DanteGabriel Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 A headline that in so many ways captures the current state of the Republican Party: Karl Rove calls airport security on Alex Jones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Walker Texas Ranger Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 40 minutes ago, DanteGabriel said: A headline that in so many ways captures the current state of the Republican Party: Karl Rove calls airport security on Alex Jones. Would have loved to see those two douchenozzles start slap fighting with each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 10 hours ago, Switchback the Second said: I do hope most here got to witness the glory that was that Trump/Pence 60 Minutes interview. There's so much gold in there it's hard to pick a favorite. It brings up fond memories of Palin's interview with Katie Couric. Just an obvious lack of comprehension for the job and what their actual beliefs/principles are. Leslie Stahl was masterful. These goobers have no clue. The highlight: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/07/17/trump-excuses-mike-pences-iraq-war-vote-but-slams-hillary-clinton-for-voting-the-same-way/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sologdin Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 i think it's important to remain cognizant of which letters have the ability to fornicate orthographically. an R and an A, for instance, might be expected mutually to thrust into each other, whereas an A and a P might have to fill the voids differently; a J and and B by contrast constitute a pair wherein one double-penetrates the other, say. hilary should accordingly hire bernie as VP and create a logo wherein her H slides lubriciously in and out of his B. win, yes? duh. yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 4 hours ago, Tywin et al. said: The highlight: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/07/17/trump-excuses-mike-pences-iraq-war-vote-but-slams-hillary-clinton-for-voting-the-same-way/ Yeah, it's good ('I don't care... it's a long time ago... he's entitled to make a mistake every once in a while'. 'But [Clinton]'s not?' 'She's not.') But there's only one money quote from that interview. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 I thought this was a good guide on a quickie look at the Green Party - and how it isn't the slam dunk perfect vote that folks might think it is. Quote This national focus also means that they spend much of their time talking about a handful of big, showy environmental issues instead of working on environmental justice at the local level where people are being hurt. Some of those issues are completely bogus too, as well as being focused on the affluent. So if you vote for Jill Stein, you’re voting for a party that is focusing on GMO labeling over the nitpicky zoning and regulation that would actually make life better for people in black, Hispanic, and native neighborhoods. You know, the poor and exploited neighborhoods. [ETA: Just to be clear, GMO labeling is a bad issue for the Greens. See Benny’s comment below for more on that.] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 1 minute ago, Dickwad Poster #3784 said: I thought this was a good guide on a quickie look at the Green Party - and how it isn't the slam dunk perfect vote that folks might think it is. GMO is a bogus issue? Can't say I agree with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 3 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: GMO is a bogus issue? Can't say I agree with that. Pretty much every single scientist indicates otherwise. Now, Monsanto is a piece of shit giant company that sucks ass - but the actual GMO plants have shown zero issues with anyone. There isn't even a faked study that indicates otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MerenthaClone Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 More negatively, they're anti-nuclear and have a worrying tolerance of anti-vax supporters, though it seems like they're moving more from that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 1 minute ago, Dickwad Poster #3784 said: Pretty much every single scientist indicates otherwise. Now, Monsanto is a piece of shit giant company that sucks ass - but the actual GMO plants have shown zero issues with anyone. There isn't even a faked study that indicates otherwise. ? That's the issue. http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2008/05/monsanto200805 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 3 minutes ago, MerenthaClone said: More negatively, they're anti-nuclear and have a worrying tolerance of anti-vax supporters, though it seems like they're moving more from that. Eh. Stein won't come out and say anything against it, and she is pro-homeopathy too. It's like all the super movie star bullshit fad science liberal things rolled up into one. I liked the idea of Bruce Sterling's Viridian movement which combined a lot of environmentalism with actual scientific progress and globalization. It has apparently been replaced with the Bright Green movement, which embodies a lot of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 GMO labelling is a bunch of bullshit because it's entire purpose is to put big scary labels on something to make it seem bad without any actual proof it requires a warning of any sort. It's like slapping "Warning: Dihydrogen Monoxide" labels on things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 2 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: ? That's the issue. http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2008/05/monsanto200805 But that's not the issue. Marking something as having GMO is not the same thing as marking it as coming from Monsanto. And demonizing GMO means people start