When an INTJ is mad at you and wants to wreck your life, how do you escape their torment?

By nature, INTJs are quick with their thoughts, yet deliberate in their decisions. This is especially true when emotions are concerned.

Chances are, for somebody to even earn a spot on the INTJs naughty list, they had to first pay a hefty toll to earn their trust. This takes time. INTJs value their time.

If the INTJ is not invested, they are difficult to anger to point that tormenting anybody is even worth their time. The INTJ will shrug with calm indifference at the feeble attempt to bait them with senseless drama and extricate themselves from the presence of the percieved idiot.

However, if it is somebody they let their guard down for, it likely took quite a bit of effort to anger them to the point that an emotional response becomes an option. The INTJ will seek compromise and try to be understanding. They will communicate what they believe to be the best course of action. They will outline their expectation. They will have a goal in mind for the intended end result.

INTJs are forward thinkers that are very calculated in their assessments.

There is only one way out. In that extended moment of uncomfortable contemplative silence that follows the realization that the plan is taking a detour, the INTJ is searching for opposing perspectives that will provide some enlightenment to explain where things did not go as expected.

If you can rationally detail how the INTJ is being selfish, ignorant, or short-sighted.. you will earn their respect. Maybe even a super rare sincere apology.

If the INTJ can’t summon the perspective needed to understand the motivation or intent of the person who is deemed to be betraying them? It’s probably best to hide for the next half century. Yup. Just fall off the face of the planet and disappear.

The thought of regaining the trust of an INTJ after they have been angered to the point that vengeance reigns? You’d have better luck squeezing blood from a stone.

The unwritten code of INTJ conduct states that everybody gets one honest chance to prove their worth. Use it or lose it. For the most part, they don’t care either way.. and just let the superficial squabbles fade to irrelevant nothingness.

Once the emotions get unlocked, the rules change. They will become your greatest asset or most formidable liability. And, because the INTJ is so open minded, they will let the other person determine their own fate.

If you managed to anger an INTJ to the point that you would legitimately fear any negative consequence, I would be curious to know what provoked such a reaction. What hints were missed? Who changed the plan? Who failed to communicate intentions? Who took advantage of the situation? Who failed to adapt?

INTJs don’t like surprises. It overwhelms their inferior Se function.

And, even worse, INTJs don’t like it when they fail to accurately anticipate how any situation might play out. They pride themselves on the strength of their intuition. Anger becomes self betrayal. Not only did they get surprised, they failed to see it coming. INTJs don’t like being wrong, and they dont like to set themselves up for future disappointment by offering forgiveness.

INTJs are dismissive of the petty stuff. They will just walk away and forget you exist on the planet. Problem solved.

Lie in court and steal their kids? Tarnish their professional reputation? Disregard all the sacrifices they have made for your opportunistic benefit while mocking them for the generosity? Abuse the power of your position to discredit them? Well, congratulations.. you just fueled the jaded passion of the next Ted Kaczynski. And, INTJs have no problem rationalizing and justifying that wrath. After all, they offered countless fair compromises, right?

INTJs are often the quiet and observant ones. Meek and unassuming. More demanding of themselves than of those areond them. Autonomous. Unimposing. They secretly have huge hearts and give far too much to those they deem worthy of acceptance.

Under the surface, a fire burns.. it would be wise to avoid getting caught up in the negative power of the dormant inferno. Best not to provoke that dragon.

And, if you have.. the only way out is to be honest, explain your motivations, and hope they have the maturity and vision required to see your perspective.

If that can’t happen, life becomes merely a consequence of poor reactions and decisions. Own them and move on.

Which guard dog should I have at home between a Doberman, Rottweiler, or Belgian?

If your family is willing to marry your dog, to be with them every day, and night, a Dobe is perfect…because she’s bred to be a body guard, she will love you like no other can…but if you treat her like a breed that is to be separated from your family even by a door, your Dobe will first ignore you, then resent you, and then divorce you. One night you’ll wander in and be the intruder in her home. Bad bad scenario. If bonded however, they are real practical jokers and extremely loving with family, they also may not let anyone near your kids ‘just because…There is a reason this breed is called the Velcro dog. They stick to you. I’ve owned them for three decades. I don’t mind the devotion required. The reward is a love so strong, it breaks your heart.

