🔥 Popular | Latest

Children, Community, and Crime: Local Hero Arrested After Killing 30 Pedophiles In Murder Spree Sean Adl-Tabatabai 3 days ago "I've been killing pedos for, damn, close to 15 years now," "It started a few years back, after a girl I was dating was raped and murdered." "I tracked the guy down myself, slit his throat." "I realized I had a real knack for it after that, so I kept going." nunyabizni: eeveelutionsforequality: paradisemantis: jack-o-fficial: paradisemantis: blacklivezmatter: the-map-community-is-dangerous: whyyoustabbedme: free him he’s doing better than American Justice system The hero we’ve literally always asked for. Been killing for 15 years but it started a few years back. I approve though Murder is a fucking HUGE nope Molesting children is a bigger one though, lmao. Kill the fuckers that do that. Though I do kinda worry about how many people may have been actual false-accused victims. No person has the right to go beyond the reaches of the law, especially to such a disgustingly excessive extent, regardless of how morally justified they feel in doing so and any suggestions to the contrary are ill-informed at best and dangerously destructive at worst. The law and legal system exist to met out punishment, you don’t have the right and you shouldn’t.Innocent people are just one example of problems that arise when you decide to take matters into your own hands by fucking murdering people you don’t like. I cannot believe I have to actually type and explain this to people, even a single person thinking like this is too many. The title should say “Vigilante Serial Killer Arrested After Killing 30 Alleged Pedophiles” not “Hero”. We don’t deal with crime with mob rule and guilty (especially to the point of sentencing to death) until proven innocent. We don’t want a society where your vengeful shitty ex can lie and tell a person that you’re a pedo and have you brutally slaughtered. ~ Vape If y’all want to have a moral discussion as to if he was right or not, he wasn’t, that’s fine.  This story is as fake as shit though.  Seriously this guy would have been all over the news if this happened.https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/vigilante-arrested-killing-30-pedophiles/There was no truth to this story, which originated with (and was solely reported by) Empire News, a fake news web site whose disclaimer identifies its contents as “entertainment”: Empire News is intended for entertainment purposes only. Our website and social media content uses only fictional names, except in cases of public figure and celebrity parody or satirization. Any other use of real names is accidental and coincidental.
Save
Fbi, Memes, and Obama: Why is Peter Strzok so smug? He's in the SES. I would guess that 95% of Americans have never heard of the Senior Executive Service, but the SES has more REAL power than Congress. The SES was created in 1979 to form kind of an aristocracy among the federal bureaucracy All are political appointees. They resemble "civilian generals" but unlike generals they don't rotate out to new duty stations. Congress can haul FBI SESer Peter Strzok in and berate him, but they can't do a damn thing to him. Contempt of Congress? An SESer could not care any less. The approximately 10,000 SESers protect one another above all else. It's not about Democrats vs. Republicans, it's now more about the SES vs. the rest of the govemment Folks need to get up to speed on the REAL power structure in Washington There is a civil war going on, and 95% of it is happening below the surface. Trump and the Congress have barely made a dent in the power of the SES Imagine the old USSR, with KGB-aligned senior apparatchiks answerable directly to the Politburo and nobody else in charge of every federal agency and department. That is the SES, In our case today, the unexpected occurred and Trump was elected as POTUS, but the SES is still loyal to the Obama and The Washington D. C. Deep State is a group of 8,156 appointed managers in 75 federal agencies that control the executive bureaucracy and tell new political appointees what they can and cannot do. Yes, that’s right, the Deep State is an official government program, well-organized, comprehensive, and “in charge.” OUT OF THE 8,156 MEMBERS WHO MAKE UP THIS DEEP STATE OF ENSCONCED BUREAUCRATS, OVER 7,000 WERE APPOINTED BY OBAMA. These the are the “Obama Holdouts” that still control the executive branch of government a full year after Trump has come to office. Obama expanded the existing Flag_of_the_United_States_Senior_Executive_Service.svgprogram of Deep State managers and appointed over 7,000 of the 8,156 bosses who are called the Senior Executive Service. Some call it the “Shadow Government”, and it is true that this federal cabal works in the shadows. Have you ever heard of such a group? Some call it Obama’s Army. Let’s review what we know about the power of “political appointees” who hold important leadership and policymaking positions. There are four basic types of appointments: Presidential Appointments with Senate Confirmation: There are 1,212 senior leaders, including the Cabinet secretaries and their deputies, the heads of most independent agencies and ambassadors, who must be confirmed by the Senate. Presidential Appointments without Senate Confirmation: There are 353 positions which make up much of the White House staff, although they are also scattered throughout many of the smaller federal agencies. Non-career Senior Executive Service: Members of the Senior Executive Service (SES) work in key positions just below the top presidential appointees, bridging the gap between the political leaders and the civil service throughout the federal government. Schedule C Appointments: There are 1,403 Schedule C appointees who serve in a confidential or policy role. They range from schedulers and confidential assistants to policy experts. . The Senior Executive Service (SES) in 2016 had 8,156 members who were appointees. Obama appointed over 7,000 of them to these key positions. Most of these appointees do not arise from inside the respective agencies through

The Washington D. C. Deep State is a group of 8,156 appointed managers in 75 federal agencies that control the executive bureaucracy and tel...