talking about 'natural' foods (as if things like existing crops of most plant food or meat are at all natural) instead of actually fighting the issue. It's like saying that Enron is bad, therefore we should make sure that we ban all natural gas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelli Fury Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 The problems with Mondanto have way way way more to do with patent law and lobbying regulations than gmo labeling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 16 minutes ago, Dickwad Poster #3784 said: But that's not the issue. Marking something as having GMO is not the same thing as marking it as coming from Monsanto. And demonizing GMO means people start talking about 'natural' foods (as if things like existing crops of most plant food or meat are at all natural) instead of actually fighting the issue. It's like saying that Enron is bad, therefore we should make sure that we ban all natural gas. When that GMO seed is deliberately designed to cross-pollinate with neighboring crops in order to create a patent issue, you've got a serious problem for any farmer who chooses not to use Monsanto seed. I agree that the science up to this point doesn't support the fact that GMO foods are dangerous to longterm health, but I think it's fair to consider the fact that companies like Monsanto spend a lot of money suppressing studies in this field, and actively trash the reputations of researchers who publish negative data. It's comparable to the Tobacco Industry's attempts to suppress medical studies that started to gain ground in the 50's and 60's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 2 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: When that GMO seed is deliberately designed to cross-pollinate with neighboring crops in order to create a patent issue, you've got a serious problem for any farmer who chooses not to use Monsanto seed. Yes! That's a problem! But it's not a problem with the healthiness of the food itself. 2 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: I agree that the science up to this point doesn't support the fact that GMO foods are dangerous to longterm health, but I think it's fair to consider the fact that companies like Monsanto spend a lot of money suppressing studies in this field, and actively trash the reputations of researchers who publish negative data. It's comparable to the Tobacco Industry's attempts to suppress medical studies that started to gain ground in the 50's and 60's. No! That's not true at all. That would be true if there were any - literally, ANY - scientific studies that indicated that GMO products were unhealthy in any way, shape or form. There aren't! This is even more cut and dried than climate change! I mean, seriously - here are 10 studies that indicate GMO is bad for you - and all of them are complete unscientific bullshit. And these are the best ones! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 Isn't Monsanto suing "seed cleaners" claiming the facilitate patent infringement when their seed crosspollinates (via the wind) with non-monsanto seed near fields sown with their product? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 4 minutes ago, Dickwad Poster #3784 said: Yes! That's a problem! But it's not a problem with the healthiness of the food itself. No! That's not true at all. That would be true if there were any - literally, ANY - scientific studies that indicated that GMO products were unhealthy in any way, shape or form. There aren't! This is even more cut and dried than climate change! I mean, seriously - here are 10 studies that indicate GMO is bad for you - and all of them are complete unscientific bullshit. And these are the best ones! Agreed to the first bit. Yes, the science in the early going was bad. No argument there. That said, you don't think companies like Monsanto haven't sought to suppress further studies? I understand your point that GMO labeling doesn't address the issue here, but I do believe that there is a dangerous relationship between organizations like the FDA and Big Agribusiness. In many ways we've handed over regulation of this industry over to the industry itself. I guess GMO labeling is a poor example of how to bring this incestuous relationship to light. Not sure what the answer here is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin of Ice Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 GMO food is not bad for you. The way they make GMO foods so that they are super resistant to pesticides and chemicals in order to spray the food with more and more toxic pesticides that will leave residue on your fruits and veggies or be absorbed into them, all the while ignoring the way that the organisms they're treated for will simply evolve and become immune to these more toxic pesticides... that might be bad for you. And for the environment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 1 minute ago, Paladin of Ice said: GMO food is not bad for you. The way they make GMO foods so that they are super resistant to pesticides and chemicals in order to spray the food with more and more toxic pesticides that will leave residue on your fruits and veggies or be absorbed into them, all the while ignoring the way that the organisms they're treated for will simply evolve and become immune to these more toxic pesticides... that might be bad for you. And for the environment. Right. There is a relationship between GMO foods and environmental hazards. Take the California almond vs Bee issue, for example. http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2014/04/california-almond-farms-blamed-honeybee-die Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.022a4ba4f4aa53526e0290eedde6f808.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.