been indicted in connection to the arrest. No routine interaction should escalate into this kind of treatment. The public deserves policing rooted in dignity!

@guypbenson That’s good. Shows how stupid they are by being upfront that they want to shaft the Republic. Now we can prepare to crush them once and for all while we got the muscle.

They are getting increasingly brazen as they discuss rigging our governing institutions in republic-destroying, power-mad ways. Openly, dangerously destructive.

@Emmawatsonssag1 @guideforlovers Ok incel.

@AtlasCarson @guideforlovers Brevity is the soul of wit. You're obviously a woman.

@PatAdams96 I’ve been n alcohol drinker. I’ve been around alcohol drinkers. She’s drunk in this video. I think she needs a few glasses of wine to cope before public appearances or videos etc.

Kamala Harris is now calling for Democrats to hold a “No Bad Idea Brainstorm” where they discuss: - Abolishing the Electoral College - Packing the Supreme Court - Making Puerto Rico and D.C. states “We’ve got to neutralize these red states from cheating!”

@Emmawatsonssag1 @guideforlovers It’s not your fault you are LOW IQ.

@AtlasCarson @guideforlovers I'm not reading all that nigger.

@PeterSchiff You remind me of the so called sports betting touts. For a fee they will give you their picks. Since every game has a 50/50 chance of their recommendation of coming true half of their customers are always happy. I pick the other side or USA/Trump coming out with the W.

I'm not advocating for an invasion of Iran. I'm just stating the predicament we've gotten ourselves into. I was against this war from the start, and it's becoming increasingly obvious that it was one of the greatest foreign policy blunders in U.S. history.

Absent a U.S. boots-on-the-ground invasion and occupation, it’s clear Iran will win this war. It will emerge with more influence in the Gulf than it had before the war started, and control over the Strait of Hormuz will give it an economic advantage it never enjoyed in the past.

Indeed, when a man and woman share genuine love and a sustained commitment—whether within marriage or a deeply bonded relationship—stretch marks, cellulite, and the broader “battle scars” of pregnancy and time are typically embraced as honorable inscriptions upon the shared journey of their bodies. In such contexts, these marks cease to be aesthetic liabilities and become instead emblems of mutual investment and lived history. The distinction I wish to draw, however, is far more specific. I refer exclusively to those women who have already traversed such bodily transformations with a previous partner and who now re-enter the open dating market. Here the marks are not relics of a bond the new suitor has ever shared; they are the visible residue of someone else’s intimacy, someone else’s children, someone else’s life chapter. Stripped of any emotional or biographical connection, the phenomenon becomes a pure test of raw physical attraction. There is no softening halo of love or loyalty to refract the gaze; the evaluation is therefore unmediated and binary: one either finds the body compelling or one does not. This truth was articulated to me years ago by my best friend’s father—a man whose decades of practiced success with women had earned him the quiet respect of those who understood the terrain. Following an encounter with a divorced mother who, throughout our intimacy, frantically attempted to keep her top in place and her midsection concealed, I confided in him that the “carnage” I had glimpsed had extinguished my desire. He nodded without judgment and explained that my reaction was not callous but normative. Absent love, absent paternity, absent marital covenant, the body stands or falls on its own aesthetic merit. The calculus is mercilessly straightforward. Ultimately, I am under no obligation to align my attractions with anyone else’s ideological prescriptions. What I find desirable is a sovereign matter of my own discernment. Furthermore, the relentless public critique women level at men—height, genital dimensions, financial status, hair loss, and myriad other supposed deficiencies—often emanates from individuals who themselves fall squarely within the median or below in physical appeal, carry excess weight, and exhibit chronically disagreeable temperaments. In light of this asymmetry, the reciprocal candor exercised by men regarding female bodily realities constitutes nothing more than a justified return of fire. Preferences are not moral failings; they are the honest grammar of desire.

@AtlasCarson @guideforlovers Guys don't do this. I'm almost 40 and I've never heard this from any man ever.

In my 20s, 5 bachelor friends got together and rented a studio for entertaining women. They needed a place away from the roving eyes of their GFs. There was a Polaroid camera, and each would take pictures of the woman they brought (with permission and face obscured) and leave it on the nightstand so the next bachelor using the facilities could compare. Then they talked about it after softball games over beer and pizza. Same thing with women. I hooked up with a friend of a girl I was seeing solely on the basis of what was reported to her about my skill set. The girl I was dating talked about me, and her GF wanted to experience it for herself. Good press is a benefit. Bad press, not so much.