Belgians are being bred more and more to be hyper watchers. They have never been known as pets as much as workers. They require intense training to level them out and more exercise than the Dobe or Rottie (who need it but not excessively) just to blow off steam. The barking may in itself get you in trouble if you live in a trafficked area. They won’t be as physically affectionate as the other breeds. They are often animal aggressive to new pets. I returned a puppy with aggression issues the same day to the breeder and recommended police academy. He was accepted.

Rotties are excellent watchers…but require heavy family time too….think only somewhat more forgiving than a Dobe. Drooly, sweet but with intimidating size needs socializing and intense monitoring with small kids simply because of their size.. They will follow you, waiting to do some job, any job. They are guardians, drovers, haulers and companions. They eat …a lot and love wrestling with family. When not on duty, they are goofballs. In the best sense of the word. The neighbors Zeus is a serious baby sitter. He would die for family.

None of those guarders you mentioned is a first time owner dog. But I would suggest a very noble breed instead. For a first timer, a smaller female German Shepherd rescue. Calmer, gentler tho slightly larger than the Belgian, more emotionally forgiving than the Doberman and physically more manageable with kids than the Rottweiler powerhouse. But intimidating as all heck.

German Shepherds look intimidating enough to deter intruders, their bark is thunder and like the other three breeds, can and will defend to the death. My parents loved them the best.

For the first timer, A true rescue GSD will normally be temperament rated, and housetrained. She will be spayed, and calmer than a puppy. Lots of toys will suffice instead of the furniture. A female is physically easier, and a little less stubborn. All these dogs require inside residency in the same room with family to remain reliable with family. After owning a pedigree GSD rescue, you’ll be ready for the challenge of a GSD puppy, or other protection breeds…but as it is with most guardian breeds, once you feel their powerful commitment, it becomes a ‘breed’ thing. If you become. GSD person, you’ll be in great company. Strong leaders manage strong breeds.

See the best watchers ‘look’ below.

Belgium Sheepdog



2 German Shepherd pics

How Democrats betrayed the Working Class and embraced Wall Street & Corporate America

How Democrats betrayed the working class by pursuing campaign finance parity with Republicans in the 1980s and 1990s.

Today’s Democratic elites see the professional/creative class as a “meritocracy”. They were unwilling to reign in Wall Street in 2008 and now because Wall Street is populated with their fellow Ivy League alumni and they identify with corporate leadership.


The day after Donald Trump was elected president, The New York Times recommended six books “for those trying to understand the political, economic, regional and social shifts that drove one of the most stunning political upsets in the nation’s history.” Among them: Thomas Frank’s Listen, Liberal: Or What Ever Happened to the Party of the People?

Frank, a Kansas City native, has followed up, embarking on a 13-city barnstorming tour to talk to Trump voters, union leaders, and progressive activists across the Midwest in conjunction with Listen Liberal’s release in paperback. On his last stop¬in Kansas City¬he discusses what he has learned.

This event is co-presented by Rainy Day Books. Frank discussed Listen Liberal at the Library in March 2016; you can view the video on YouTube, and you can find the book in the Library Catalog.

Anti-war US Army veteran warns of hawks in Biden transition team


President-elect Joe Biden’s transition team is full of war hawks and weapons industry shills. Max Blumenthal and Ben Norton speak with US Army veteran Danny Sjursen, who fought in Iraq and Afghanistan before becoming an anti-imperialist activist and journalist, about what a Biden-Harris administration foreign policy would look like. Sjursen, who previously taught at the United States Military Academy, also discusses how warmongering members of the West Point Mafia dominate the US government and military-industrial complex.

The Doctor Versus the Denier

Anthony Fauci’s at the pool, but Donald Trump’s in deep.

Never mind Johnny Depp and Amber Heard.

You want to see a real can’t-look-away train wreck of a relationship? Look to the nation’s capital, where a messy falling out is chronicled everywhere from the tabloids to a glossy fashion magazine, replete with a photo shoot by a swimming pool.

The saga has enough betrayal, backstabbing, recrimination, indignation and ostracization to impress Edith Wharton.

The press breathlessly covers how much time has passed since the pair last spoke, whether they’re headed for splitsville, and if they can ever agree on what’s best for the children.

It was always bound to be tempestuous because they are the ultimate odd couple, the doctor and the president.

  • One is a champion of truth and facts. The other is a master of deceit and denial.
  • One is highly disciplined, working 18-hour days. The other can’t be bothered to do his homework and golfs instead.
  • One is driven by science and the public good. The other is a public menace, driven by greed and ego.
  • One is a Washington institution. The other was sent here to destroy Washington institutions.
  • One is incorruptible. The other corrupts.
  • One is apolitical. The other politicizes everything he touches — toilets, windows, beans and, most fatally, masks.

