I'm lost, what does any of this have to do with food wars
Food for the soul.

Ah, the putdown.

What do you expect from someone as "obstinate" about the facts as me?

What do you expect from someone as "obstinate" about the facts as me?
That's not a putdown. Had I called you a -----, that would have been a putdown.

Good for her.. My critique is with Yale allowing her "seminar "on campus . It's a nice gimmick.. a trick with cell phones that she pretends is research.
I just heard a podcast of the interview that Smoothy was mentioning .
When pressed about her opinions about the appropriateness of bestiality and incents ;she refused to comment . If she was really teaching ,perhaps she could've said it's sick and twisted and inappropriate criminal behavior . Instead she hung up.

That only proves they attended. Lots of conservatives attend universities but their ideas and point of view are typically not welcome and in fact, the schools are often quite openly hostile toward conservatives (while pretending to welcome diversity of course).

Also In fact as I've posted twice now, Harvard Law School's paper penned an op-ed telling them not to apply there should you someday have the gall to criticize them.

Warning: Do Not Enroll (http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/2/28/do-not-enroll/)

Now go ahead and give us your "why is it conservatives are powerless to change them" routine.

The article is not saying this. The article says (correctly or incorrectly) that Harvard doesn't cater for extreme left or right ideologies.

The author is saying that you should not enroll at Harvard with the intent of gaining a political career AND then using you political position to demonize Harvard for political points.

In other words, doing similar to what is happening here at the moment.

At the risk of repeating myself (another post disappered) what has any of this to do with food?

The article is not saying this. The article says (correctly or incorrectly) that Harvard doesn't cater for extreme left or right ideologies.

The author is saying that you should not enroll at Harvard with the intent of gaining a political career AND then using you political position to demonize Harvard for political points.

In other words, doing similar to what is happening here at the moment.

I get the point of the column, it's an opinion an institute of higher learning should avoid. It's supposed to be an institution that welcomes a diversity of views and accepts the good and bad without being so thin skinned.

I doubt seriously any of them enrolled "with the intent of gaining a political career AND then using" their "political position to demonize Harvard for political points." I'm reasonably certain they went there to get an education, wouldn't you agree?

That's not a putdown. Had I called you a -----, that would have been a putdown.

And I was merely making an observation, supported by the evidence.

I get the point of the column, it's an opinion an institute of higher learning should avoid. It's supposed to be an institution that welcomes a diversity of views and accepts the good and bad without being so thin skinned.

I doubt seriously any of them enrolled "with the intent of gaining a political career AND then using" their "political position to demonize Harvard for political points." I'm reasonably certain they went there to get an education, wouldn't you agree?

What you are saying here may well be true. However, my point is that the article in questions doesn't provide evidence for your position.

Tut

What you are saying here may well be true. However, my point is that the article in questions doesn't provide evidence for your position.

Tut

It was not meant to be a definitive proof, but the attitude most certainly supports my position.

Ah, the putdown.Better get used to it, a lack of social skills is strong with this one. <sigh>

It was not meant to be a definitive proof, but the attitude most certainly supports my position.


As Tom points out this ridiculous seminar is hosted by someone who charges an up front fee for service. Her area of expertise appears to be sex. She probably mostly makes a living by teaching in a private capacity.

(a) Are you saying that holding this poor excuse for a workshop somehow reflects the wider attitudes of the university employed teaching staff?

(b) Are you saying that an article displaying a dislike for people who graduate from Harvard and then use their political position for points scoring reflects an attitude of the university, and not the attitude of the person(s) who wrote the article?

I would be interested if you can show me how to bring (a) and (b) together to demonstrate attitude.

Better get used to it, a lack of social skills is strong with this one. <sigh>

Now THAT was a put down. Congratulations, you excel at insults.

As Tom points out this ridiculous seminar is hosted by someone who charges an up front fee for service. Her area of expertise appears to be sex. She probably mostly makes a living by teaching in a private capacity.

Exactly but irrelevant to the point that this was a seminar for teaching students sensitivity toward "taboo" sexual such as bestiality acts in a prestigious university .


