earn
earn

earn

choose
choose

choose

ethical
ethical

ethical

yours
yours

yours

work ethic
work ethic

work ethic

their
their

their

dieing
dieing

dieing

same
same

same

earned
earned

earned

homes
homes

homes

🔥 | Latest

Alive, Animals, and Cats: Meg OVeganMegane Vegans who feed their pets meat: u guys have gotta see the bigger picture. We shouldn't support animal exploitation w/ our money That's it. 7/13/16, 10:50 PM aer @thelilmermade @VeganMegane yes um so how would I feed my cat? 7/13/16, 11:02 PM lI VIEW TWEET ACTIVITY Meg @VeganMegane @thelilmermade is your cat male or 7m female? :) check out this website for more info: vegancats.com/ veganfaq.php Meg @VeganMegane @thelilmermade I know you want to best for your companion, and I won't deny that there are risks, but you can minimise those risks! 5m someoneintheshadow456: nautica-the-savant: marbledmartin: thegrumpymathematician: nunyabizni: sarcasmsuitsme: skypig357: iswearimnotnaked: hi hello CATS!!!! CANNOT!!!! BE VEGAN!!!!! i cannot believe i have to fucking say this. dogs are omnivore and IF YOUR VET APPROVES your pooch MAY be able to go on an APPROVED(!!!!!) commercial vegan dog food like the brand “v-dog” which has all the essential vitamins, protein, etc. (the oldest record winning dogs have been vegan) cats are CARNIVORE and cannot fucking live on a vegan diet. a vet would laugh in your face and probably find some way to have your pet taken away from you because you’re obviously not fit to have an animal if you think you can feed a cat a diet based on your own ethics i’m vegan but this is so fucking harmful. it’s about minimizing your harm, not putting your animals on risky diets in an attempt to be perfect. DON’T FUCKING DO THIS TO YOUR PETS Idiot people If you see someone you know doing this, report them for animal cruelty and neglect. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This posts, and many of the notes on it, are bothering me. Ladies, gentlemen, esteemed colleagues from outside the confines of the gender binary; gather ‘round. Let’s throw some science in this joint. 1. Humans. Humans are not cats. Humans are not dogs. One would think this obvious, but people have a tendency to attempt such interspecies comparisons when discussing diet. Humans are order omnivora; we have essentially evolved in a manner that attempts to give us as much dietary flexibility as possible. We do, however, require a substance called B12 (or cobalamin), which is extremely important for brain and nervous system functions, as well as the synthesis of DNA and the construction of red blood cells. We cannot produce this vitamin ourselves–no animal, plant, or fungus can. The enzymes used in cobalamin production are essentially unique to bacteria and archaea–some species of which hang out in the digestive tracks of other animals. We get cobalamin in a roundabout way from fish, shellfish, meat, eggs, milk, and dairy products. While there is no naturally-occurring, vegan source of the vitamin that has been demonstrated effective in a human study of statistically significant sample size, effective synthetic forms do exist and can be used as a substitute.  Cyanocobalamin is one of the most common and is frequently found in fortified foods and vitamins. In short: Humans are omnivores. Humans have evolved for dietary flexibility, including viable vegetarianism. Humans did not evolve for veganism (be extremely suspicious of people who tell you that we did, as they are lying), but due to modern technologies, veganism is also a viable diet that humans can thrive on, should they so choose. 2. Cats. Cats are order carnivora. Cats require (amongst other things) an amino acid called taurine. We’re not quite sure how, exactly, but we know that it’s extremely important to feline heart wall tissue, retinal tissue, and brain tissue amongst other things. Cats cannot manufacture their own taurine, and must get it from other sources–primarily shellfish, fish and meat. Taurine breaks down when heated, so feeding your cat a home-cooked diet rich in this foods is also not necessarily a good idea (talk to a vet). Secondary (read: SUPPLEMENTARY. NOT A SOLE SOURCE OF TAURINE.) sources of taurine for cats include dairy, eggs, and seaweed- or yeast-based taurine supplements. In nature, cats don’t really need to worry about getting enough taurine, because (as you may have noticed), taurine sources are indeed the things that cats tend to catch and eat. However, a cat that lives in a human household is dependent on humans for food, and sometimes humans are utter fucktrucks. In short: Cats are obligate carnivores. Their primary source of nutrition is meat. They must eat meat, preferably as close to raw as possible. They have digestive tracks designed for digesting meat. There are vegan/vegetarian cat kibbles on the market. Do not buy them. Your cat is neither vegan nor vegetarian, and if you adjust their diet as if they were, you are a terrible person who is harming and possibly killing your pet. You suck. End of discussion. 3. Dogs. Dogs are slightly more nuanced here. They are facultative carnivores–meaning that they optimally should eat meat, but can survive on other things if resources are scare. Dogs also need the amino acid taurine, but can technically manufacture it themselves if the proper building blocks are in their diets. They also need vitamin D–D3 is preferable, but D2 can be used to some degree. Dogs are somewhere between us (the true omnivore) and the cat (the true carnivore). A vegan or vegetarian diet will keep a dog alive, certainly, but is unlikely to allow your pet to thrive as it lacks the recommended nutrients. You should probably be feeding your dog meat. The exception here–some dogs are allergic to conventional dog foods, or find symptoms of certain diseases alleviated by vegetarianism. In this case, a veterinarian (not you, layperson, I mean an actual trained veterinarian) may determine that the benefits of putting your dog on a vegetarian/vegan diet outweigh those of feeding your dog meat. This is relatively rare, but does occasionally happen. And no, actually, the oldest dog is not vegan–Bramble is the only dog on this list that I found had some indication of veganism. The oldest dog on record is an Australian Kelpie named Maggie, who was not vegan. It is more likely that Bramble lived that long despite the veganism, not because of it. In short: If a vet thinks that your dog may be allergic to dog food/require a special diet and recommends you try feeding it a vegetarian/vegan diet, listen to your vet. Otherwise? Dogs are carnivora. They do need vegetables and other sources of nutrients, but their optimal fuel, as it were, is meat. Your dog needs meat to be happy. Fucking feed your dog.  Now, I did manage to find two veterinarians who disagree with every other study I dug up and the American Veterinary Medical Association. Their articles are here and here. They don’t really have sources, and are essentially wholly dependent on anecdotal evidence (“my dog is a vegetarian and hasn’t died!”), but for those of you data cherry-pickers reading this, there you go.  As a rule, dogs and cats need meat. If that makes you uncomfortable, that is your problem, not theirs. If you try to implement a vegan or vegetarian diet for your pets because you implemented one for yourself, you shouldn’t have those pets. That is animal abuse. (By the way, those of you not feeding your cats and non-allergic dogs the food they need to survive and thrive? What the fuck is wrong with you? Do you not love your pets?) TL;DR If you do not want a pet that must be fed meat, you should under no circumstances acquire a cat or a dog. Thank you for your time. Rebloobing for the more detailed info on B12 and obligate carnivore vs true omnivores Always reblog. Dear Vegans, If you’re not willing to at least feed your dogs and cats commercial food, get a rabbit or a parrot.
Alive, Animals, and Cats: Meg
 OVeganMegane
 Vegans who feed their pets meat:
 u guys have gotta see the bigger
 picture. We shouldn't support
 animal exploitation w/ our money
 That's it.
 7/13/16, 10:50 PM