After a fractious week, when the former reality-show star in the White House retweeted a former game-show host saying that we shouldn’t trust doctors about Covid-19, Donald Trump and Anthony Fauci are gritting their teeth.

What’s so scary is that the bumpy course of their relationship has life-or-death consequences for Americans.

Who could even dream up a scenario where a president and a White House drop oppo research on the esteemed scientist charged with keeping us safe in a worsening pandemic?

The administration acted like Peter Navarro, Trump’s wacko-bird trade adviser, had gone rogue when he assailed Dr. Fauci for being Dr. Wrong, in a USA Today op-ed. But does anyone believe that? And if he did, would he still have his job?

No doubt it was a case of Trump murmuring: Will no one rid me of this meddlesome infectious disease specialist?

Republicans on Capitol Hill privately confessed they were baffled by the whole thing, saying they couldn’t understand why Trump would undermine Fauci, especially now with the virus resurgent. They think it’s not only hurting Trump’s re-election chances, but theirs, too.

As though it couldn’t get more absurd, Kellyanne Conway told Fox News on Friday that she thinks it would help Trump’s poll numbers for him to start giving public briefings on the virus again — even though that exercise went off the rails when the president began suggesting people inject themselves with bleach.

How did we get to a situation in our country where the public health official most known for honesty and hard work is most vilified for it?” marvels Michael Specter, a science writer for The New Yorker who began covering Fauci during the AIDs crisis. “And as Team Trump trashes him, the numbers keep horrifyingly proving him right.”

When Dr. Fauci began treating AIDs patients, nearly every one of them died. “It was the darkest time of my life,” he told Specter. In an open letter, Larry Kramer called Fauci a “murderer.”

Then, as Specter writes, he started listening to activists and made a rare admission: His approach wasn’t working. He threw his caution to the winds and became a public-health activist. Through rigorous research and commitment to clinical studies, the death rate from AIDs has plummeted over the years.

Now Fauci struggles to drive the data bus as the White House throws nails under his tires. It seems emblematic of a deeper, existential problem: America has lost its can-do spirit. We were always Bugs Bunny, faster, smarter, more wily than everybody else. Now we’re Slugs Bunny.

Can our country be any more pathetic than this: The Georgia governor suing the Atlanta mayor and City Council to block their mandate for city residents to wear masks?

Trump promised the A team, but he has surrounded himself with losers and kiss-ups and second-raters. Just your basic Ayn Rand nightmare.

Certainly, Dr. Fauci has had to adjust some of his early positions as he learned about this confounding virus. (“When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?” John Maynard Keynes wisely observed.)

Medicine is not an exact art,” Jerome Groopman, the best-selling author and professor at Harvard Medical School, put it. “There’s lots of uncertainty, always evolving information, much room for doubt. The most dangerous people are the ones who speak with total authority and no room for error.”

Sound like someone you know?

Medical schools,” Dr. Groopman continued, “have curricula now to teach students the imperative of admitting when something went wrong, taking responsibility, and committing to righting it.”

Some are saying the 79-year-old Dr. Fauci should say to hell with it and quit. But we need his voice of reason in this nuthouse of a White House.

Despite Dr. Fauci’s best efforts to stay apolitical, he has been sucked into the demented political kaleidoscope through which we view everything now. Consider the shoot by his pool, photographed by Frankie Alduino, for a digital cover story by Norah O’Donnell for InStyle magazine.

From the left, the picture represented an unflappable hero, exhausted and desperately in need of some R & R, chilling poolside, not letting the White House’s slime campaign get him down or silence him. And on the right, some saw a liberal media darling, high on his own supply in the midst of a deadly pandemic. “While America burns, Fauci does fashion mag photo shoots,” tweeted Sean Davis, co-founder of the right-wing website The Federalist.

It’s no coincidence that the QAnon-adjacent cultists on the right began circulating a new conspiracy theory in the fever swamps of Facebook that Dr. Fauci’s wife of three and a half decades, a bioethicist, is Ghislane Maxwell’s sister. (Do I need to tell you she isn’t?)

Worryingly, new polls show that the smear from Trumpworld may be starting to stick; fewer Republicans trust the doctor now than in the spring.