@AtlasCarson @guideforlovers That is for men that talk but most men never ever talk While most women talk. Most men know instinctly that talking about their woman is bad.Most women have to be teached that talking about their men is bad. Even praising him is bad. Imagine telling her girlfriends how bad he is

Indeed, when a man and woman share genuine love and a sustained commitment—whether within marriage or a deeply bonded relationship—stretch marks, cellulite, and the broader “battle scars” of pregnancy and time are typically embraced as honorable inscriptions upon the shared journey of their bodies. In such contexts, these marks cease to be aesthetic liabilities and become instead emblems of mutual investment and lived history. The distinction I wish to draw, however, is far more specific. I refer exclusively to those women who have already traversed such bodily transformations with a previous partner and who now re-enter the open dating market. Here the marks are not relics of a bond the new suitor has ever shared; they are the visible residue of someone else’s intimacy, someone else’s children, someone else’s life chapter. Stripped of any emotional or biographical connection, the phenomenon becomes a pure test of raw physical attraction. There is no softening halo of love or loyalty to refract the gaze; the evaluation is therefore unmediated and binary: one either finds the body compelling or one does not. This truth was articulated to me years ago by my best friend’s father—a man whose decades of practiced success with women had earned him the quiet respect of those who understood the terrain. Following an encounter with a divorced mother who, throughout our intimacy, frantically attempted to keep her top in place and her midsection concealed, I confided in him that the “carnage” I had glimpsed had extinguished my desire. He nodded without judgment and explained that my reaction was not callous but normative. Absent love, absent paternity, absent marital covenant, the body stands or falls on its own aesthetic merit. The calculus is mercilessly straightforward. Ultimately, I am under no obligation to align my attractions with anyone else’s ideological prescriptions. What I find desirable is a sovereign matter of my own discernment. Furthermore, the relentless public critique women level at men—height, genital dimensions, financial status, hair loss, and myriad other supposed deficiencies—often emanates from individuals who themselves fall squarely within the median or below in physical appeal, carry excess weight, and exhibit chronically disagreeable temperaments. In light of this asymmetry, the reciprocal candor exercised by men regarding female bodily realities constitutes nothing more than a justified return of fire. Preferences are not moral failings; they are the honest grammar of desire.

@AtlasCarson @guideforlovers Never happened in my life. You might just have some asshole friends.

Indeed, when a man and woman share genuine love and a sustained commitment—whether within marriage or a deeply bonded relationship—stretch marks, cellulite, and the broader “battle scars” of pregnancy and time are typically embraced as honorable inscriptions upon the shared journey of their bodies. In such contexts, these marks cease to be aesthetic liabilities and become instead emblems of mutual investment and lived history. The distinction I wish to draw, however, is far more specific. I refer exclusively to those women who have already traversed such bodily transformations with a previous partner and who now re-enter the open dating market. Here the marks are not relics of a bond the new suitor has ever shared; they are the visible residue of someone else’s intimacy, someone else’s children, someone else’s life chapter. Stripped of any emotional or biographical connection, the phenomenon becomes a pure test of raw physical attraction. There is no softening halo of love or loyalty to refract the gaze; the evaluation is therefore unmediated and binary: one either finds the body compelling or one does not. This truth was articulated to me years ago by my best friend’s father—a man whose decades of practiced success with women had earned him the quiet respect of those who understood the terrain. Following an encounter with a divorced mother who, throughout our intimacy, frantically attempted to keep her top in place and her midsection concealed, I confided in him that the “carnage” I had glimpsed had extinguished my desire. He nodded without judgment and explained that my reaction was not callous but normative. Absent love, absent paternity, absent marital covenant, the body stands or falls on its own aesthetic merit. The calculus is mercilessly straightforward. Ultimately, I am under no obligation to align my attractions with anyone else’s ideological prescriptions. What I find desirable is a sovereign matter of my own discernment. Furthermore, the relentless public critique women level at men—height, genital dimensions, financial status, hair loss, and myriad other supposed deficiencies—often emanates from individuals who themselves fall squarely within the median or below in physical appeal, carry excess weight, and exhibit chronically disagreeable temperaments. In light of this asymmetry, the reciprocal candor exercised by men regarding female bodily realities constitutes nothing more than a justified return of fire. Preferences are not moral failings; they are the honest grammar of desire.

@AtlasCarson @guideforlovers I would never talk down on my woman to my friends. This is woman copium for being horrible people with no empathy. Stop pretending to be the more romantic gender, you're not.