Sensitive content

This media may contain sensitive content.

Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Three Masters. Unlimited greed. 💸 While you’re watching, someone else is already paying. Feet. Pits. Soles. Tribute. The question isn’t if you’ll send… it’s how much. 👑 #Findom #PayPig #CashCow #FootWorship #FeetFetish #FootFetish #FootGuys #AlphaMale #Tribute #MoneySlave

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfĂźgbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Caller: “I think i’m my 41 year old boyfriend’s retirement, should i run?” Caller: I’m 32, an attorney, and I’ve been dating a 41 year old for three years. We’re talking marriage, but I just discovered he has no retirement or investment accounts. Nothing. George: At 41? Caller: Zero. And it’s making me nervous about our future together. Dave: You’re right to be nervous. This isn’t about being superficial or greedy. How someone handles money tells you a lot about their character and maturity. Caller: That’s what I’m worried about. I’ve been responsible with my finances and I don’t want to subsidize someone who lacks ambition. Dave: That’s a legitimate concern. You two need to understand each other’s financial values before marriage. George: Here’s the key question, does he have legitimate reasons for not saving, like caring for sick family members? Or is it just a lack of planning and discipline? Caller: I don’t think he has legitimate excuses. Dave: Then you have a bigger problem. This isn’t just about money, it’s about whether you two are aligned on life goals and whether you’ll respect each other long term. George: If he’s not planning for retirement at 41, that tells you something about how he approaches adulthood and responsibility. That doesn’t disappear after marriage. Caller: Can people change? Dave: They can, but they have to want to. Before you marry him, have a direct conversation. Find out if he’s willing to get serious about retirement and financial planning. If not, you need to ask yourself if you can be happy with someone who isn’t taking care of his future. Caller: That’s hard to hear. George: It is. But being miserable in a marriage because you’re subsidizing someone’s lack of planning is worse. Dave: Don’t marry someone hoping they’ll change. Marry someone who’s already aligned with you.

Lin

147,000 Aufrufe • vor 27 Tagen

People are already saying Star Fox Battle Mode looks light because it only has three stages. That's missing the point. This isn’t three deathmatch arenas with different skyboxes. It’s three actual missions with completely different objectives. On Corneria you fight to capture and hold a control zone. On Fichina the goal is grabbing energy crystals while the other team tries to stop you. In Sector Y you’re raiding space pirates to steal their cargo before they escape. That’s not the same fight three times. That’s three different reasons to fly an Arwing, three different ways to use your team, and three different ways a match can actually swing. Star Fox has always worked best when it feels like you’re on a mission, not just shooting other players until the timer runs out. The old versus modes were fun, but they were still mostly arena fights. These objectives force actual strategy and role distribution. Someone has to push the zone while others cover. Someone has to hunt crystals while the rest harass or defend. The limited stage count feels intentional instead of cheap. And then there’s GameShare. Up to four players can drop in together locally or through GameChat. Local works between Switch 2 and original Switch. Online is Switch 2 only for now. It’s the closest we’ve ever got to the old briefing room fantasy, except now you’re not watching the team talk. You’re wearing their faces and flying with them. Most people are focused on how many maps there aren’t. I’m more interested in whether these three maps make you want to keep playing with the same crew. So which objective sounds good to you? Corneria zone control, Fichina crystals, or Sector Y cargo runs? And be honest: would you rather have three distinct mission-style stages that force different strategies, or eight generic deathmatch maps that all play roughly the same?

AussieGamer

36,292 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

I usually don’t watch K‑movies, but my schedule is wide open while I’m waiting for new episodes and K‑dramas to drop. So I decided to check out this K‑movie that just landed on Netflix and honestly, I’m glad I did. This one isn’t your typical loud romance or dramatic rollercoaster it’s quiet, soft, and emotional in a way that really sinks into your chest. From the first scene, it feels like watching real people people who hurt, who hide, who are afraid to let themselves be seen until someone finally does. The three main characters are perfect, they don’t make grand declarations, and nothing about their story is flashy and honestly, that’s what makes it so beautiful. I don’t want to give too much away, but this movie is about loneliness, connection, and healing in the smallest moments like the way two people make eye contact, or how someone speaks before they realize they’re saying something real. The acting is so freaking good. You feel every glance, every silence. The pacing is gentle not rushed and you actually get time to sit in the emotions. It’s the kind of movie that stays with you long after you press play. It’s not perfect for everyone if you want big twists or loud drama, this isn’t that. But if you want something heartfelt, honest, and quietly powerful you need to watch Pavane. Trust me. Go stream it. You’ll understand what I mean. #Pavane