Save
America, Arguing, and Crime: ITS EASY TO FORGET THAT FOR DECADES THE U.S. HAD A HEALTHCARE SYSTEM THAT WAS THE ENVY OF THE WORLD. WE HAD THE FINEST DOCTORS AND HOSPITALS, PATIENTS RECEIVED HIGH QUALITY, AFFORDABLE MEDICAL CARE, AND THOUSANDS OF PRIVATELY FUNDED CHARITIES PROVIDED HEALTH SERVICES FOR THE PO0 RON PAUL TURNING POINT USA <p><a href="http://redbloodedamerica.tumblr.com/post/165630900777/bushmeat-said-when-they-tell-you-how-ghastly" class="tumblr_blog">redbloodedamerica</a>:</p> <blockquote><p><a href="http://bushmeat.tumblr.com/" title="bushmeat">bushmeat</a> said:</p><blockquote><p>When they tell you how ghastly socialised healthcare is, remember what they are saying is absolute bullshit <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608253">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608253</a></p></blockquote><p>If I had a nickel every time some leftist moron linked to a World Healthcare Organization or Commonwealth Fund study, well, I would have a shitload of nickels.</p><p>Since my previous source’s website is currently down–<a href="http://redbloodedamerica.tumblr.com/post/142352613032/that-red-guy-montypla-weaselwonderworld">which I’ve used in the past</a> to slap this idiotic notion that other countries’ healthcare systems are somehow superior the US’s private system–I’ll instead point to this <a href="https://object.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa654.pdf">other great explanation</a> by the folks over at CATO on why this pathetic claim is always made by these left-wing think-tanks:</p><blockquote><p><i> The debate over how to reform America’s health care sector often involves comparisons between the United States and other countries, and with good reason. Looking at other countries can help us learn which policies, if any, to emulate, and which to avoid. </i></p><p><i>There have been many attempts at international health care system comparisons.Among the most influential are the World Health Report 2000 published by the World Health Organization, several studies published by the Commonwealth Fund, and individual measures such as infant mortality and “mortality amenable to health care.” Generally in these studies, the United States performs poorly in comparison to Europe, Australia, and Japan. Therefore, scholars often use the studies to argue for adding even more government regulations to our already highly regulated health care system. </i></p><p><i>However, these studies suffer from several problems. First, they often rely on unadjusted aggregate data—such as life expectancy, or mortality from heart disease—that can be affected by many non–health care factors, including nutrition, exercise, and even crime rates. Second,they often use process measures, such as how many patients have received a pap smear or mammogram in the past three years. Process measures tell us what doctors do, but provide only an indirect measure of doctors’ productivity. Third, some of these studies inappropriately incorporate their own biases about financing in their statistics, which makes market-driven health systems appear worse even if their outcomes are similar or better. </i></p><p><i>An additional limitation of these studies is the omission of any measure of innovation. None of the best-known studies factor in the contribution of various countries to the advances that have come to characterize the current practice of health care in the developed world. </i></p><p><i>Every single health care test or treatment must be invented at some point. We would be living in a different world today were it not for the remarkable genius and hard work of health care inventors in the past, as well as investments from government health agencies and pharmaceutical and medical device companies. The health care issues commonly considered most important today—controlling costs and covering the uninsured— arguably should be regarded as secondary to innovation, inasmuch as a treatment must first be invented before its costs can be reduced and its use extended to everyone. </i><br/></p></blockquote><p>Furthermore, from another Glen Whitman <a href="https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/bp101.pdf">article</a>:</p><blockquote><p><i> Those who cite the WHO rankings typically present them as an objective measure of the relative performance of national health care systems. They are not. The WHO rankings depend crucially on a number of underlying assumptions- some of them logically incoherent, some characterized by substantial uncertainty, and some rooted in ideological beliefs and values that not everyone shares. <br/></i></p><p><i> The WHO health care rankings result from an index of health-related statistics. As with any index, it is important to consider how it was constructed, as the construction affects the results. </i><br/></p><p><i> There is good reason to account for the quality of care received by a country’s worst-off or poorest citizens. Yet the Health Distribution and Responsiveness Distribution factors do not do that.Instead, they measure relative differences in quality, without regard to the absolute level of quality. To account for the quality of care received by the worst-off, the index could include a factor that measures health among the poor, or a health care system’s responsiveness to the poor. This would, in essence, give greater weight to the well-being of the worst off.  Alternatively, a separate health performance index could be constructed for poor households or members of disadvantaged minorities. These approaches would surely have problems of their own, but they would at least be focused on the absolute level of health care quality, which should be the paramount concern. <br/></i></p><p><i> The WHO rankings, by purporting to measure the efficacy of health care systems, implicitly take all differences in health outcomes not explained by spending or literacy and attribute them entirely to health care system performance. Nothing else, from tobacco use to nutrition to sheer luck, is taken into account. </i></p><p><i>To some extent, the exclusion of other variables is simply the result of inadequacies in the data. It is difficult to get information on all relevant factors, and even more difficult to account for their expected effects on health. But some factors are deliberately excluded by the WHO analysis on the basis of paternalistic assumptions about the proper role of health systems. An earlier paper laying out the WHO methodological framework asserts, “Problems such as tobacco consumption, diet, and unsafe sexual activity must be included in an assessment of health system performance.” </i></p><p><i>In other words, the WHO approach holds health systems responsible not just for treating lung cancer, but for preventing smoking in the first place; not just for treating heart disease, but for getting people to exercise and lay off the fatty foods. <br/></i></p><p><i> Second, the WHO approach fails to consider people’s willingness to trade off health against other values. Some people are happy to give up a few potential months or even years of life in exchange for the pleasures of smoking, eating, having sex, playing sports, and so on. The WHO approach, rather than taking the public’s preferences as given, deems some preferences better than others (and then praises or blames the health system for them). </i></p><p><i>A superior (though still imperfect) approach would take people’s health-related behavior as given, and then ask which health systems do the best job of dealing with whatever health conditions arise.