(a) Are you saying that holding this poor excuse for a workshop somehow reflects the wider attitudes of the university employed teaching staff?


No.


(b) Are you saying that an article displaying a dislike for people who graduate from Harvard and then use their political position for points scoring reflects an attitude of the university, and not the attitude of the person(s) who wrote the article?

I'm saying the editorial is a common attitude displayed toward conservatives in higher education in America.

Exactly but irrelevant to the point that this was a seminar for teaching students sensitivity toward "taboo" sexual such as bestiality acts in a prestigious university .



I'll address your first point.


If what you are saying this is the case, then what conclusions are you drawing about the university? Given the fact that you don't seem to be defending your claim in terms of "attitude" of the institution towards these types of workshops. Or is the whole workshop thing irrelevant, as you say?

Tut

they do ...
Yale University Hosts Workshop Teaching Sensitivity to Bestiality, Incest (http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/education/yale-university-hosts-workshop-teaching-sensitivity-bestiality-incest)


Tom, I will make the claim here at I would make to Speech further down the track.

This is another beat-up. What conclusions are you going to draw about the academic staff that allows such a workshop by a private individual for private profit?

It would probably be the case that this woman is not a professor. It would probably be the case that she is not in charge of a faculty. It is probably be the case that she doesn't teach at the university. From what you have posted about her she seems to be a teacher/therapist who has a Ph.D

What conclusions are you drawing about the attitudes of the teaching staff at the university based on the fact that she has used the facilities there?

What conclusions are you drawing about he sexual preferences of the academic staff because she has use the facilities there?

Hosting the event suggests there was some type of widespread approval by the academic staff that such an event would be acceptable.

Tom, I will make the claim here at I would make to Speech further down the track.

This is another beat-up. What conclusions are you going to draw about the academic staff that allows such a workshop by a private individual for private profit?

It would probably be the case that this woman is not a professor. It would probably be the case that she is not in charge of a faculty. It is probably be the case that she doesn't teach at the university. From what you have posted about her she seems to be a teacher/therapist who has a Ph.D

What conclusions are you drawing about the attitudes of the teaching staff at the university based on the fact that she has used the facilities there?

What conclusions are you drawing about he sexual preferences of the academic staff because she has use the facilities there?

Hosting the event suggests there was some type of widespread approval by the academic staff that such an event would be acceptable.
I make no conclusions about the Yale staff at all. I make conclusions about the judgment of a university that charges premium tuition for this type of pseudo-education . I would keep that in mind if I was a parent funding my child's education ;and I would advise a child that is funding their own education to take other course work that doesn't include this cr@p.
For $40,000 a year the child could certainly get a more close up personal sex education experience if that is why they are attending college if you get my drift.
But I guess this type of high tech card trick is what passes for liberal education these days.

If you have to go to college to learn sex then there is something sadly lacking

But I guess this type of high tech card trick is what passes for liberal education these days.But it isn't a "liberal" education, I showed you that. Both liberals and conservatives attend the school. You can't seem to get over that fact.

I'll address your first point.


If what you are saying this is the case, then what conclusions are you drawing about the university? Given the fact that you don't seem to be defending your claim in terms of "attitude" of the institution towards these types of workshops. Or is the whole workshop thing irrelevant, as you say?

Tut

I was drawing no conclusions about Yale. Tal and Wondergirl offered misinformation and misdirection about the seminar and I established the facts (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/3425087-post217.html).


Event director Giuliana Berry told CampusReform.org that the workshop was supposed to teach students to respond with “understanding” and “compassion” to taboo and even illegal sex acts.

I leave you to draw conclusions about the seminar. Mine is Yale should have better things to offer its students than a seminar teaching sensitivity toward "taboo and even illegal sex acts."

Needkarma suggested - sarcastically I'm sure - the seminar may have been hosted by conservatives such as Yale College Republicans or wasn't liberal in nature because Bush attended Yale. I merely offered the op-ed as an example of the bias and hostility that conservatives often face in college. Draw your own conclusions about the op-ed, I think it was openly hostile and condescending. If you want definitive proof of the bias conservative students - and educators - face in college that's another discussion.

But it isn't a "liberal" education, I showed you that. Both liberals and conservatives attend the school. You can't seem to get over that fact.

The fact that conservatives attend school proves nothing more than conservatives go to school, I showed you that.

The fact that conservatives attend school proves nothing more than conservatives go to school, I showed you that.And you telling me it's a liberal education becomes an undeniable fact based on faith in your word? LOL.

And you telling me it's a liberal education becomes an undeniable fact based on faith in your word? LOL.

No. I discussed bias and intolerance toward conservatives.

Survey shocker: Liberal profs admit they’d discriminate against conservatives in hiring, advancement (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/aug/1/liberal-majority-on-campus-yes-were-biased/#ixzz2ON8gf2Uf)
‘Impossible lack of diversity’ reflects ideological intimidation on campus


A lack of political diversity in psychology is said to lead to a number of pernicious outcomes, including biased research and active discrimination against conservatives (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2002636). The authors surveyed a large number (combined N = 800) of social and personality psychologists and discovered several interesting facts. First, although only 6% described themselves as conservative "overall," there was more diversity of political opinion on economic issues and foreign policy. Second, respondents significantly underestimated the proportion of conservatives among their colleagues. Third, conservatives fear negative consequences of revealing their political beliefs to their colleagues. Finally, conservatives are right to do so: In decisions ranging from paper reviews to hiring, many social and personality psychologists said that they would discriminate against openly conservative colleagues. The more liberal respondents were, the more they said they would discriminate.


Thomas Bertonneau—SUNY Oswego

The study by Fosse and Gross, aside from offering a circular argument (the academy is liberal because liberals—rather than conservatives—are drawn to the academy), runs counter to everything that I have observed in nearly thirty years of combined graduate-school and teaching experience at the college level.

The professoriate is not merely liberal, it is radically left libera (http://www.popecenter.org/commentaries/article.html?id=2302)l in its basic assumptions and it is relentless in its determination to make itself homogeneously left liberal, if necessary by driving out difference. Even where a majority of faculty members are, perhaps, not vehement in their like-minded attitude, the true believers tend to dominate the institutional structure and set the tone. The degree of hostility toward dissent would likely shock an outsider.

The most ridiculous claim by Fosse and Gross is that the political character of the academy can be explained in part by the fact that the scholarly life attracts people who have a "a high tolerance for controversial ideas." On the contrary: the academy is intellectually conformist and averse to actual controversy. On every subject—from "global warming" to Darwinism to affirmative action to abortion—there is one permissible opinion.

College Republicans face intensified campus witch hunt (http://collegeinsurrection.com/2012/11/college-republicans-face-intensified-campus-witch-hunt/)

Eastern Michigan U. Denies Students Funding For Pro-Life Display (http://collegeinsurrection.com/2013/03/eastern-michigan-u-denies-students-funding-for-pro-life-display/)

Student suspended for complaining about “Stomp on Jesus” Prof (http://collegeinsurrection.com/2013/03/student-suspended-for-complaining-about-stomp-on-jesus-prof/)

“The secular educationalist thinks the Christian student has been brainwashed” (http://collegeinsurrection.com/2013/03/the-secular-educationalist-thinks-the-christian-student-has-been-brainwashed/)

Emory kicks Chick-fil-A off campus because students, ahem, don’t like chicken (http://collegeinsurrection.com/2013/03/emory-kicks-chick-fil-a-off-campus-because-students-ahem-dont-like-chicken/)

I could do this all day.

Hello again, Steve:


I could do this all day.Couple things.. There's NO question that there are MORE liberal ivy league university's in the land.. So what?

I PROMISE you, that IF I were accepted at one of the right wing universities, and divulged either my politics or my lack of religion, I'd be harassed too. Would it be worse than what liberals do? Who cares? The FACT that we're an INTOLERANT society ISN'T news.

But, please, PLEASE don't tell me your side is any better.

Excon

You mean this isn't a center right country and conservative are the true minority? If you need affirmative action just ask. How dare them liberals treat you like second class citizens after all you have done for them.

Ex, I have no doubt you'd be more welcome. It is the right defending the free and open exchange of ideas.

Tal, ‘Impossible lack of diversity’ reflects ideological intimidation on campus"

I PROMISE you, that IF I were accepted at one of the right wing universities, and divulged either my politics or my lack of religion, I'd be harassed too. Would it be worse than what liberals do?
Reminds me of the mid-'60s when I was at a conservative, right-wing college that had an opportunity to feature a musical performance by Pete Seeger. The administration refused, stating that it would corrupt the student body because the concert might be used to promote a communist agenda or an overthrow of the U.S. government. That college is still in that mind-frame, by the way.

I could do this all day.What? Post opinion pieces? All except the "stomp on Jesus" (which I find reprehensible as well) are opinion pieces. That's not facts.

I guess I'll never understand your need to label something so you can hate it.

Did you know the more doctors out here in the USA get more money for denying a patient help than actually helping? So why not have all the un-healthy running around? Why not keep the low even lower, the more that's cast out the more the cycles continue...

Reminds me of the mid-'60s when I was at a conservative, right-wing college that had an opportunity to feature a musical performance by Pete Seeger. The administration refused, stating that it would corrupt the student body because the concert might be used to promote a communist agenda or an overthrow of the U.S. government. That college is still in that mind-frame,.by the way.
I listen to Pete Seeger when I have a case of insomnia... instant cure !

I listen to Pete Seeger when I have a case of insomnia .........instant cure !
He used to be a force to be reckoned with, apparently. "We Shall Overcome" stuck daggers in the hearts of conservatives.

Oh I like the way other artists have done his songs.

"We Shall Overcome" stuck daggers in the hearts of conservatives. no it didn't .It stuck a dagger in the hearts of southern Democrats .

oh I like the way other artists have done his songs.
no it didn't .It stuck a dagger in the hearts of southern Democrats .
At that college I attended, they were Midwestern Republicans.

What? Post opinion pieces? All except the "stomp on Jesus" (which I find reprehensible as well) are opinion pieces. That's not facts.

I guess I'll never understand your need to label something so you can hate it.

First was the admission of discrimination. I'm sure it isn't indicative only of social psychology professors. Ex admitted it as well. And yes, I hate the liberal bias in academia. Do you not think narrowmindedness in education is a bad thing? I do.

Hello Pot:


Do you not think narrowmindedness in education is a bad thing? I do.Meet kettle.

Excon

Hello Pot:

Meet kettle.

excon

Like I didn't know that was coming. You make the mistake (publicly) of assuming I'm narrow minded for the fact I defend conservative values. Privately you know better. Don't you, huh?

I was drawing no conclusions about Yale. Tal and Wondergirl offered misinformation and misdirection about the seminar and I established the facts (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/3425087-post217.html).



I leave you to draw conclusions about the seminar. Mine is Yale should have better things to offer its students than a seminar teaching sensitivity toward "taboo and even illegal sex acts."

Needkarma suggested - sarcastically I'm sure - the seminar may have been hosted by conservatives such as Yale College Republicans or wasn't liberal in nature because Bush attended Yale. I merely offered the op-ed as an example of the bias and hostility that conservatives often face in college. draw your own conclusions about the op-ed, I think it was openly hostile and condescending. If you want definitive proof of the bias conservative students - and educators - face in college that's another discussion.


Here are my conclusions based on the information provided thus far:

(a) McDevitt was TEACHING a class inside of the university grounds.

(b) The McDevitt class has nothing to do with the type of courses offered by the university.

(c) The McDevitt class is not a reflection on any type of 'preference' that the academic staff might hold.

(d) The McDevitt class is a symptom of wider liberalisation problems when it comes to education at universities.

Seems to me that one can conclude that the university is guilty via implication.

When I was in college there were all kinds of seminars, symposiums, lectures, and discussion groups, and we had guest speakers, and lecturers sometimes. It was just part of the college experience. That's the way I take this as well. College was about being exposed to all kinds of different things, and people your mama would never teach you at home.

(a) McDevitt was TEACHING a class inside of the university grounds.
She was a guest speaker leading a seminar.

Hello again, Steve:


Privately you know better. Don't you, huh?Sure. You're like a Texas Pelosi.

Excon

She was a guest speaker leading a seminar.

Hi Wondergirl,

As to whether she was teaching or leading is a moot point. I am claiming that this whole McDevitt thing is a beat-up. What is being promoted here is an ad hominem fallacy by way of guilt through association.

Tut

Here are my conclusions based on the information provided thus far:

(a) McDevitt was TEACHING a class inside of the university grounds.

So that's established.


(b) The McDevitt class has nothing to do with the type of courses offered by the university.

Never said it did.


(c) The McDevitt class is not a reflection on any type of 'preference' that the academic staff might hold.

Did anyone say it was?


(d) The McDevitt class is a symptom of wider liberalisation problems when it comes to education at universities.

Yes.


Seems to me that one can conclude that the university is guilty via implication.

If you say so.

So that's established.



Never said it did.



Did anyone say it was?



Yes.



If you say so.

Just exhausting the possibilities. Hence, all we have left is a guilt by association.
Hence, the beat-up.

Tut

Hello again,

Well, I took her class. It was hard.

excon

Yeah gotcha

The university should tell her to take her seminar to her brothel... oooops I mean clinic.

Meanwhile ,it's safer to eat a burger than a pre-packaged bag of salad .
Salad is more dangerous than beefburgers, leading food expert warns - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddrink/foodanddrinknews/9948987/Salad-is-more-dangerous-than-beefburgers-leading-food-expert-warns.html)

Why ? Because the luddites of the world oppose irradiation.

Tom I think you should be irradiated anythime you want to but I like live food

the university should tell her to take her seminar to her brothel .... oooops I mean clinic.


Exactly. This sort of stuff should not beheld in any university grounds. In fact I can't think of any venue where it should be held.

Tut

Tom I think you should be irradiated anythime you want to but I like live food

Yeah much better to eat foods full of harmful bacteria. Where do you live ? On your own farm where you grow and harvest your own food ? Nope ;you go the grocery store like the rest of us. It's virtually impossible to do enough food inspection to eliminate all the risks (especially with our love affair with organically grown produce). Heat sterilization destroys many of the nutrients you think you are getting in these foods .Irradiation does not ;and it extends the shelf life of the food ;and there is no risk associated with consuming irradiated food .

There have been many studies of irradiation over the years and here is but one,

Food Irradiation: A Catalyst for More Health Risks (http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_23186.cfm)

But your link seems to point to the hygiene of specific producers and their processes. Seems inspecting more facilities would accomplish more than just random product inspections. Or maybe both are needed just more of it.

Hard to do when you have out of country suppliers, but local chains who use these suppliers maybe should be more proactive in making sure all due diligence against any possible contamination.

of course organic farmers would come to that conclusion.300,000 people become sick from food-borne illnesses each year in the U.S. and almost 5,000 of those die. Irradiation eliminates much of that risk without affecting the nutritional value of the food.

The CDC has been approving it more over the years and its no doubt a good tool to add to the hygiene around food handling and distribution.

And the next target in the war on anything you might remotely enjoy is, cigars.

Cigars expected to be targeted by FDA regulation (http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/cigars-expected-to-be-targeted-by-fda-regulation/2013/03/23/71105222-900e-11e2-bdea-e32ad90da239_story.html)

Hello again, Steve:

You mean I won't be able to poison myself anymore? If I want to die like a man, who is the government to tell me that I can't?

excon

I think in your case you can get your doc to do it.

Hello again, Steve:

You mean I won't be able to poison myself anymore?? If I wanna die like a man, who is the government to tell me that I can't?

excon

You need to have a talk with Mayor Bloomberg.

Public health experts and some anti-tobacco lawmakers are pressing the FDA to regulate all cigars, but they mostly worry about the inexpensive, flavored varieties that have proliferated in recent years.

Of course. I bet even Nanny Bloomy stuffs a big fat Cuban cigar between his lips every now and then.

Of course. I bet even Nanny Bloomy stuffs a big fat Cuban cigar between his lips every now and then.

I'm betting something a bit more Clintonesque...

Of course. I bet even Nanny Bloomy stuffs a big fat Cuban cigar between his lips every now and then.

No doubt, these people just want to impose a lifestyle of their choosing on the rest of us while they go about living it up as always.

Hello again, Steve:


while they go about living it up as always.It's true. I NEVER wear my seat belts - especially with a cigarette in my hand.

Excon

You mean a joint?

Hello again, Steve:

That's in my other hand, and I have a 32 ounce Big Gulp between my legs. Got some beer in the cooler.. Waiting till I hit the interstate to crack one open.

excon

While talking on your cell phone and watching a DVD?

And texting.. two girlfriends at once.

Hello again, smoothy:

Texting, hell. We're full on sexting. I LOVE being free.

excon

You don't charge, now there is a revelation

I wonder how many fewer veggies can be grown after Obama completes his land grab (http://washingtonexaminer.com/obama-eyes-taking-millions-of-acres-to-save-habitat-from-global-warming/article/2525447?custom_click=rss)?


A sweeping new Obama administration strategy to protect plants, fish and animals from the hazards of global warming would require the government to set aside millions of acres of land to preserve threatened habitat.

"More than millions of acres across the landscape will be required," said U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Dan Ashe. "The lands will be protected by easement, by land acquisitions, by local, by land trusts, by state agencies, by federal agencies," he told reporters in releasing a 120-page National Fish, Wildlife and Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy, in the works for four years.

"We're doing it for wildlife preservation and we're thinking about climate," he added.

Let 'em eat Spotted Owl.

I wonder how many fewer veggies can be grown after Obama completes his land grab (http://washingtonexaminer.com/obama-eyes-taking-millions-of-acres-to-save-habitat-from-global-warming/article/2525447?custom_click=rss)?



Let 'em eat Spotted Owl.

The answer to that... (and I beleve people like Obama would actually be capable of)

Soylent green.

Hello again, Steve:

Wow. Setting aside millions of acres to preserve wildlife is EVIL, indeed. Dem librhuls is ruinnning us. Der should be OIL on da ground...

excon

Actually there is another motive... Obama thinks there is Oil under it and he can't stop drilling on private land, so he siezes it can calls it Federal land.

North Dakota is putting a wedge in his no new oil policy.

A) The federal government already owns nearly a third of our land

B) The federal government SUCKS at managing it.

C) Feeding people (http://www.capoliticalreview.com/top-stories/central-valley-a-dust-bowl-under-obama-jerry-brown/)is more important than the Delta Smelt.

D) It has nothing to do with climate change, it's all about Obama's legacy

Oil reserves in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves_in_the_United_States)

Ain't you guys tired of "Drill,baby drill" yet? Or the messes they make?

Oil reserves in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves_in_the_United_States)

Ain't you guys tired of "Drill,baby drill" yet? Or the messes they make?

No.. we are tired of the people opposed to oil... using oil however. They should have to register and practice what they preach. That leaves more oil for the rest of us.

Oil reserves in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves_in_the_United_States)

Ain't you guys tired of "Drill,baby drill" yet? Or the messes they make?

It seems to be contributing greatly to our area economy at the moment

So does road construction in our area. Its booming without oil.

So does road construction in our area. Its booming without oil.

I know, you can't get anywhere in the Metroplex.

So does road construction in our area. Its booming without oil.

So they how are they building roads without using oil? Concrete and slave labor?

Aphault is an oil product... so no oil no blacktop. No oil no trucks... no oil no heavy equipment.

Still believe that peak oil myth ? None of the new oil that can be tapped into by horizontal drilling and fracking is considered in the known reserve. The Bakken alone doubles the known reserve and the Wiki article doesn't take into accounts new discoveries like Marcellus Shale in NY ,or Monterey Shale in Cal.. . which if anyone in California or NY had any sense ;would be developed immediately .
Add to that the abundance of natural gas in these same finds ,and the US has energy reserved that rival the Middle East .

What's the big hurry? Flooding the markets with American oil and gas would do what to the markets? Especially given we are moving to surpluses ourselves. Especially given the subsidies that oil companies to name one already enjoy.

new discoveries like Marcellus Shale in NY ,or Monterey Shale in Cal. ....which if anyone in California or NY had any sense ;would be developed immediately .
Add to that the abundance of natural gas in these same finds ,and the US has energy reserved that rival the Middle East .
And let's wreak havoc to the environment...

There's plenty of oil in Texas, Smoothy, and construction jobs pay very well, but the secret was leveraging stimulis money and having the projects ready to go. They actually have been building like crazy for 10 years, and were not as hard hit by the housing bubble but as other areas of the country. Not saying there are no down sides to be resolved, but unlike other states, the legislature has more authority than the govenor, and more business sense.

No brag, just fact!

And let's wreak havoc to the environment....

Oh, drink a little fracking fluid and chill.

Oh, drink a little fracking fluid and chill.
Heck, I'm at the end of my life anyway, so who cares what I breathe and eat and drink.

I know, you can't get anywhere in the Metroplex.

Rush hour is a BEEEEEEEEEYATCH!!


Oh, drink a little fracking fluid and chill.

Don't smoke or be near an open flame if you do.

Whats the big hurry? Flooding the markets with American oil and gas would do what to the markets? Especially given we are moving to surpluses ourselves. Especially given the subsidies that oil companies to name one already enjoy.

It means Americans get rich from our money instead of some towel heads in the desert.

There are no poor oil men in America.

I guess you either missed or forgot this (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/its-come-713241-41.html#post3395355).

I drank fracking fluid, says (Democratic) Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper (http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2013/feb/12/colorado-gov-hickenlooper-i-drank-fracking-fluid/#.URqUq39uhQo.twitter)

There are no poor oil men in America.

Or apparently anyone else who has gone to N Dakota .
Oil boom brings high-paying jobs to North Dakota - Sep. 28, 2011 (http://money.cnn.com/2011/09/28/pf/north_dakota_jobs/index.htm)
If I was a young man starting ,I'd already be there.

Scientific Study Links Flammable Drinking Water to Fracking - ProPublica (http://www.propublica.org/article/scientific-study-links-flammable-drinking-water-to-fracking/single)

Because its drinkable, doesn't mean its not flammable. Hope the guy didn't belch while he smoked.

Under pressure from fracking company, EPA abandons Texas family with flammable well water | Righting Injustice | Righting Injustice (http://www.rightinginjustice.com/news/2013/01/19/under-pressure-from-fracking-company-epa-abandons-texas-family-with-flammable-well-water/)


The Associated Press, however, obtained a confidential report that may throw some light on why the EPA suddenly removed itself from this case.

According to an AP report, “the EPA had scientific evidence against the driller, Range Resources, but changed course after the company threatened not to cooperate with a national study into a common form of drilling called hydraulic fracturing.” Regulators then set aside their analysis pointing to the drilling operation as a likely source for the contaminated well water. Other studies have demonstrated that methane concentrations are 17 times higher in drinking water wells near fracking sites than in normal wells while the fracking chemicals themselves leach into the water table.

Waterless Fracking Makes Headway in Texas, Slowly | The Texas Tribune (http://www.texastribune.org/2013/03/27/fracking-without-water-makes-headway-texasslowly/)

Yeah come drink some of this stuff.

Call me a skeptic.Naturally occurring methane seepage is a common occurrence.I bet there is more methane in areas around your local landfill than all that gets released from fracking.

call me a skeptic.Naturally occuring methane seepage is a common occurance.I bet there is more methane in areas around your local landfill than all that gets released from fracking.

Or from your average Vegetarians house.. or restaurant. The side effects of beans and lentils.

Or from your average Vegetarians house..or restaurant. The side effects of beans and lentils.
Hmmm, I grew up in dairyfarm country. I could be dead already from inhaling!

If only the frackers would restore the land once they finished...

Hmmm, I grew up in dairyfarm country. I could be dead already from inhaling!

If only the frackers would restore the land once they finished....

YOU might be thinking strip mines... frackers don't make that much of a mess... and I've seen a LOT of gas wells being drilled... including one rather spectacular fire.

Much better to have windmills where Golden and Bald Eagles get wacked .

YOU might be thinking strip mines....frackers don't make that much of a mess.....and I've seen a LOT of gas wells being drilled....including one rather spectacular fire.
Do they disassemble all the rigging and towers and other equipment they used once they are finished, and then leave the land looking as pristine as when they arrived?

Do they disassemble all the rigging and towers and other equipment they used once they are finished, and then leave the land looking as pristine as when they arrived?

Gas wells typically don't take up much more space than the average one car garage once they are in service. The pipes are buried. Those towers are only in place for drilling and moved on to the next drill site once the drilling if done.

There are dozens of them within sight of the road up where I'me from within just a few miles (Pennsylvania). And I know a few people that have wells on their property. Which they are paid monthly for.

Do they disassemble all the rigging and towers and other equipment they used once they are finished, and then leave the land looking as pristine as when they arrived?There is some equipment and site management:
https://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1680&bih=899&q=fracking&oq=fracking&gs_l=img.12...2625.4208.0.6300.8.7.0.0.0.0.0.0..0. 0...0.0...1ac.1.7.img.W7_hZn0knm8&safe=active

This is a Scientific American report of an MIT study on the issue:


So what is the truth?

Can drilling for natural gas contaminate drinking water? Yes.

Is hydraulic fracturing to blame? No.

Bottom line: water contamination does happen, but not because of hydraulic fracturing. The MIT Future of Natural Gas Study, released in June 2011, examines the causes of 43 reported environmental incidents and finds that, “no incidents of direct invasion of shallow water zones by fracture fluids during the fracturing process have been recorded.”

So what causes the contamination? According to the study, “almost 50% [of the incidents were] the result of drilling operations… most frequently related to inadequate cementing of casing into wellbores.”

Guest Post: Water Contamination – Fracking is not the problem | Plugged In, Scientific American Blog Network (http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/plugged-in/2012/01/25/guest-post-water-contamination-fracking-is-not-the-problem/)

Back to the food wars thing, seems more and more communities are pushing back against the government standing between you from and good, fresh local food.


Brooksville becomes ninth Maine town to defy state on sales of local foods (http://bangordailynews.com/2013/03/11/news/hancock/brooksville-becomes-ninth-maine-town-to-defy-state-on-sales-of-local-foods/)

BROOKSVILLE, Maine — Voters here made their town the fifth in Hancock County to pass a local food sovereignty ordinance that thumbs its nose at state and federal regulations for direct-to-consumer sales of prepared foods and farm products.

In a referendum election on March 4, residents voted 112-64 to approve the “Local Food and Community Self-Governance Ordinance,” which states that producers or processors of local foods are “exempt from licensure and inspection,” so long as the food is sold directly by the producer to a consumer.

The ordinance also makes it “unlawful for any law or regulation adopted by the state or federal government to interfere with the rights organized by this ordinance.”

The state contends that such ordinances hold no legal weight, but that hasn’t stopped residents of Sedgwick, Penobscot, Blue Hill and Trenton from passing the same local rules. Food sovereignty ordinances also have been passed in Hope, Plymouth, Livermore and Appleton.

In an interview, Kaylene Waindle, special assistant to the attorney general, said the state has a legitimate and legal interest in overseeing the safety of food being sold to consumers, and that state laws about food safety, inspection and licensing pre-empt local ordinances.

Much like individual states passing marijuana laws that fly in the face of the federal government’s stance on cannabis, the dispute over who controls local food regulation seems destined for court.

Before you even say it, I am a huge fan of food safety. I'm also a huge fan of roadside peaches, fresh tomatoes, peppers, zucchini, etc. Do we really need to have the government come between us and our neighbors to get some healthy, fresh food?

Back in the day, my first stop before going to work was at a small grocer who made sandwiches and sold fresh fruit, and had hot coffee. Those were good days.

Sounds nice.

You living in the past Tal, now if maccas don't sell it it ain't breakfast