 aer
 @thelilmermade
 @VeganMegane yes um so how
 would I feed my cat?
 7/13/16, 11:02 PM
 lI VIEW TWEET ACTIVITY
 Meg @VeganMegane
 @thelilmermade is your cat male or
 7m
 female? :) check out this website for
 more info: vegancats.com/
 veganfaq.php

 Meg @VeganMegane
 @thelilmermade I know you want to
 best for your companion, and I
 won't deny that there are risks, but
 you can minimise those risks!
 5m
someoneintheshadow456:

nautica-the-savant:

marbledmartin:

thegrumpymathematician:

nunyabizni:

sarcasmsuitsme:

skypig357:

iswearimnotnaked:

hi hello CATS!!!! CANNOT!!!! BE VEGAN!!!!! 

i cannot believe i have to fucking say this. 

dogs are omnivore and IF YOUR VET APPROVES your pooch MAY be able to go on an APPROVED(!!!!!) commercial vegan dog food like the brand “v-dog” which has all the essential vitamins, protein, etc. (the oldest record winning dogs have been vegan) 

cats are CARNIVORE and cannot fucking live on a vegan diet. a vet would laugh in your face and probably find some way to have your pet taken away from you because you’re obviously not fit to have an animal if you think you can feed a cat a diet based on your own ethics 

i’m vegan but this is so fucking harmful. 

it’s about minimizing your harm, not putting your animals on risky diets in an attempt to be perfect. 

DON’T FUCKING DO THIS TO YOUR PETS

Idiot people

If you see someone you know doing this, report them for animal cruelty and neglect.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


This posts, and many of the notes on it, are bothering me. Ladies, gentlemen, esteemed colleagues from outside the confines of the gender binary; gather ‘round. Let’s throw some science in this joint.
1. Humans. Humans are not cats. Humans are not dogs. One would think this obvious, but people have a tendency to attempt such interspecies comparisons when discussing diet. Humans are order omnivora; we have essentially evolved in a manner that attempts to give us as much dietary flexibility as possible. We do, however, require a substance called B12 (or cobalamin), which is extremely important for brain and nervous system functions, as well as the synthesis of DNA and the construction of red blood cells. We cannot produce this vitamin ourselves–no animal, plant, or fungus can. The enzymes used in cobalamin production are essentially unique to bacteria and archaea–some species of which hang out in the digestive tracks of other animals. We get cobalamin in a roundabout way from fish, shellfish, meat, eggs, milk, and dairy products. While there is no naturally-occurring, vegan source of the vitamin that has been demonstrated effective in a human study of statistically significant sample size, effective synthetic forms do exist and can be used as a substitute.  Cyanocobalamin is one of the most common and is frequently found in fortified foods and vitamins. In short: Humans are omnivores. Humans have evolved for dietary flexibility, including viable vegetarianism. Humans did not evolve for veganism (be extremely suspicious of people who tell you that we did, as they are lying), but due to modern technologies, veganism is also a viable diet that humans can thrive on, should they so choose.
2. Cats. Cats are order carnivora. Cats require (amongst other things) an amino acid called taurine. We’re not quite sure how, exactly, but we know that it’s extremely important to feline heart wall tissue, retinal tissue, and brain tissue amongst other things. Cats cannot manufacture their own taurine, and must get it from other sources–primarily shellfish, fish and meat. Taurine breaks down when heated, so feeding your cat a home-cooked diet rich in this foods is also not necessarily a good idea (talk to a vet). Secondary (read: SUPPLEMENTARY. NOT A SOLE SOURCE OF TAURINE.) sources of taurine for cats include dairy, eggs, and seaweed- or yeast-based taurine supplements. In nature, cats don’t really need to worry about getting enough taurine, because (as you may have noticed), taurine sources are indeed the things that cats tend to catch and eat. However, a cat that lives in a human household is dependent on humans for food, and sometimes humans are utter fucktrucks. In short: Cats are obligate carnivores. Their primary source of nutrition is meat. They must eat meat, preferably as close to raw as possible. They have digestive tracks designed for digesting meat. There are vegan/vegetarian cat kibbles on the market. Do not buy them. Your cat is neither vegan nor vegetarian, and if you adjust their diet as if they were, you are a terrible person who is harming and possibly killing your pet. You suck. End of discussion.
3. Dogs. Dogs are slightly more nuanced here. They are facultative carnivores–meaning that they optimally should eat meat, but can survive on other things if resources are scare. Dogs also need the amino acid taurine, but can technically manufacture it themselves if the proper building blocks are in their diets. They also need vitamin D–D3 is preferable, but D2 can be used to some degree. Dogs are somewhere between us (the true omnivore) and the cat (the true carnivore). A vegan or vegetarian diet will keep a dog alive, certainly, but is unlikely to allow your pet to thrive as it lacks the recommended nutrients. You should probably be feeding your dog meat. The exception here–some dogs are allergic to conventional dog foods, or find symptoms of certain diseases alleviated by vegetarianism. In this case, a veterinarian (not you, layperson, I mean an actual trained veterinarian) may determine that the benefits of putting your dog on a vegetarian/vegan diet outweigh those of feeding your dog meat. This is relatively rare, but does occasionally happen. And no, actually, the oldest dog is not vegan–Bramble is the only dog on this list that I found had some indication of veganism. The oldest dog on record is an Australian Kelpie named Maggie, who was not vegan. It is more likely that Bramble lived that long despite the veganism, not because of it. In short: If a vet thinks that your dog may be allergic to dog food/require a special diet and recommends you try feeding it a vegetarian/vegan diet, listen to your vet. Otherwise? Dogs are carnivora. They do need vegetables and other sources of nutrients, but their optimal fuel, as it were, is meat. Your dog needs meat to be happy. Fucking feed your dog. 
Now, I did manage to find two veterinarians who disagree with every other study I dug up and the American Veterinary Medical Association. Their articles are here and here. They don’t really have sources, and are essentially wholly dependent on anecdotal evidence (“my dog is a vegetarian and hasn’t died!”), but for those of you data cherry-pickers reading this, there you go. 
As a rule, dogs and cats need meat. If that makes you uncomfortable, that is your problem, not theirs. If you try to implement a vegan or vegetarian diet for your pets because you implemented one for yourself, you shouldn’t have those pets. That is animal abuse. (By the way, those of you not feeding your cats and non-allergic dogs the food they need to survive and thrive? What the fuck is wrong with you? Do you not love your pets?)
TL;DR If you do not want a pet that must be fed meat, you should under no circumstances acquire a cat or a dog. Thank you for your time.