<br/></i></p></blockquote><p>In other words, its a bunch of meaningless cherry-picked measurements framed in a way to make the private system appear terrible in order to push for more socialized medicine.  </p><p>Despite all of it’s flaws, which are usually thanks to government market intervention, the United States still has the best health care system on the entire goddamn planet per capita.  It’s most likely that the life-saving equipment and procedures that are used in other hellholes using slave healthcare to save lives are thanks to us.  </p><p>You’re welcome.</p><figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="250" data-orig-width="450"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/b97a460c917c68f3900de0bc46e50c59/tumblr_inline_owpcxquafE1r1jtxd_540.gif" data-orig-height="250" data-orig-width="450"/></figure></blockquote>
Save
Alive, Anaconda, and Community: ORDER HEREORDER HERE edens-blog: inner-fish: leftist-daily-reminders:leftist-daily-reminders:winterayars:leftist-daily-reminders:randomrants-obdm:Never gets an order wrong, takes breaks, gets lazy, comes in late, ‘forgets’ to wash hands after restroom, gets frustrated, or gets paidOf course ancaps just view human labor as a cost to be minimized and a tool for the accumulation of capital. Of course the implication here is “beg for scraps from the capitalists or starve”. Under more ideal conditions, where the means of production wasn’t hoarded by elites and managed in top-down fashion, machines replacing menial jobs would be precisely what we want – that means shorter hours and more leisure time. Under the current system, people need to find any job (no matter how necessary) and earn wages in order to subsist, so of course we’ve been conditioned to view machines replacing labor as a threat. But why should it be? If so many jobs aren’t necessary because they don’t, well, build and maintain the necessities of society (and only serve the interests of capital and bureaucracy), and so many other jobs aren’t necessary because they can be replaced by machines, WHY do we put up with this bullshit?? If everyone divvied up the necessary jobs in a democratic post-capitalist society, they could be eased by tech and the shifts could be reduced to fractions of what they are now. Capitalism will not be able to cope with the automation it sets into motion. Socialism is nigh.Capitalism will not be able to cope with automation. A lot of current theories about labor, capital, and the like will not be able to cope with a world where 1 person’s labor can provide a reasonable life for 100.Exactly. A central capitalist contradiction will make itself known in the next couple decades: if businesses are going to want to compete, they’ll need to automate, which in turn means laying off workers by the millions; the unemployed masses will not be able to buy the products that the capitalists sell, and at some time then a tipping point will be reached where the only jobs presented to people will be building and maintaining the machines (of course a bit of an exaggeration, but it’ll still likely be close to the reality). Universal basic income proposals will crop up, and the elite will see it as an opportunity to keep capitalism alive and kicking. (In other words, UBIs in this context are meant to maintain capitalism’s tiered ownership over the means of production, land, and resources, but with redistributive taxation to provide a livable floor for people, all to mitigate revolutionary upheaval in the end.) Of course socialists would rather just ditch this convoluted process of UBIs and taxation as a sophisticated feeding tube for capitalism – just turn the economy over to the people for democratic/for-need management and utilize all that automation for the collective good. That means people benefitting en masse, thus shorter shifts, thus more time for leisure and creative self-actualization and socializing. In that potential post-capitalist democracy, in the many scenarios where one person’s labor could provide a reasonable life for a hundred, you just need to divvy up those jobs so that any burden that exists can be eased, alongside a community of people having daily shifts of, say, 2 to 4 hours (and even that’s very likely a conservative estimate). Technology and democratic management of the collective capacities have the potential to liberate people from so much toil, if only we were to think outside of the myopic box of mainstream political discourse presented to us by OP. This isn’t about minimum wages – this is about demanding a world that works for human beings by default, not only when it’s convenient for the gears of capital. This isn’t about “the people need more jobs” – we ultimately need less jobs, with a focus on the necessary ones divvied up among populations and the economy from there focused on literally meeting societal needs, all so that people can spend most of their lives pursuing their interests and building connections. The creation of art, culture, inventions, and entertainment would arise from self-actualized individuals who create because they want to or because they see value in enriching the lives of others. We can do so, so much better than the bland status quo discourse that insists we must choose between smaller scraps and machines stealing our ability to access resources. The scraps were made by us, as was the whole feast, and they only find their way down to us because a superfluous owner class accrues the majority of the feast based on their unnecessary top-down ownership; the machines should be creating a world where it’s easier for us to access resources, not representing the opposite as a threat to us.I just want to remind everybody that OP is an ancap and that this is the disgusting view capitalism-apologists have of workers in the service industry. These machines are perfect for people who are mute, deaf, have anxiety, can’t read, or can’t speak English. This post is stupid and these machines are great.
