Corvette Forum : DigitalCorvettes.com Corvette Forums banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
607 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I know what he went through was traumatic and horrible, but it doesn't give him the right to threaten the health and safety of others.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/01/1...psychiatric-evaluation-following-arrest-town/


"...Saturday Fuller appeared to become enraged and allegedly started threatening Tucson Tea Party co-founder Trent Humphries at a town hall meeting being taped for an ABC News special.

Fuller -- who was sitting in the front row -- allegedly became agitated when Humphries suggested postponing gun control conversations until after all six shooting victims had been buried.

Ogan said that Fuller snapped a photo of the Tea Party leader and yelled out, "You're dead." Fuller also began ranting, and as he was being escorted out, he addressed the audience as "whores," according to Ogan.

Fuller was involuntarily committed for psychiatric evaluation. "


http://tucsoncitizen.com/fortbuckle...rch-james-eric-fuller-before-championing-him/

"James Eric Fuller, a 63-year-old Democratic activist, was arrested after shouting “You’re dead!” at Tucson Tea Party spokesman Trent Humphries, said "
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
710 Posts
I know what he went through was traumatic and horrible, but it doesn't give him the right to threaten the health and safety of others.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/01/1...psychiatric-evaluation-following-arrest-town/


"...Saturday Fuller appeared to become enraged and allegedly started threatening Tucson Tea Party co-founder Trent Humphries at a town hall meeting being taped for an ABC News special.

Fuller -- who was sitting in the front row -- allegedly became agitated when Humphries suggested postponing gun control conversations until after all six shooting victims had been buried.

Ogan said that Fuller snapped a photo of the Tea Party leader and yelled out, "You're dead." Fuller also began ranting, and as he was being escorted out, he addressed the audience as "whores," according to Ogan.

Fuller was involuntarily committed for psychiatric evaluation. "


http://tucsoncitizen.com/fortbuckle...rch-james-eric-fuller-before-championing-him/

"James Eric Fuller, a 63-year-old Democratic activist, was arrested after shouting “You’re dead!” at Tucson Tea Party spokesman Trent Humphries, said "

But see. This is OK. Because its the Left showing hate twoards the right, there's nothing wrong with it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,253 Posts
But see. This is OK. Because its the Left showing hate twoards the right, there's nothing wrong with it.
Don't you know this kind of stuff is just killing the media? They just KNOW the right is bad, and they want a Tea Partier to spout this kind of stuff. Low and behold, who heads down that road? A lefty. Some days a journalist just can't get a break.:crazy:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,607 Posts
Wow, what an idiot.

What does that bring the score to? I know someone is keeping track of which party is the most bestest based on fewest crazy people.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
31,366 Posts
Loughner was a patsy, this other guy was a plant, meant to take a bullet, for the cause of gun control and painting the Tea Party as bad. The screw up was, Loughner really is batshit, but the left didn't know because they are batshit themselves.

:laughing:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,052 Posts
Wow, what an idiot.

What does that bring the score to? I know someone is keeping track of which party is the most bestest based on fewest crazy people.

:laughing::cheers::laughing:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,914 Posts
Wow, what an idiot.

What does that bring the score to? I know someone is keeping track of which party is the most bestest based on fewest crazy people.

No, no... those of your ideology are the keepers of statistics and studies, as you use them to validate your emotional responses and cries of victimhood to each and every situation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,607 Posts
No, no... those of your ideology are the keepers of statistics and studies....
Sorry for using facts and research. Ill stop in the future. :laughing:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,914 Posts
12 people in a room with a controlled environment and a predictable outcome, is hardly a fact or research. For every 99 out of 100 "study groups" you pose as proof and therefore need for new regulation... I will counter with common sense... such as blue berries and heart disease...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,607 Posts
12 people in a room with a controlled environment and a predictable outcome, is hardly a fact or research. For every 99 out of 100 "study groups" you pose as proof and therefore need for new regulation... I will counter with common sense... such as blue berries and heart disease...
Are you going to post links these controlled studies I keep referencing? Im curious.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,914 Posts
... As I stated, your ideology is the keeper of instance for self-promotion of ideology.

But if you insist... I suppose it would not take long to find one.

-----------------------------------------

EXPERTS have suggested that breastfeeding infants exclusively for six months may not necessarily be best and could put babies off some foods if they are not introduced to solids earlier.
Guidelines in the UK, including Scotland, urge women to breastfeed for the first six months of a baby's life before introducing solids.

But now experts writing in the British Medical Journal have said babies could suffer iron deficiency and may be
ADVERTISEMENT
more prone to allergies if they only receive milk and are not given solids at an earlier age.

In 2001, the World Health Organisation announced a global recommendation that infants should be exclusively breastfed for six months.

"Many western countries, including 65 per cent of European member states and the United States, elected not to follow this recommendation fully, or at all," said the experts from University College London's Institute of Child Health.

"However, in 2003 the health minister announced that the United Kingdom would comply."

The WHO recommendation "rested largely" on a review of 16 studies, including seven from developing countries.

It concluded that babies just given breast milk for six months had fewer infections and experienced no growth problems.

But another review of 33 studies found "no compelling evidence" that parents should not introduce solids at four to six months, the experts said.

Some studies have also shown that breastfeeding for six months does not give babies all the nutrition they need. One US study from 2007 found that babies exclusively breastfed for six months were more likely to develop anaemia than those introduced to solids at four to six months. There is also the issue of allergies, the experts said.

The authors said exclusively breastfeeding for six months is a good recommendation for developing countries, which have higher death rates from infection.