Rebloobing for the more detailed info on B12 and obligate carnivore vs true omnivores


Always reblog. 

Dear Vegans,
If you’re not willing to at least feed your dogs and cats commercial food, get a rabbit or a parrot.

someoneintheshadow456: nautica-the-savant: marbledmartin: thegrumpymathematician: nunyabizni: sarcasmsuitsme: skypig357: iswearimnotn...

Being Alone, America, and Click: Jason Fuller, Contributor Working to bring about the best in America, both on-line and off. Impeachment Is No Longer Enough; Donald Trump Must Face Justice Impeachment and removal from office are only the first steps; for treason and-if convicted in a court of law-executed. 06/11/2017 10:39 pm ET for America to be redeemed, Donald Trump must be prosecuted Donald Trump has been President of the United States for just shy of six months now. I think that most of us among the electorate knew that his presidency would be a relative disaster, but I am not sure how many among us expected the catastrophe our nation now faces. friendly-neighborhood-patriarch: hominishostilis: abstractandedgyname: siryouarebeingmocked: mississpithy: bogleech: notyourmoderate: angrybell: thinksquad: http://archive.is/5VvI5 Huffpo, everybody. Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Or is the HuffPo just publishing outright fantasies? God dammit, I’m now in the position of defending Huffington. I didn’t want to be here. Okay, @angrybell … actually, @ literally everyone who reblogged this uncritically as a tacit endorsement and agreement. Such as @the-critical-feminist that I reblog this from.My first question has to be: are you serious? Don’t read that with a tone, don’t read that as an attack. That’s my first question: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Are you asking a sincere question or is this the sort of rhetoric that doesn’t translate well into text? And, if you are actually asking this question, are ou going to hear the answer or are you going to immediately start concocting your counter-argument because you just know in your heart that anyone who disagrees with you must be wrong, so you start formulating a plan to prove them wrong before you actually hear what they have to say?Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets and simply believe that the author’s reasoning does not hold up for whatever reasons you have chosen not to state, and you believe their source information is falsified for whatever reason you have chosen not to state, I will move on. After I have given you and yours every conceivable benefit of the doubt and every charitable assumption. Because if the article itself doesn’t convince you, there’s the fact that Donald Trump has broken literally every federal law against corruption and conflict of interest. Not one or two, not most, not all but a few. Literally every single law we have against corruption, from the Constitution to the informal guidelines circulated as a memo from the White House ethics scholars. He’s broken literally every one of those rules. He’s openly traded favors for money and favors for months now. Hell, that Chinese influence-peddler that paid him off for sixteen million dollars should have been enough to get him convicted of treason. Sharing code-word level classified information with a government on the opposite side of an ongoing military conflict isn’t *necessarily* treason, unless the information was part of a share program with an allied nation and wasn’t his to distribute. That’s aiding a foreign aggressor at the expense of a military ally, and that’s treason. Giving aid and comfort to enemies of the nation. Obstruction of justice is pretty clear-cut, that’s an impeachment, except that the justice in question is also a matter of national security, so that’s treason. Again. Defaming the former president? Misdemeanor, impeachable. The way he drags his heels nominating posts in Justice and State could be prosecuted as dereliction of duty. If he has tapes of Comey, he’s on the hook for contempt, if he doesn’t then he’s on the hook for witness tampering. Hell, deleting the covfefe tweet is destroying federal records, which is a misdemeanor, and impeachable. The man doesn’t go a week without bringing on an impeachable offense. Strictly speaking, every time he goes to Mar-A-Lago he’s committing grand larceny by fraud, because he’s taking millions of dollars of American funds for his own benefit, after promising not to do that. There are dozens, hundreds maybe, of impeachable offenses already in this 140 days, “high crimes and misdemeanors”. Actual counts of treason, punishable by death by hanging, is probably only five or six counts. Only five or six counts of high treason by our sitting president. His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job. Trump’s supporters probably believe he’s done nothing impeachable or treasonous because they spent eight years claiming on no grounds whatsoever that Obama was impeachable and treasonous, just because they didn’t like him. They now probably convince themselves that these facts about Trump are as fake as their Obama theories and they’ve ruined the gravity of these terms for themselves. “ His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job. “ I like how Bogleech doesn’t know many Trump supporters are former Obama supporters. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/04/us/obama-trump-swing-voters.html https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/16/17980820/trump-obama-2016-race-racism-class-economy-2018-midterm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama-Trump_voters It’s not even a secret. But why am I not surprised bogleech - that intellectual titan - failed to do basic research? And last time I checked, no nation required their politicans to be perfect. Which is what NYM is asking for with that quote; perfection. That’s what ‘above reproach’ means. An impossible standard, considering people “reproach” Trump for feeding fish wrong, for his skin color, for any and every little thing, even if they have to twist reality into a pretzel to do it. In fact, I’ve seen people take pictures of kids in cages from 2014, and blame Trump for it. So this: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Is a question of this: Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Seems you missed the part that says “merits this”. Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? (The underlined is in the subtitle, not the headline.) Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets… Context? Central tenets? Do you not know how highlighting works? You don’t need to know the context, or any other point, when you’re indicating a specific, explicit, and isolated quality. The subtitle called for Trump’s execution, we’re 5 paragraphs in and you haven’t even acknowledged that part yet. Or at all, I’m guessing, because I’m not reading further. You keep talking around it. You accuse others, preemptively, of not hearing the answer and pre-”concocting” a response, and yet you’re waffling on about shit around the one, sole, isolated thing that was indicated in the first place. This isn’t about ignoring context, this is about criticising one thing. Which is a thing people are allowed to do, by the way, just because people criticise one thing, doesn’t mean they’re criticising everything about the everyone involved, and everything said before, adjacent to, and after that one thing, and therefore are required to include all of those things in their consideration and assessment of this one thing. The specific criticism of the indicated quality is the advocation of Trump’s execution. That’s it. No context is needed to understand that this is what was said, especially since that which was said, which is being criticised, is explicit. No amount of, “So, click-bait subtitle that you don’t see until you’ve already clicked on the article link out of the way, here’s what I actually meant when I said I wanted this person tried and executed,” could excuse the use of that language, let alone actually believing in it. It’s like… it’s like if someone makes a typo, someone else is like, “Oh, seems you made a typo,” you’d jump in like, “But what about they’re perfectly reasonable spelling everywhere else? Hm? Forced to ignore contextual perfect spelling I see. They’re lack of typos everywhere else explains this typo, and vindicates it”. You and what’s his face, James, fuckin ReasonAndEmpathy or whatever now, y’all keep saying “but what of the context?” when the criterion of criticism is isolated, atomic, specific, and/or explicit. No amount of context invalidates the very specific, singular words explicitly spoken. “Sure he called for Trump to be executed, but he explains himself.” Fucking and? When did the death sentence become ok? When did that happen? Moderates are ok with the death sentence now? Aight, weird. Man this fucking post aged like fine wine, take a SIP Delicious This was quite a ride
Being Alone, America, and Click: Jason Fuller, Contributor
 Working to bring about the best in America, both on-line and off.
 Impeachment Is No Longer Enough;
 Donald Trump Must Face Justice
 Impeachment and removal from office are only the first steps;
 for treason and-if convicted in a court of law-executed.
 06/11/2017 10:39 pm ET
 for America to be redeemed, Donald Trump must be prosecuted
 Donald Trump has been President of the United States for just shy of six months now. I
 think that most of us among the electorate knew that his presidency would be a relative
 disaster, but I am not sure how many among us expected the catastrophe our nation now
 faces.
friendly-neighborhood-patriarch:

hominishostilis:

abstractandedgyname:
siryouarebeingmocked:

mississpithy:

bogleech:

notyourmoderate:

angrybell:

thinksquad:


http://archive.is/5VvI5


Huffpo, everybody. 




Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Or is the HuffPo just publishing outright fantasies?

God dammit, I’m now in the position of defending Huffington. I didn’t want to be here. Okay, @angrybell … actually, @ literally everyone who reblogged this uncritically as a tacit endorsement and agreement. Such as @the-critical-feminist that I reblog this from.My first question has to be: are you serious? Don’t read that with a tone, don’t read that as an attack. That’s my first question: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Are you asking a sincere question or is this the sort of rhetoric that doesn’t translate well into text? And, if you are actually asking this question, are ou going to hear the answer or are you going to immediately start concocting your counter-argument because you just know in your heart that anyone who disagrees with you must be wrong, so you start formulating a plan to prove them wrong before you actually hear what they have to say?Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets and simply believe that the author’s reasoning does not hold up for whatever reasons you have chosen not to state, and you believe their source information is falsified for whatever reason you have chosen not to state, I will move on. After I have given you and yours every conceivable benefit of the doubt and every charitable assumption. Because if the article itself doesn’t convince you, there’s the fact that Donald Trump has broken literally every federal law against corruption and conflict of interest. Not one or two, not most, not all but a few. Literally every single law we have against corruption, from the Constitution to the informal guidelines circulated as a memo from the White House ethics scholars. He’s broken literally every one of those rules. He’s openly traded favors for money and favors for months now. Hell, that Chinese influence-peddler that paid him off for sixteen million dollars should have been enough to get him convicted of treason. Sharing code-word level classified information with a government on the opposite side of an ongoing military conflict isn’t *necessarily* treason, unless the information was part of a share program with an allied nation and wasn’t his to distribute. That’s aiding a foreign aggressor at the expense of a military ally, and that’s treason. Giving aid and comfort to enemies of the nation. Obstruction of justice is pretty clear-cut, that’s an impeachment, except that the justice in question is also a matter of national security, so that’s treason. Again. Defaming the former president? Misdemeanor, impeachable. The way he drags his heels nominating posts in Justice and State could be prosecuted as dereliction of duty. If he has tapes of Comey, he’s on the hook for contempt, if he doesn’t then he’s on the hook for witness tampering. Hell, deleting the covfefe tweet is destroying federal records, which is a misdemeanor, and impeachable. The man doesn’t go a week without bringing on an impeachable offense. Strictly speaking, every time he goes to Mar-A-Lago he’s committing grand larceny by fraud, because he’s taking millions of dollars of American funds for his own benefit, after promising not to do that. There are dozens, hundreds maybe, of impeachable offenses already in this 140 days, “high crimes and misdemeanors”. Actual counts of treason, punishable by death by hanging, is probably only five or six counts. Only five or six counts of high treason by our sitting president. His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job. 

Trump’s supporters probably believe he’s done nothing impeachable or treasonous because they spent eight years claiming on no grounds whatsoever that Obama was impeachable and treasonous, just because they didn’t like him. They now probably convince themselves that these facts about Trump are as fake as their Obama theories and they’ve ruined the gravity of these terms for themselves.





“

His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job.


“






I like how Bogleech doesn’t know many Trump supporters are former Obama supporters.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/04/us/obama-trump-swing-voters.html
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/16/17980820/trump-obama-2016-race-racism-class-economy-2018-midterm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama-Trump_voters
It’s not even a secret. But why am I not surprised bogleech - that intellectual titan - failed to do basic research?
And last time I checked, no nation required their politicans to be perfect. Which is what NYM is asking for with that quote; perfection. That’s what ‘above reproach’ means. An impossible standard, considering people “reproach” Trump for feeding fish wrong, for his skin color, for any and every little thing, even if they have to twist reality into a pretzel to do it. In fact, I’ve seen people take pictures of kids in cages from 2014, and blame Trump for it.

So this:


Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated?


Is a question of this:


Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this?


Seems you missed the part that says “merits this”.


Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? 


(The underlined is in the subtitle, not the headline.)


Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets…
Context? Central tenets? Do you not know how highlighting works? You don’t need to know the context, or any other point, when you’re indicating a specific, explicit, and isolated quality.
The subtitle called for Trump’s execution, we’re 5 paragraphs in and you haven’t even acknowledged that part yet. Or at all, I’m guessing, because I’m not reading further. You keep talking around it. You accuse others, preemptively, of not hearing the answer and pre-”concocting” a response, and yet you’re waffling on about shit around the one, sole, isolated thing that was indicated in the first place.
This isn’t about ignoring context, this is about criticising one thing. Which is a thing people are allowed to do, by the way, just because people criticise one thing, doesn’t mean they’re criticising everything about the everyone involved, and everything said before, adjacent to, and after that one thing, and therefore are required to include all of those things in their consideration and assessment of this one thing.
The specific criticism of the indicated quality is the advocation of Trump’s execution. That’s it. No context is needed to understand that this is what was said, especially since that which was said, which is being criticised, is explicit. No amount of, “So, click-bait subtitle that you don’t see until you’ve already clicked on the article link out of the way, here’s what I actually meant when I said I wanted this person tried and executed,” could excuse the use of that language, let alone actually believing in it.
It’s like… it’s like if someone makes a typo, someone else is like, “Oh, seems you made a typo,” you’d jump in like, “But what about they’re perfectly reasonable spelling everywhere else? Hm? Forced to ignore contextual perfect spelling I see. They’re lack of typos everywhere else explains this typo, and vindicates it”.
You and what’s his face, James, fuckin ReasonAndEmpathy or whatever now, y’all keep saying “but what of the context?” when the criterion of criticism is isolated, atomic, specific, and/or explicit. No amount of context invalidates the very specific, singular words explicitly spoken. “Sure he called for Trump to be executed, but he explains himself.” Fucking and? When did the death sentence become ok? When did that happen? Moderates are ok with the death sentence now? Aight, weird.


Man this fucking post aged like fine wine, take a SIP 

Delicious

This was quite a ride

friendly-neighborhood-patriarch: hominishostilis: abstractandedgyname: siryouarebeingmocked: mississpithy: bogleech: notyourmoderate: ...

Alive, Animals, and Children: (Ja)ded @thefathippy 20h maooo000 Judy Harris Yesterday at 5:04 PM. 0+ Why the zoo charge us to look at animals they stole? this ain't even yall shit Sharon @MySharona1987 Replying to @thefathippy To be fair, they are doing a lot to help pandas screw. 4:56 AM- 11 Jul 2018 mysharona1987: little-butch-crouton: severelynerdysheep: somehavegonemissing: spookyboyfelix: princess-nakamoto: mysharona1987: No, seriously: I do think zoos do a *lot* of good. Much of the time. It’s not necessarily a Seaworld situation. Yeah a lot of animals don’t even have habitats anymore anyway. So zoos are just giving them a home. Even if people come to see them nearly everyday, its better then being kicked out of their habitat eventually by man. The funds from zoos are often used to feed the animals anyway (most zoos are non profit they cant use that money for people) if you pay to go to the zoo you are paying to keep those animals alive Zoos also educate people about animals, allowing for people to fall in love with the weird and wonderful. They help promote habitat preservation and putting a stop to poaching. Please don’t dismiss zoos, they’re not the same places as they used to be in the 1800s, or even the mid 1900s. So while Zoos are absolutely miles better than they were historical, there are still many serious issues. In terms of education, while I totally get why most people believe that zoos teach people (children especially) about how to protect animals and their habitats and are great places of education, this is not actually the case. In reality viewing captive animals in zoos only teaches people how animals react to boredom, depression, and stress in captive situations. The most effective methods of education in zoos come via presenting videos, documentaries, interactive modules, graphic displays, and computer simulations. which all show animals in their natural environments and do not require any animals to actually be kept in zoos. In terms of the work Zoos to in regards to species conservation and habitat preservation, zoos really are not effective, especially compared to other conservation and preservation work. While there are zoos that do good conservation work, most of the significant conservation work is not from zoos but other organizations that work with wildlife and natural habitats. Most animals in captivity are not even classified as endangered, with the priority of Zoos being in getting hold of animals popular with visitors, rather than those who face extinction. When it comes to breeding programs (and breeding animals in captivity aren’t the best way to help in conservation)   zoos do spend plenty of money on these programs however half of the animals being bred by Zoos are not classed as endangered in the wild and 25% are not threatened species but ones popular with visitors. It’s also actually massively more expensive to keep animals captive in zoos than to protect equivalent numbers of them in the wild! When it comes to the research, few Zoos actually support meaningful scientific research (with fewer employing scientists with full-time research jobs) and of those that do employ scientists its common for these scientists to study free-living animals rather than those within the zoo. Due to the nature of any research that does take place in zoos, the results of this research also generates little information about how to best conserve species in the wild as studies of captive animals have limited benefits to animals in the wild and animals brought up in captivity are less likely to survive in the wild if reintroduced as they often don’t have the natural behaviors needed for survival in the wild. More effective methods of habitat preservation and species conservations would be a multipronged approach tackling habitat loss and climate change, investing in conservation programs in the wild, education, working with local communities, seriously addressing poaching etc. and also to move away from the Zoo model towards more ethical and effective models of species conservation.  Just a few of the other ethical issues with Zoos include surplus animals, who, when grow older, and are less attractive to patrons, will often be sold or killed. Animals who breed frequently also are sometimes sold to game farms and ranches where hunters pay to kill them and other surplus animals are sometimes sold to roadside zoos,, private individuals, animal dealers, or to laboratories for experimentation purposes. The animals not sold often end up being fed to other zoo animals. In terms of the health of these captive animals, many develop health conditions and mental health problems such as Zoochosis. Of course, a major problem with zoos as well is that the animals who live there are kept in enclosures that don’t allow them to live their lives in a natural way and don’t compare with the natural habitat the animals were meant to be in. Zoo animals have to spend day after day, week after week, year after year in the exact same enclosure. This makes their lives very monotonous. Take elephants, for example, elephants in the wild, are used to traveling many miles a day in herds of about ten related adults and their offspring but in zoos are usually kept in pairs or even isolated in incredibly small enclosures compared to what they are used to in the wild. Elephants kept in zoos often show many signs of being mental distress and the average lifespan of elephants in zoos is around 16-18 years, instead of the 50-70 years they can live in the wild. I’m just going to copy paste your response when people ask me what I’m going to school for. I’m very pro zoo and I want animals in their natural habitat just as much. This is genuinely quite an interesting discussion.
Alive, Animals, and Children: (Ja)ded @thefathippy 20h
 maooo000
 Judy Harris
 Yesterday at 5:04 PM.
 0+
 Why the zoo charge us to
 look at animals they stole?
 this ain't even yall shit
 Sharon
 @MySharona1987
 Replying to @thefathippy
 To be fair, they are doing a lot to help pandas
 screw.
 4:56 AM- 11 Jul 2018
mysharona1987:

little-butch-crouton:
severelynerdysheep:

somehavegonemissing:

spookyboyfelix:

princess-nakamoto:


mysharona1987:


No, seriously: I do think zoos do a *lot* of good. Much of the time.
It’s not necessarily a Seaworld situation.


Yeah a lot of animals don’t even have habitats anymore anyway. So zoos are just giving them a home. Even if people come to see them nearly everyday, its better then being kicked out of their habitat eventually by man.


The funds from zoos are often used to feed the animals anyway (most zoos are non profit they cant use that money for people) if you pay to go to the zoo you are paying to keep those animals alive

Zoos also educate people about animals, allowing for people to fall in love with the weird and wonderful.  They help promote habitat preservation and putting a stop to poaching. Please don’t dismiss zoos, they’re not the same places as they used to be in the 1800s, or even the mid 1900s. 

So while Zoos are absolutely miles better than they were historical, there are still many serious issues. In terms of education, while I totally get why most people believe that zoos teach people (children especially) about how to protect animals and their habitats and are great places of education, this is not actually the case. In reality viewing captive animals in zoos only teaches people how animals react to boredom, depression, and stress in captive situations. The most effective methods of education in zoos come via presenting videos, documentaries, interactive modules, graphic displays, and computer simulations. which all show animals in their natural environments and do not require any animals to actually be kept in zoos.
In terms of the work Zoos to in regards to species conservation and habitat preservation, zoos really are not effective, especially compared to other conservation and preservation work. While there are zoos that do good conservation work, most of the significant conservation work is not from zoos but other organizations that work with wildlife and natural habitats. Most animals in captivity are not even classified as endangered, with the priority of Zoos being in getting hold of animals popular with visitors, rather than those who face extinction. When it comes to breeding programs (and breeding animals in captivity aren’t the best way to help in conservation)   zoos do spend plenty of money on these programs however half of the animals being bred by Zoos are not classed as endangered in the wild and 25% are not threatened species but ones popular with visitors. It’s also actually massively more expensive to keep animals captive in zoos than to protect equivalent numbers of them in the wild! When it comes to the research, few Zoos actually support meaningful scientific research (with fewer employing scientists with full-time research jobs) and of those that do employ scientists its common for these scientists to study free-living animals rather than those within the zoo. Due to the nature of any research that does take place in zoos, the results of this research also generates little information about how to best conserve species in the wild as studies of captive animals have limited benefits to animals in the wild and animals brought up in captivity are less likely to survive in the wild if reintroduced as they often don’t have the natural behaviors needed for survival in the wild. More effective methods of habitat preservation and species conservations would be a multipronged approach tackling habitat loss and climate change, investing in conservation programs in the wild, education, working with local communities, seriously addressing poaching etc. and also to move away from the Zoo model towards more ethical and effective models of species conservation. 
Just a few of the other ethical issues with Zoos include surplus animals, who, when grow older, and are less attractive to patrons, will often be sold or killed. Animals who breed frequently also are sometimes sold to game farms and ranches where hunters pay to kill them and other surplus animals are sometimes sold to roadside zoos,, private individuals, animal dealers, or to laboratories for experimentation purposes. The animals not sold often end up being fed to other zoo animals. In terms of the health of these captive animals, many develop health conditions and mental health problems such as Zoochosis. Of course, a major problem with zoos as well is that the animals who live there are kept in enclosures that don’t allow them to live their lives in a natural way and don’t compare with the natural habitat the animals were meant to be in. Zoo animals have to spend day after day, week after week, year after year in the exact same enclosure. This makes their lives very monotonous. Take elephants, for example, elephants in the wild, are used to traveling many miles a day in herds of about ten related adults and their offspring but in zoos are usually kept in pairs or even isolated in incredibly small enclosures compared to what they are used to in the wild. Elephants kept in zoos often show many signs of being mental distress and the average lifespan of elephants in zoos is around 16-18 years, instead of the 50-70 years they can live in the wild.


I’m just going to copy paste your response when people ask me what I’m going to school for. I’m very pro zoo and I want animals in their natural habitat just as much.

This is genuinely quite an interesting discussion.

mysharona1987: little-butch-crouton: severelynerdysheep: somehavegonemissing: spookyboyfelix: princess-nakamoto: mysharona1987: No, ...

Advice, Confused, and Disappointed: alexaloraetheris: Reasons I believe my friend is secretly some kind of deity 1) First time we spoke was a week after the beggining of freshman year she summed up my entire character and most of the events of my life Sherlock style. I asked her how the hell she knew all that. She just shrugged and said she figured out our entire class already 1 2) The one time we had religion class instead of ethics she listened to the teacher for a few minutes, laughed and told me "Humans have wished to be gods so much they've forgotten they have to ability to create them. Imagination has truly suffered from this monotheism stuff." I was confused and asked her if she was an atheist. She rolled her eyes and said Oh I believe in god alright. I just don't think the bastard deserves to be worshipped." 3) Out of nowhere she gave me this advice The only truth a liar ever told was that lies weren't going to save you. Don't become the liar who has to pass that wisdom on, because they speak from experience 4) To this day, she has one of those old-timey phones with buttons she only uses to ocassionally call someone. When I asked her why she never got a smartphone she got pouty: "I hate social media. On Facebook they talk a lot but never say anything. If I wanted to listen to people moan about their problems and ask for help they don't expect l'd listen to their prayers." (Notice the choice of words) 5) I noticed she was stiff and I offered her a massage since I'm really good at it but when i started kneading her back I swear to this day those were not muscles I felt. I asked her what she did to turn her muscles into rocks covered with a thin layer of skin and she kinda froze then shrugged and said she was just really, really stiff. My hands hurt after ten minutes when I can usually go for an hour. Next time I offered she seemed surprised and laughed. She still has rocks for muscles 6) We were having a debate over the way neural pathways are formed (I study biology and she forensics) and I jokingly asked if I could have her brain for study when she dies. She laughed Sure, if you find a way to kill me you can have it. I'm actually curious what you're gonna find." 7) One time she was tired and miserable and I tried to comfort her. We both have really dark sense of humor so I told her she could scare the dead out of their graves with that glare. She told me the dead can't come back and I rolled my eyes and said 'obviously' but she continued When you die you descend to the underworld with nothing to lose. To keep you, they give you something to lose. When you want to return, they will demand it back. That's why nobody ever leaves. The only way out is to never enter." 8) One day she just came up to me with a disappointed look on her face When I asked her what was wrong she was quiet for a few seconds and then just told me "Betrayals committed in good intentions are still damning. Just... keep that in mind." Then she left and didn't speak to me for three days. I still don't know what she meant but even three years later I haven't forgotten it. 9) We were casually sitting on a bench when, out of nowhere, she asked me Is it just me or have humans gotten dumber? Or have they always been this stupid and I just haven't been paying attention?" 10) She asked me if I ever wondered what it was like to die. I said no but told her I would tell her when I found out. I meant it as a ghost joke but she smiled at me and said Great. I'll wait for you to come back. Maybe you'll even remember me In conclusion, she is some kind of low-key god and she lost her faith in humanity even before we lost our faith in her but she's stuck with us because immortality is a bitclh P.S. I just remembered her name is a variation on 'Eve'. Maybe l should reconsider my atheist status?! What if God was one of us?
Advice, Confused, and Disappointed: alexaloraetheris:
 Reasons I believe my friend is secretly some kind of deity
 1) First time we spoke was a week after the beggining of freshman year she
 summed up my entire character and most of the events of my life Sherlock
 style. I asked her how the hell she knew all that. She just shrugged and said
 she figured out our entire class already
 1
 2) The one time we had religion class instead of ethics she listened to the
 teacher for a few minutes, laughed and told me
 "Humans have wished to be gods so much they've forgotten they have to
 ability to create them. Imagination has truly suffered from this monotheism
 stuff."
 I was confused and asked her if she was an atheist. She rolled her eyes and
 said
 Oh I believe in god alright. I just don't think the bastard deserves to be
 worshipped."
 3) Out of nowhere she gave me this advice
 The only truth a liar ever told was that lies weren't going to save you. Don't
 become the liar who has to pass that wisdom on, because they speak from
 experience
 4) To this day, she has one of those old-timey phones with buttons she only
 uses to ocassionally call someone. When I asked her why she never got a
 smartphone she got pouty:
 "I hate social media. On Facebook they talk a lot but never say anything. If I
 wanted to listen to people moan about their problems and ask for help they
 don't expect l'd listen to their prayers." (Notice the choice of words)
 5) I noticed she was stiff and I offered her a massage since I'm really good at
 it but when i started kneading her back I swear to this day those were not
 muscles I felt. I asked her what she did to turn her muscles into rocks
 covered with a thin layer of skin and she kinda froze then shrugged and said
 she was just really, really stiff. My hands hurt after ten minutes when I can
 usually go for an hour. Next time I offered she seemed surprised and
 laughed. She still has rocks for muscles
 6) We were having a debate over the way neural pathways are formed (I
 study biology and she forensics) and I jokingly asked if I could have her brain
 for study when she dies. She laughed
 Sure, if you find a way to kill me you can have it. I'm actually curious what
 you're gonna find."
 7) One time she was tired and miserable and I tried to comfort her. We both
 have really dark sense of humor so I told her she could scare the dead out of
 their graves with that glare. She told me the dead can't come back and I
 rolled my eyes and said 'obviously' but she continued
 When you die you descend to the underworld with nothing to lose. To keep
 you, they give you something to lose. When you want to return, they will
 demand it back. That's why nobody ever leaves. The only way out is to never
 enter."
 8) One day she just came up to me with a disappointed look on her face
 When I asked her what was wrong she was quiet for a few seconds and then
 just told me
 "Betrayals committed in good intentions are still damning. Just... keep that in
 mind." Then she left and didn't speak to me for three days. I still don't know
 what she meant but even three years later I haven't forgotten it.
 9) We were casually sitting on a bench when, out of nowhere, she asked me
 Is it just me or have humans gotten dumber? Or have they always been this
 stupid and I just haven't been paying attention?"
 10) She asked me if I ever wondered what it was like to die. I said no but told
 her I would tell her when I found out. I meant it as a ghost joke but she smiled
 at me and said
 Great. I'll wait for you to come back. Maybe you'll even remember me
 In conclusion, she is some kind of low-key god and she lost her faith in
 humanity even before we lost our faith in her but she's stuck with us because
 immortality is a bitclh
 P.S. I just remembered her name is a variation on 'Eve'. Maybe l should
 reconsider my atheist status?!
What if God was one of us?