Save
Advice, Ariel, and Head: ooo AT&T 1:55 PM mobile.twitter.com Open in app Sign up Log in shon faye Ф @shonfaye one of the cutest/saddest things I ever did was write out the legal ways Ariel could have annulled her contract with Ursula The Sea Witch into a contract with Ursula as a minor the contract is voidable at any time- after being unsuccessful in winning the heart of Prince Eric she could have voided the contract and walked (swam) away with her voice 2. Given that Ariel's voice is given as consideration for her legs, Ursula's condition that, if she does not kiss Eric in 3 days she must also give her soul as penalty is, arguably, onerous and unreasonable - like the maritime equivalent of PPl Insurance or overdraft charges. Ariel may be able to sever that clause of the contract or have recourse to the appropriate ombudsman. Even if said duty, express or implied, does not arise and Ariel remains in breach of contract, she and Triton would be liable only in damages-though query any ascertainable head of loss to Ursula anyway. Perhaps merely the funds required to make her potion? Ursula has no right to specific performance of her contract because this is an equitable remedy and the equitable maxim "he who comes to equity shall come with clean hands" applies-Ursula's hands are dirty, she has been manifestly dishonest. No court in the sea would grant her this remedy 3. Depending on the common law of the sea it, it may be that Ursula has a contractual duty to act in good faith- by deliberately obstructing Ariel's ability to perform agents to capsize her boat just as she is about kiss Eric and by becoming Vanessa and enchanting the 4. The sea seems to be an absolute monarchy in which all three constitutional branches reside in the Crown, therefore Triton has absolute power to declare the contract void ab initio on the grounds of public policy or to pass primary legislation retrospectively voiding it. her obligations by means of sending 479 People talking 000 AT&T 1:53 PM mobile.twitter.com 1. Ariel, at 16, is a minor and while she can enter into a contract with Ursula as a minor the contract is voidable at any time- after being unsuccessful in winning the heart of Prince Eric she could have voided the contract and 'walked' (swam) away with her voice. 2. Given that Ariel's voice is given as consideration for her legs, Ursula's condition that, if she does not kiss Eric in 3 days she must also give her soul as penalty is, arguably, onerous and unreasonable like the maritime equivalent of PPI Insurance or overdraft charges. Ariel may be able to sever that clause of the contract or have recourse to the appropriate ombudsman. 3. Depending on the common law of the sea it, it may be that Ursula has a contractual duty to act in good faith - by deliberately obstructing Ariel's ability to perform her obligations by means of sending agents to capsize her boat just as she is about kiss Eric and by becoming Vanessa and enchanting the Prince into a marriage under magical duress, Ursula has breached this duty. 8,576 ·14.9K 479 People talking 1:54 PM mobile.twitter.com & Share Even if said duty, express or implied, does not arise and Ariel remains in breach of contract, she and Triton would be liable only in damages-though query any ascertainable head of loss to Ursula anyway. Perhaps merely the funds required to make her potion? Ursula has no right to specific performance of her contract because this is an equitable remedy and the equitable maxim "he who comes to equity shall come with clean hands" applies -Ursula's hands are dirty, she has been manifestly dishonest. No court in the sea would grant her this remedy 4. The sea seems to be an absolute monarchy in which all three constitutional branches reside in the Crown, therefore Triton has absolute power to declare the contract void ab initio on the grounds of public policy or to pass primary legislation retrospectively voiding it. ALWAYS GET INDEPENDENT LEGAL ADVICE.
Save
Bailey Jay, Children, and Memes: THE LARGEST MASS SHOOTING IN US HISTORY HAPPENED December 29,1890. When 297 SiouxIndians at Wounded KneeCreek on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota were murdered by federal agents & members of the 7th Cavalry who had come to confiscate their firearms “for their own safety and protection”. The slaughter began after the majority of the Sioux had peacefully turned in their firearms. The Calvary began shooting, and managed to wipe out the entire camp. 200 of the 297 victims were women and children. Wounded Knee was among the first federally backed gun confiscation attempts in UnitedStates history. It ended in the senseless murder of 297 people. The SecondAmendment, the right of the people to take up arms in defense of themselves, their families, and property in the face of invading armies or an oppressive government. The Second Amendment was written by people who fled oppressive and tyrannical regimes in Europe, and it refers to the right of American citizens to be armed for defensive purposes, should such tyranny arise in the United States. WoundedKnee is the prime example of why the Second Amendment exists, and why we should vehemently resist any attempts to infringe on our Rights to Bear Arms. Without the Second Amendment we will be totally stripped of any ability to defend ourselves and our families.

THE LARGEST MASS SHOOTING IN US HISTORY HAPPENED December 29,1890. When 297 SiouxIndians at Wounded KneeCreek on the Pine Ridge Indian Reser...

Save
Save
Anaconda, Food, and Muslim: BRUSHING HARDER DOES NOT CLEAN BETTER dentagama1: When do we overbrush our teeth? 1. Brushing Too OftenIdeally your dentist wants you to brush three times a day, after every meal. At the very least professionals suggest you brush once after breakfast and once before bed. But what if you eat six small meals a day? Should you still brush after every meal and every snack and every sip of coffee? This is where misconceptions about brushing teeth start to arise. 2. Brushing Too VigorouslyMany dental patients attack their teeth with their toothbrushes, thinking they are getting rid of plaque hard and fast. But being over-zealous with your toothbrush does not remove any more plaque. Matter of fact, it starts harming the gum tissue and exposes the tooth root. Here the dentin is not protected by enamel, but rather a thin layer of cementum. Excessive or improper tooth brushing is liable to abrade these substances and do permanent damage.Right-handed patients tend to press harder when brushing the teeth on their left hand side. On the pictures you can see enamel lesions and gum recession caused by right-handed patients overbrushing their teeth. 3. Brushing With the Wrong ToothbrushPlaque is fairly soft. You could remove it with a damp cloth, if that could reach all the nooks and crannies where it hides. But once plaque hardens into calculus (tartar), the only way to remove it is with professional help from a dentist or hygienist. This is why there is not any extra benefit to using a hard bristle brush. The best manufactured toothbrushes have soft or medium nylon bristles. If you were to check these out under a microscope you would see they have rounded edges, instead of flat. This cuts down on the abrasiveness while still allowing the bristles to clean along the gumline and in the crevices of teeth.In some Muslim cultures it is highly recommended the use of a tree toothpick called miswak. It is even mentioned in their sacred book of Quran that the use of miswak ‘purifies the mouth’ and it is quoted by the Islamic prophet Muhammad himself. However, science has proven that the long term use of miswak can cause gum recession and abrasion lesions on the buccal surface of the teeth. 4. Brushing With the Wrong ToothpasteToothpastes contain minor abrasive substances to remove plaque and superficial stains from teeth. Under normal use, toothpaste helps clear away plaque and food particles, but leaves the enamel and dentin intact. Researchers say it would take 80 to 100 years to remove just 1mm of exposed dentin. Enamel, as a much harder substance, would remain intact. However, not all toothpastes are created equal, especially those you might make at home. Abnormal or abusive brushing with abrasive toothpastes might not have much effect on the enamel. But it could dramatically impact the soft tissue and any exposed dentin. 5. Brushing Too SoonAcid is the most harmful substance for the enamel. So if you brush right after having highly acidic foods or beverages, the enamel has not had enough time to naturally recover. It is more susceptible to damage caused by overbrushing. http://dentagama.com/news/why-overbrushing-your-teeth-can-be-dangerous

dentagama1: When do we overbrush our teeth? 1. Brushing Too OftenIdeally your dentist wants you to brush three times a day, after every mea...