But in the UK, it could lead to some adverse health outcomes and may "reduce the window for introducing new tastes".

They said: "Bitter tastes, in particular, may be important in the later acceptance of green leafy vegetables, which may potentially affect later food preferences with influence on health outcomes such as obesity."

Janet Fyle, professional policy adviser at the Royal College of Midwives, questioned the message in the BMJ article.

"I really must challenge the suggestion from the review that the UK should reconsider its current advice on exclusive breastfeeding for six months," she said.

"I believe that this is a retrograde step and plays into the hands of the baby food industry which has failed to support the six-month exclusive breastfeeding policy in the UK."

A Scottish Government spokeswoman said it fully endorsed the WHO's guidance.

"It's vital to encourage women to breastfeed exclusively for longer," she said.

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/news/Breastfeeding-for-first-six-months.6690003.jp
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,914 Posts
Another ? OK...


Why the stress of household chores is bad for your heart

Looking after your home is more stressful than being at work, a new study suggests.

New research shows worrying about household chores such as cleaning, getting the car serviced and paying the bills may be even worse for your heart.

Scientists in the US tested over 100 working men and women and found those who took on most of the responsibility for running the home had significantly higher blood pressure readings than those who left it to their partners.

The findings, published in the journal Psychosomatic Medicine, suggest it’s not the workload itself but the stress about how to cope with it that causes the damage.

The strongest link with high blood pressure came from worries over how to get domestic chores done, such as cleaning, cooking and shopping.

Next came car maintenance and repair, paying the bills and keeping on top of the household budget.

But having to look after children or pets had no adverse effect on blood pressure.

Although there have been hundreds of studies investigating the links between stress at work and the risk of heart attacks and strokes, little research has been done into whether running a home and family has a similar effect.

Heart disease is Britain’s biggest killer.

Around 270,000 people suffer a heart attack every year and nearly one in three die before they even reach hospital.

High blood pressure, which affects one in five people in the UK, is one of the major risk factors.

The higher it climbs, the greater the force exerted by blood on the walls of the arteries when the heart beats.

The World Health Organisation estimates that 50 per cent of all heart attacks and strokes are due to raised blood pressure.

Clinical guidelines state the ideal limit for blood pressure is a systolic reading of 140mmHg and a diastolic reading of 90mmHg.

Systolic is the pressure inside arteries when the heart is forcing blood through them and diastolic is the pressure when the heart relaxes.

Scientists from the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine recruited 113 men and women in full-time work.

Each one provided details on how many hours they worked and what level of responsibility they took on for running the home.

They then underwent regular blood pressure checks at a local clinic over a three-week period, before finally wearing a blood pressure monitor for a day to track changes at work and home.

The results showed those taking on most of the responsibility at home, primarily women, were at greater risk of high blood pressure.

Household chores increased systolic readings by as much as 4.4mmHg, taking care of house or car repairs by 2.64mmHg and paying bills by 1.66mmHg.

Poorer families were more likely to be affected than better off ones.

Although some research suggests vigorous housework may be good for the heart, researchers believe the repetitive nature of cleaning, for example, may add to stress-related blood pressure problems rather than alleviate them.

In a report on their findings they said: "The perceived responsibility for household tasks, rather than the time spent doing those tasks, is what’s most distressing."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/h...f-household-chores-is-bad-for-your-heart.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,410 Posts
... As I stated, your ideology is the keeper of instance for self-promotion of ideology.

But if you insist... I suppose it would not take long to find one.

-----------------------------------------

EXPERTS ...
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/news/Breastfeeding-for-first-six-months.6690003.jp
EXPERTS... Catch phrase used by journalists to provide creedence to their 'story'. According to most journalists, EXPERTS ar those that now how to write a grant and have it accepted in order to do a 'study'. My daughter is graduating in a few months with a minor in entrepenuership. She has taken several courses in the art of writing a grant proposal, and has actually had one accepted. So she must be an expert. I think she is, but I'm her father.

Corps are bad, industry is bad, since corps run industry (falsehood), and industry produces goods for consumption, they control our lives thought manufacturing (falsehood). In this case it's baby food. Since it doesn't come from a mother's breast, it isn't natural, and therefore is bad. Only breastmilk is natural baby food, so therefore it's the only good food to feed a baby.

It all goes back to believeing one's own beliefs are so righteous and correct that one must force other's to live by those beliefs, instead of allowing choice.

It really is about cultist thinking. Cultist mentality.

The left believes in it so vehemently, it believes the right must too, and it does, but the left thinks it goes right through the moderate to the middle. Hence the AZ massacre blog-foolery.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,607 Posts
Do you agree 100% with everything said or believed in by conservatives? I didnt think so, I dont agree with 100% of everything a liberal says.

You said:

12 people in a room with a controlled environment and a predictable outcome, is hardly a fact or research. For every 99 out of 100 "study groups" you (singlular "you" referencing me)pose as proof and therefore need for new regulation... I will counter with common sense... such as blue berries and heart disease...
Are you going to post links these controlled studies I keep referencing? Im curious.
Your post references me, singular meaning Double_take. My post reference "I" singular meaning Double_take. You are lumping me into your nicely wrapped "liberal" package. I dont subscribe blindly to that world view or mindset. Please post links to when I (singular, double_take) have posted studies which you accuse me of relying on. I have nothing to do with the studies you have posted. Absolutely zero.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,914 Posts
Fine... YOU are playing semantics ! I was speaking to you... you hold many of the same beliefs as "them". You... is far easier then typing out "the left ideology". You... know exactly what I was stating in the context of my complaints.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top