What if God was one of us?

Community, Doctor, and Tumblr: Don't gag my doctor Don't block my health care #NoGagRule Gag rule (n.) A dangerous Trump-Pence policy that prevents doctors, nurses, and other providers from counseling, referring, providing, or even mentioning abortion by taking away their Title X funds if they do. Designed to block millions of patients from care and unbiased information at Planned Parenthood health centers. #NOGăą Rule #NoGağRule #NoGağRule #NoGa Rule plannedparenthood: A proposed Trump/Pence policy is attempting to take away your basic rights. We have until July 31 to submit comments against this gag rule that violates medical ethics. The gag rule would: Impose new rules designed to make it impossible for millions of patients to get birth control or preventive care from Planned Parenthood.Under this rule, doctors, nurses, hospitals, and community health centers across the country would no longer be able to refer their patients for safe, legal abortion.Remove the guarantee that you’re getting full and accurate information about your health care from your doctor. For nearly two decades, Title X law has been clear: Health care providers cannot withhold information from you about your pregnancy options. This rule means they can.Delete the requirement that contraception provided be medically approved, and no longer directs providers to ensure you have access to the full range of birth control.We have a chance to stop this rule, but we need your help
Community, Doctor, and Tumblr: Don't gag my doctor
 Don't block my health care
 #NoGagRule

 Gag rule (n.)
 A dangerous Trump-Pence policy that prevents doctors,
 nurses, and other providers from counseling, referring,
 providing, or even mentioning abortion by taking
 away their Title X funds if they do.
 Designed to block millions of patients from care and unbiased
 information at Planned Parenthood health centers.

 #NOGăą Rule
 #NoGağRule
 #NoGağRule
 #NoGa Rule

plannedparenthood:
A proposed Trump/Pence policy is attempting to take away your basic rights. We have until July 31 to submit comments against this gag rule that violates medical ethics. The gag rule would: 
Impose new rules designed to make it impossible for millions of patients to get birth control or preventive care from Planned Parenthood.Under this rule, doctors, nurses, hospitals, and community health centers across the country would no longer be able to refer their patients for safe, legal abortion.Remove the guarantee that you’re getting full and accurate information about your health care from your doctor. For nearly two decades, Title X law has been clear: Health care providers cannot withhold information from you about your pregnancy options. This rule means they can.Delete the requirement that contraception provided be medically approved, and no longer directs providers to ensure you have access to the full range of birth control.We have a chance to stop this rule, but we need your help

plannedparenthood: A proposed Trump/Pence policy is attempting to take away your basic rights. We have until July 31 to submit comments agai...