EdoQueen🌹

79,701 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Elon Musk just reduced American crime politics to a single question on Joe Rogan. And answered it like it was arithmetic. Musk: “While obviously not everyone who’s a Democrat is a criminal, almost everyone who is a criminal is a Democrat.” That’s not a partisan attack. That’s an observation about how incentives work. If you’re a criminal, you don’t vote for the party promising longer sentences and more cops. You vote for the one gutting bail laws and calling enforcement racist. This isn’t opinion. This is game theory. Musk: “Because the Democrats are the soft-on-crime party. So if you’re a criminal, who are you gonna vote for?” Nobody wants to follow that logic to its conclusion. But the math doesn’t care. The softness isn’t accidental. It’s architectural. No-cash bail. Decriminalized theft. Sanctuary cities. Defund the police. These aren’t compassion. They’re infrastructure. Every policy that removes consequences builds a constituency that needs them to stay gone. That’s not ideology. That’s customer acquisition. You don’t protect criminals because you care about them. You protect them because they show up in November. The people paying the price are never the ones writing the policy. It’s the working-class neighborhoods getting hollowed out. The immigrant families who played by the rules watching the system reward the ones who broke them. The small business owners boarding up windows because the DA won’t prosecute. They’ll spend the next week calling Musk reckless for this. But he didn’t build the incentive structure. He just described it. And that’s what they’ll never forgive.

Dustin

371,429 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Candace lost me a long time ago, but for those of you still paying attention to her, here are a couple things I learned about being a young widow. First, and most importantly, your children are watching. When kids are faced with something they’ve never experienced before, especially something frightening, they look to the adults they trust to learn how to respond. Whether you realize it or not, you’re teaching them what grief looks like, how to carry it, and whether it becomes something that consumes you or something you eventually learn to live with. That’s why I struggle to understand Candace’s perspective. I sincerely hope her children have someone in their lives modeling a healthier way through life. Second, Erika is absolutely right. Everyone else is watching too. Your friends, your family, your coworkers, your neighbors… they’re all taking their cues from you. Most people genuinely want to help, but they’re afraid of saying or doing the wrong thing. The tone you set becomes the tone everyone else follows. That’s just human nature. If you make your grief a place no one feels safe entering, people eventually keep their distance. If you lead with love, hope, and grace, you’ll usually find people willing to walk beside you. That’s one of the biggest lessons widowhood ever taught me, and it’s why Erika’s message resonates with me far more than Candace’s ever will. ❤️

SharrellAnne

21,210 Aufrufe • vor 23 Tagen

“Is JD Vance a Political Coward, a Personal Coward, or Both?” JD Vance said this in a recent interview with UnHerd: “99% of Republicans, and I think probably 97% of Democrats, do not hate Jewish people for being Jewish… there is a real backlash to a consensus view in American foreign policy… we should be able to say ‘we agree with Israel on that issue, and we disagree with Israel on this other issue.’” Fine. Name the issue. Go ahead. Say it clearly. Is it Jewish communities in Judea & Samaria? Is it taking the gloves off against Iran—America’s enemy? Is it military cooperation that strengthens America and creates American jobs? Be precise. Be specific. Name the policy you’re “disagreeing” with. Because here’s the problem: you and people like you keep downplaying the massive rise in antisemitism on both the Left and the Right, as if it’s fringe or imaginary. It isn’t. And a huge portion of it is laundered through Israel. “I’m not an antisemite, I’m just anti-Zionist.” Okay… then what’s your criticism of Israel that doesn’t collapse into the same old ignorant, obsessive, conspiratorial Jew-hatred the moment anyone asks a follow-up? Because most of the “criticism” from the right-wing influencer class doesn’t hold water. It doesn’t survive scrutiny. It’s not “policy disagreement.” It’s fixation. It’s resentment. It’s a vibe! One that always seems to end at “Jews.” And you can’t pretend you don’t know who you’re standing next to. Tucker Carlson—who elevated you and pushed you into national Republican stardom—has mainstreamed this genre of “anti-Zionism” that constantly bleeds into antisemitic insinuation: loyalty tests, dual-loyalty smears, Talmud hysteria, and endless “Israel controls America” signaling. And that’s why it stood out that one of your strongest condemnations lately was aimed at Sloan Rachmuth; who asked a question you should be able to answer in public without melting down: How much influence does Tucker Carlson’s orbit—including his son Buckley, and the broader network around them—have on your thinking and staffing? It’s easy to dismiss antisemitism on the Right when you just… don’t look at it. It’s easy to say “that’s not antisemitism, it’s just Israel,” when you use “Israel” as a rug to sweep it under. But we can see what’s under the rug. When every TPUSA-style event reliably produces yet another obsessive USS Liberty question, that isn’t “foreign policy nuance.” It’s a tell. When prominent right-wing personalities give an on-blowjob to figures like Nick Fuentes, that isn’t “edgy discourse.” It’s an ecosystem. When Candace Owens and other influencers rant about Jews, Israel, and the Talmud like it’s a civilizational panic button, that isn’t “criticism.” It’s antisemitism with a costume on. This exists on the Right. It’s not small. And it cannot be ignored… especially by someone auditioning to lead a country. So why are you ignoring it? Here’s my contention: because you’ll say or do anything for power. You’ll cozy up to Jew-haters because you want their votes… and because YOU think you NEED them. That’s not just cowardly. That’s dangerous. And it’s anti-American. So prove me wrong. If you’re “just anti-Zionist” and it’s “just about Israeli policy”: Name the policy. Be specific. Say it plainly. No winking. No fog. No dodge. Anything else is just cowardice.

Jake Donnelly

22,716 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten