
B
1.2K posts



Earlier this month, @AaronSiriSG showed the CDC vaccine advisory committee how radically the childhood vaccine schedule has changed since the 1980s. The difference is staggering. “You can see there’s been a significant increase in just the routine vaccines between 1983 and today.” “In 1983, there were two oral drops and three injections. Today there are three oral drops and 25 injections given by the first birthday, including in utero.”


Still can’t believe the leader of the German far-right party is a lesbian who is in love with an Indian migrant.




BREAKING: U.S. District Attorney admits Minnesota Somali fraud has cost U.S. taxpayers nearly the entire GDP of Somalia.

reminder that 2016 is going to be 10 years away in a couple days


The dumbest, laziest, no-talent kids you knew in college believe they can flip America’s democracy to socialism, then communism “we already got NYC!” Is their rallying cry — they’re not wrong. The commie mind virus is infectious & we must fight it this is Pluribus IRL








I remain convinced that drunk driving laws is just neo-prohibitionism / neo-Puritanism in disguise. The fact that "the experts" (who are all likely tepid WASPs who hearken from the world of New England pietists) agree that "no one can safely drive drunk" is just too suspicious. Obviously, any experienced drunk driver knows that there are some people who can safely drive over the legal limit, and that there are numerous driving circumstances in which the risks are very low. E.g, when my cousin used to get loaded at the bar, he'd just idle home at 3mph, a mile up a dirt road with no traffic. Utterly harmless -- like driving a lawn tractor. We did this for years without a single issue. Or, having had 7-8 pints of beer, driving down a rural route on which there is literally nothing to hit, and no traffic, and no houses within 100ft of the road -- and at that, a route I'd driven a thousand times in all weather. What was the risk? Essentially nothing (except if I wound up hitting a deer). So I am forced to conclude that the carte blanche, blanket-style legal architecture around drunk driving is clearly not motivated by an earnest desire to reduce harm. If it was, there could be allowances made for drivers who, in spite of being fairly buzzed / drunk, manage to drive safely and without problems for their entire life. Instead, it's about punishing the alleged wastrels -- and inhibiting the social culture of rowdy ruralites. They're hot to ruin the lives of country boys who love a good time. We now get together less, have fewer children, and are less rowdy. Consequently, this country has no balls anymore, and one wonders if in the event of a war -- when we'll need a fair few rowdies to join up -- if we'll even have enough left to go around. I say legalize it but increase penalties for any wrongdoing on the roads by 3-5x for drivers found to be drunk at the scene of the crime. That'd keep the best of them rolling without a hassle, and the roads would be every bit as safe as they are today (at least out here in the boonies).


Not to doxx him but found @cobracommandr15's youngest posted a vid to social media earlier