Forget Mueller, Sessions, Comey, Canada, his niece, Mika Brzezinski. Of the many quarrels, scrapes and scraps Trump has instigated in his time in office, surely this will be remembered not only as the most needless and perverse, but as the most dangerous.

As Dr. Fauci told The Atlantic, it’s “a bit bizarre.”

More than a bit, actually.

Will Trump Be the Sage One?

Only one person can save us from the dangerous belligerent in the White House.

And that person is Donald Trump.

How screwed up is that?

Will the president let himself be pushed into a parlous war by John Bolton, who once buoyed the phony case on W.M.D.s in Iraq? Or will Trump drag back his national security adviser and the other uber hawks from the precipice of their fondest, bloodiest desire — to attack Iran?

Can Cadet Bone Spurs, as Illinois senator and Iraq war vet Tammy Duckworth called Trump, set Tom Cotton straight that winning a war with Iran would not merely entail “two strikes, the first strike and the last strike”? Holy cakewalk.

Once, we counted on Trump’s advisers to pump the brakes on an out-of-control president. Now, we count on the president to pump the brakes on out-of-control advisers.

.. “On one side, you have a president who doesn’t want war, who simply wants to do with Iran what he has done with North Korea, to twist the arm of the Iranians to bring them to a negotiation on his terms,” said Gérard Araud, the recently departed French ambassador. “He thinks they will suffer and at the end, they will grovel in front of his power.”

But in a way, Araud said, the face-off with the Iranians is more “primitive and dangerous” because, besides Bolton, other factions in the Middle East are also “dreaming of going to war.”

“Even if Trump doesn’t personally want war, we are now at the mercy of any incident, because we are at maximum tension on both sides,” said Araud, recalling Candidate Trump’s bellicose Twitter ultimatumsin 2016 when Iran’s Revolutionary Guards held American sailors blindfolded at gunpoint for 15 hours.

Given their sour feelings about W. shattering the Middle East and their anger at Trump shredding the Iran nuclear deal, Europeans are inclined to see the U.S. as trying to provoke Iran into war. This time, the Europeans will not be coming along — and who can blame them?

I’m having an acid flashback to 2002, when an immature, insecure, ill-informed president was bamboozled by his war tutors.

In an echo of the hawks conspiring with Iraqi exiles to concoct a casus belli for Iraq, Bolton told members of an Iranian exile group in Paris in 2017 that the Trump administration should go for regime change in Tehran.

And that’s why, before 2019, we here will celebrate in Tehran!” Bolton cheerily told the exiles.

When Bolton was the fifth column in the Bush 2 State Department — there to lurk around and report back on flower child Colin Powell — he complained that W.’s Axis of Evil (Iran, Iraq, North Korea) was too limited, adding three more of his own (Cuba, Libya, Syria). Then, last year, Bolton talked about “the Troika of Tyranny” (Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela). His flirtations with military intervention in Venezuela this month irritated Trump.

The 70-year-old with the Yeti mustache is an insatiable interventionist with an abiding faith in unilateralism and pre-emptive war. (The cost of our attenuated post-9/11 wars is now calculated at $5.9 trillion.)

W. and Trump are similar in some ways but also very different. As Trump biographer Michael D’Antonio notes: W. was interested in clarity. Trump wants chaos. W. wanted to trust his domineering advisers. Trump is always imagining betrayal. W. wanted to be a war hero, like his dad. Trump does not want to be trapped in an interminable war that will consume his presidency.

Certainly, the biographer says, Trump enjoys playing up the scary aspects of brown people with foreign names and ominous titles, like “mullah” and “ayatollah,” to stoke his base.

But Trump, unlike W., is driven by the drama of it. “It’s a game of revving up the excitement and making people afraid and then backing off on the fear in order to declare that he’s resolved the situation,” D’Antonio said. “Trump prefers threats and ultimatums to action because that allows him to look big and tough and get attention without doing something for which he will be held responsible. This is who he is at his core: an attention-seeking, action-averse propagandist who is terrified of accountability in the form of coffins arriving at Dover Air Force Base.”

David Axelrod, who had the military briefing about what a war with Iran would look like when he was in the Obama White House, said: “I’m telling you. It’s not a pretty picture.”

He says he is not sure which movie Bolton is starring in: “Dr. Strangelove” or “Wag the Dog.”

If part of your brand is that you’re not going to get the U.S. into unnecessary wars,” he said, “why in the world would you hire John Bolton?