Save
Anaconda, Food, and Muslim: BRUSHING HARDER DOES NOT CLEAN BETTER <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://dentagama1.tumblr.com/post/139968337448">dentagama1</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p>When do we overbrush our teeth?</p> <p>1. Brushing Too Often<br/>Ideally your dentist wants you to brush three times a day, after every meal. At the very least professionals suggest you brush once after breakfast and once before bed. But what if you eat six small meals a day? Should you still brush after every meal and every snack and every sip of coffee? This is where misconceptions about brushing teeth start to arise.</p> <p>2. Brushing Too Vigorously<br/>Many dental patients attack their teeth with their toothbrushes, thinking they are getting rid of plaque hard and fast. But being over-zealous with your toothbrush does not remove any more plaque. Matter of fact, it starts harming the gum tissue and exposes the tooth root. Here the dentin is not protected by enamel, but rather a thin layer of cementum. Excessive or improper tooth brushing is liable to abrade these substances and do permanent damage.<br/>Right-handed patients tend to press harder when brushing the teeth on their left hand side. On the pictures you can see enamel lesions and gum recession caused by right-handed patients overbrushing their teeth.</p> <p>3. Brushing With the Wrong Toothbrush<br/>Plaque is fairly soft. You could remove it with a damp cloth, if that could reach all the nooks and crannies where it hides. But once plaque hardens into calculus (tartar), the only way to remove it is with professional help from a dentist or hygienist. This is why there is not any extra benefit to using a hard bristle brush. The best manufactured toothbrushes have soft or medium nylon bristles. If you were to check these out under a microscope you would see they have rounded edges, instead of flat. This cuts down on the abrasiveness while still allowing the bristles to clean along the gumline and in the crevices of teeth.<br/>In some Muslim cultures it is highly recommended the use of a tree toothpick called miswak. It is even mentioned in their sacred book of Quran that the use of miswak ‘purifies the mouth’ and it is quoted by the Islamic prophet Muhammad himself. However, science has proven that the long term use of miswak can cause gum recession and abrasion lesions on the buccal surface of the teeth.</p> <p>4. Brushing With the Wrong Toothpaste<br/>Toothpastes contain minor abrasive substances to remove plaque and superficial stains from teeth. Under normal use, toothpaste helps clear away plaque and food particles, but leaves the enamel and dentin intact. Researchers say it would take 80 to 100 years to remove just 1mm of exposed dentin. Enamel, as a much harder substance, would remain intact. However, not all toothpastes are created equal, especially those you might make at home. Abnormal or abusive brushing with abrasive toothpastes might not have much effect on the enamel. But it could dramatically impact the soft tissue and any exposed dentin.</p> <p>5. Brushing Too Soon<br/>Acid is the most harmful substance for the enamel. So if you brush right after having highly acidic foods or beverages, the enamel has not had enough time to naturally recover. It is more susceptible to damage caused by overbrushing.</p> <p><a href="http://dentagama.com/news/why-overbrushing-your-teeth-can-be-dangerous">http://dentagama.com/news/why-overbrushing-your-teeth-can-be-dangerous</a><br/></p> </blockquote>

dentagama1: When do we overbrush our teeth? 1. Brushing Too OftenIdeally your dentist wants you to brush three times a day, after every mea...

Save
Animals, Ass, and Beef: stveganyogi.tumbir.com <p><a href="http://crazedcrocgirl.tumblr.com/post/116479236723/piefacemcgee-dammit-jim-im-a-blog" class="tumblr_blog">crazedcrocgirl</a>:</p> <blockquote><p><a href="http://piefacemcgee.tumblr.com/post/116460274637/dammit-jim-im-a-blog-hang-the-bastard" class="tumblr_blog">piefacemcgee</a>:</p> <blockquote><p><a href="http://dammit-jim-im-a-blog.tumblr.com/post/116259595542/hang-the-bastard-ladywarblerforever" class="tumblr_blog">dammit-jim-im-a-blog</a>:</p> <blockquote><p><a href="http://hang-the-bastard.tumblr.com/post/73391181951/ladywarblerforever-naturepunk" class="tumblr_blog">hang-the-bastard</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a href="http://ladywarblerforever.tumblr.com/post/73387926284/naturepunk-freshiejuice" class="tumblr_blog">ladywarblerforever</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a href="http://hang-the-bastard.tumblr.com/post/73320718922/sfveganyogi-maggie-menu-on-the-menu-for-maggie" class="tumblr_blog">hang-the-bastard</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a href="http://sfveganyogi.tumblr.com/post/71924348225/maggie-menu-on-the-menu-for-maggie-tonight-is" class="tumblr_blog">sfveganyogi</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><strike>Maggie Menu</strike></p> <p><strike>On the menu for Maggie tonight is puréed sweet potato, puréed brown rice, sprouted organic tofu, chia seeds, and digestive enzymes. Does she look excited? She is!</strike></p> </blockquote> <p><b>This dog does not look excited, this dog looks malnourished.</b></p> <p>The diet you are feeding your dog places a huge burden entirely on the pancreas, forcing it to produce large amounts of amylase to deal with the starch, cellulose, and carbohydrates in plant matter. (yes, even with your supplements) The carnivore’s pancreas does not secrete cellulase to split the cellulose into glucose molecules, nor have dogs become efficient at digesting and assimilating and utilizing plant material as a source of high quality protein. <br/></p> <p>When this stuff sits in the pet’s intestine <b>(yes even with your supplemented enzymes)</b> it not only irritates the lining of the bowels but also provides the perfect warm, wet environment with plenty of undigested sugars and starches as food for bacteria. <br/></p> <p>I respect your choice in leading a vegan lifestyle, but please do not force this on your pet who does not recognize the difference, your dog absolutely needs a healthier diet or it is going to develop health issues and I guarantee you, will not live as long as it could otherwise. </p> </blockquote> <p><strike>side reminder that some dogs can have vegan meat and be completely nourished and content, loving and excited over their meals. See: Onision’s two dogs, Dobs and Leelu. Actually, his name is Greg. He, his wife Lainey, and their two dogs are all vegetarian, and both Dobs and Leelu thrive. They look very well nourished, are energetic, very loving towards both Greg and Lainey, and they are fed vegetarian foods. Do dogs and cats eat meat? Absolutely. With the right nourishments, can they live, thrive, and live a happy and healthy life without it? <b><i>You bet your sweet ass they</i> <i>can</i>. </b>Stop bagging on this person for feeding this to their dog. I may advise offering meaty treats to your pet, perhaps chop some chicken or throw in some cooked red meat, but your dog seems very okay to me. The meat would be an added bonus that may please your pooch and also provide additional protein and minerals. He/She seems healthy to me, and also seems interested in the food you’re about to feed them. Do not let these people tell you that you’re abusing your dog. If you choose to continue their diet in this way, I would definitely look more into different kinds of treats that would help with the digestion more, though I don’t know too much in that area. Best of luck to both you and your puppy dog!</strike></p> </blockquote> <p>Hi hello you seem new to veterinary science and animal welfare in general so let me educate you on some topics <b>that you are completely wrong about</b></p> <p><b><i>1) “side reminder that some dogs can have vegan meat and be completely nourished and content, loving and excited over their meals.”</i></b></p> <p>This is an assumption. The <b>assumption</b> that dogs are omnivores remains to be proven, whereas the <b>truth </b>about dogs being natural carnivores is very well-supported by the evidence available to us and is understood by many science welfare groups, universities, and doctors of veterinary science. </p> <p>Dogs and wolves share 99.8% of their mitochondrial DNA, those who insist dogs did not descend from wolves must disprove the litany of scientific evidence that concludes wolves are the ancestors of dogs. And guess what? The wolf is a carnivore. Since a dog’s internal physiology does not differ from a wolf, dogs have the same physiological and nutritional needs as those carnivorous predators. </p> <p>By stating otherwise you are ignoring and disregarding the work of contributing doctors, educators, and researchers who have compiled over 300 years of research and observations of the wild canine.</p> <p><b><i>2) Do dogs and cats eat meat? Absolutely. With the right nourishments, can they live, thrive, and live a happy and healthy life without it?</i></b></p> <p>No. But congratulations, you got one thing right, dogs and cats eat meat. Can they live a happy and healthy life without it? <b>No they cannot.</b> Cats and dogs health is largely dependent on the body’s ability to digest and make use of the food that is a part of their natural diet that is supplemented from meats. By creating a lack of naturally produced (meat, not supplements) protein in the body of the animal, you are putting your animals at risk for something called protein-losing enteropathy. Although this condition can affect any breed or age of dog, some dog breeds are more likely than others. <b>That being said, feeding your dog and cat an all vegan or vegetarian diet and expecting them to thrive on it is a gamble at best.</b></p> <p>There is an entire array of problems that can arise from a lack of natural protein.  </p> <ul><li>Occasional bouts of diarrhea</li> <li>Chronic diarrhea</li> <li>Weight loss</li> <li>Lack of energy (lethargy)</li> <li>Difficulty breathing (dyspnea)</li> <li>Enlarged abdomen</li> <li>Legs and feet may be puffy or swollen (edema)</li> </ul><ul><li>Cancer in the intestines</li> <li>Infection in the intestines <ul><li>Bacteria such as salmonella(from rotting plant material)</li> <li>Fungal infection</li> <li>Intestinal parasites like hookworms and whipworms</li> </ul></li> <li>Inflammation of the intestines (inflammatory bowel disease)</li> <li>Food Allergies</li> <li>Stomach or intestinal ulcers</li> <li>Congestive heart failure</li> <li>Problems with the movement of lymphatic fluid out of the intestines (lymphangiectasia)</li> </ul><p><b><i>3) “He/She seems healthy to me, and also seems interested in the food you’re about to feed them.”</i></b></p> <p><b>Hey, wrong again.</b> This dogs nose is dried out, it is almost a pale white pink, this is an indication of dehydration or something more serious. The eyes are not clear and bright as they should be, they are red and puffy around the edges, the lining of the eyelids should be pink rather than red. This dog also has a blank stare on its face, and the nose is not pointing at the food, this means the dog is uninterested and is a sign of lethargy. This dog is begging for this meal to be something nutritious. I work at a highly respected veterinary hospital and I see this more often than you would think, <b>I know how to tell when a dog looks malnourished, </b>and so would you if you worked and studied every day in the field of veterinary medicine.</p> <p>Next time I hope you will take the initiative to educate yourself on these and other important topics on the care for your animal, before you preach something you have no idea about.</p> </blockquote> <p>Not to mention with cats specifically, they <i><b>NEED</b> </i>a<i> </i>protein called taurine. Taurine is found in fish, meat and human breast milk. Without enough taurine your cat will fucking go blind. They can’t even eat dog food without going blind because it doesn’t have a high enough taurine content. Cat’s (neutered) need around <i>25</i>% of their diet to consist of protein to be healthy and that protein MUST BE chicken, fish, or beef or they will go blind and eventually die from malnutrition. Cats also must have plenty of fat in their diet because they can’t produce their own. Bottom line if your feeding your cat (or dog but that was discussed more above) a vegan diet, you’re murdering your animal and causing it to suffer immensely in the process. </p></blockquote> <p>How could the OP even bullshit themselves into thinking their dog looks even remotely excited? Pretty sure that’s a Lab, and I’ve had two at my house for the past 12 years. They look absolutely nothing like that when it’s their dinnertime. They’re full of energy, with wagging tails and bouncing impatience and eagerly dig into their bowls. <br/></p><p>That is the most apathetic look about a meal I have <i>ever </i>seen a dog have.<br/></p></blockquote> <p>I’m glad to see this post back on my dash because it means people are still spreading this around. And this is <i>super</i> important information.</p><p>Dogs and cats <i>cannot</i> be vegan or vegetarian. If you want a pet that can, get a fucking gerbil.</p></blockquote> <p>Idiots starving and abusing their pets in the name of being against animal cruelty.</p>
Save
Animals, Ass, and Cats: stveganyogi.tumbir.com <p><a href="http://hang-the-bastard.tumblr.com/post/73391181951/ladywarblerforever-naturepunk" class="tumblr_blog">hang-the-bastard</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a href="http://ladywarblerforever.tumblr.com/post/73387926284/naturepunk-freshiejuice" class="tumblr_blog">ladywarblerforever</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a href="http://hang-the-bastard.tumblr.com/post/73320718922/sfveganyogi-maggie-menu-on-the-menu-for-maggie" class="tumblr_blog">hang-the-bastard</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a href="http://sfveganyogi.tumblr.com/post/71924348225/maggie-menu-on-the-menu-for-maggie-tonight-is" class="tumblr_blog">sfveganyogi</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p>Maggie Menu</p> <p>On the menu for Maggie tonight is puréed sweet potato, puréed brown rice, sprouted organic tofu, chia seeds, and digestive enzymes. Does she look excited? She is!</p> </blockquote> <p><b>This dog does not look excited, this dog looks malnourished.</b></p> <p>The diet you are feeding your dog places a huge burden entirely on the pancreas, forcing it to produce large amounts of amylase to deal with the starch, cellulose, and carbohydrates in plant matter. (yes, even with your supplements) The carnivore’s pancreas does not secrete cellulase to split the cellulose into glucose molecules, nor have dogs become efficient at digesting and assimilating and utilizing plant material as a source of high quality protein. <br/></p> <p>When this stuff sits in the pet’s intestine <b>(yes even with your supplemented enzymes)</b> it not only irritates the lining of the bowels but also provides the perfect warm, wet environment with plenty of undigested sugars and starches as food for bacteria. <br/></p> <p>I respect your choice in leading a vegan lifestyle, but please do not force this on your pet who does not recognize the difference, your dog absolutely needs a healthier diet or it is going to develop health issues and I guarantee you, will not live as long as it could otherwise. </p> </blockquote> <p>side reminder that some dogs can have vegan meat and be completely nourished and content, loving and excited over their meals. See: Onision’s two dogs, Dobs and Leelu. Actually, his name is Greg. He, his wife Lainey, and their two dogs are all vegetarian, and both Dobs and Leelu thrive. They look very well nourished, are energetic, very loving towards both Greg and Lainey, and they are fed vegetarian foods. Do dogs and cats eat meat? Absolutely. With the right nourishments, can they live, thrive, and live a happy and healthy life without it? <b><i>You bet your sweet ass they</i> <i>can</i>. </b>Stop bagging on this person for feeding this to their dog. I may advise offering meaty treats to your pet, perhaps chop some chicken or throw in some cooked red meat, but your dog seems very okay to me. The meat would be an added bonus that may please your pooch and also provide additional protein and minerals. He/She seems healthy to me, and also seems interested in the food you’re about to feed them. Do not let these people tell you that you’re abusing your dog. If you choose to continue their diet in this way, I would definitely look more into different kinds of treats that would help with the digestion more, though I don’t know too much in that area. Best of luck to both you and your puppy dog!</p> </blockquote> <p>Hi hello you seem new to veterinary science and animal welfare in general so let me educate you on some topics <b>that you are completely wrong about</b></p> <p><b><i>1) “side reminder that some dogs can have vegan meat and be completely nourished and content, loving and excited over their meals.”</i></b></p> <p>This is an assumption. The <b>assumption</b> that dogs are omnivores remains to be proven, whereas the <b>truth </b>about dogs being natural carnivores is very well-supported by the evidence available to us and is understood by many science welfare groups, universities, and doctors of veterinary science. </p> <p>Dogs and wolves share 99.8% of their mitochondrial DNA, those who insist dogs did not descend from wolves must disprove the litany of scientific evidence that concludes wolves are the ancestors of dogs. And guess what? The wolf is a carnivore. Since a dog’s internal physiology does not differ from a wolf, dogs have the same physiological and nutritional needs as those carnivorous predators. </p> <p>By stating otherwise you are ignoring and disregarding the work of contributing doctors, educators, and researchers who have compiled over 300 years of research and observations of the wild canine.</p> <p><b><i>2) Do dogs and cats eat meat? Absolutely. With the right nourishments, can they live, thrive, and live a happy and healthy life without it?</i></b></p> <p>No. But congratulations, you got one thing right, dogs and cats eat meat. Can they live a happy and healthy life without it? <b>No they cannot.</b> Cats and dogs health is largely dependent on the body’s ability to digest and make use of the food that is a part of their natural diet that is supplemented from meats. By creating a lack of naturally produced (meat, not supplements) protein in the body of the animal, you are putting your animals at risk for something called protein-losing enteropathy. Although this condition can affect any breed or age of dog, some dog breeds are more likely than others. <b>That being said, feeding your dog and cat an all vegan or vegetarian diet and expecting them to thrive on it is a gamble at best.</b></p> <p>There is an entire array of problems that can arise from a lack of natural protein.  </p> <ul><li>Occasional bouts of diarrhea</li> <li>Chronic diarrhea</li> <li>Weight loss</li> <li>Lack of energy (lethargy)</li> <li>Difficulty breathing (dyspnea)</li> <li>Enlarged abdomen</li> <li>Legs and feet may be puffy or swollen (edema)</li> </ul><ul><li>Cancer in the intestines</li> <li>Infection in the intestines <ul><li>Bacteria such as salmonella(from rotting plant material)</li> <li>Fungal infection</li> <li>Intestinal parasites like hookworms and whipworms</li> </ul></li> <li>Inflammation of the intestines (inflammatory bowel disease)</li> <li>Food Allergies</li> <li>Stomach or intestinal ulcers</li> <li>Congestive heart failure</li> <li>Problems with the movement of lymphatic fluid out of the intestines (lymphangiectasia)</li> </ul><p><b><i>3) “He/She seems healthy to me, and also seems interested in the food you’re about to feed them.”</i></b></p> <p><b>Hey, wrong again.</b> This dogs nose is dried out, it is almost a pale white pink, this is an indication of dehydration or something more serious. The eyes are not clear and bright as they should be, they are red and puffy around the edges, the lining of the eyelids should be pink rather than red. This dog also has a blank stare on its face, and the nose is not pointing at the food, this means the dog is uninterested and is a sign of lethargy. This dog is begging for this meal to be something nutritious. I work at a highly respected veterinary hospital and I see this more often than you would think, <b>I know how to tell when a dog looks malnourished, </b>and so would you if you worked and studied every day in the field of veterinary medicine.</p> <p>Next time I hope you will take the initiative to educate yourself on these and other important topics on the care for your animal, before you preach something you have no idea about.</p> </blockquote> <p>Stop. Feeding. Your dogs. And cats. Vegan. Diets. You will KILL THEM.</p>
Save
Bad, Bill Clinton, and Google: Michigan House Passed Bill Allowing EMTs To Refuse Treatment To Gay People Over the weekend, Republicans in the Michigan Statehouse passed a "license to discriminate" bill that would give just about anyone the right to refuse service [. <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://justanotherconservative.tumblr.com/post/104755708059/fuck-liberal-morons-harbi-doll-rossjm">justanotherconservative</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://fuck-liberal-morons.tumblr.com/post/104754344326/harbi-doll-rossjm-lumos5001-utterly-and">fuck-liberal-morons</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://harbi-doll.tumblr.com/post/104752758548/rossjm-lumos5001-utterly-and-thoroughly">harbi-doll</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://rossjm.tumblr.com/post/104748223762">rossjm</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://lumos5001.tumblr.com/post/104715442836/utterly-and-thoroughly-disgusted-by-my-state-right">lumos5001</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a href="http://www.newnownext.com/michigan-house-passed-bill-allowing-emts-to-refuse-treatment-to-gay-people/12/2014/?fb_ref=fbshare_web">utterly and thoroughly disgusted by my State right now</a></p> </blockquote> <p>This article is so strawman I can almost hear it singing <span>‘</span><span>if I only had a brain.’ The bill basically means private businesses and individuals have the right to serve/not serve who they want. Just like how a bar can refuse to serve alcoholics. It’s literally that simple. </span></p> <p><br/>Of course, wild eyed conspiracy theorists immediately jump to the most ridiculous conclusions, then publish said conclusions as the title of their laughworthy articles. It’s basically just the following exchange happening over and over:<br/><br/><strong>Bill:</strong> <em>I think people should be allowed to interact with who they want and businesses should have the right to run their business according to their beliefs, without the government forcing them to do stuff. This includes protecting religious beliefs from government interference.</em><br/><br/><strong>Idiots:</strong> <em>So you want gay people to die? Republicans want gay people do die!? Hey everyone, look at this bill that literally says that EMTs are allowed to let gay people die!!!!!</em><br/><br/>Pure clickbait. Do people really think an EMT is going to let a gay person die just because a bill says they’re allowed to withhold treatment? They’d be pretty stupid to risk that much exposure and criticism. I’m pretty sure most EMTs don’t want to risk losing their job for refusing to help a victim. <br/><br/>I mean really, EMTs and the people in charge of them don’t want the hassle and public outrage that would arise as a result of bigoted discriminations. They have a reputation to protect. Not to mention the fact that emergency workers get into the field because, I don’t know, maybe they want to help people?<br/><br/>Waiters may not like certain customers but they grin and bear it anyway or else they risk losing their job and the restaurant would risk losing business. If the customer was that bad, then people would side with the restaurant. If the waiter was the one handling it badly, then people would side with the customer. <em><strong>It’s. Literally. That. Simple.</strong></em><br/><br/>Also, the bill they’re citing is related to one passed in 1993 by Bill Clinton, a <em><strong>Democrat</strong></em>. The bill was introduced by Chuck Schumer, a<em><strong> Democrat</strong></em>. So much for the big bad Republicans. Stop and think for a while before falling for the most basic stuff. Also, a quick <a href="http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Michigan+EMT+Snopes">Google search</a> really isn’t that hard. </p> </blockquote> <p>^^</p> </blockquote> <p>Reposted for comments above not the liberal drivel in the article….</p> </blockquote> <p>I love it when I don’t have to write a refutation because someone else already has.</p> </blockquote>
Save