MY thoughts are it's a lessor of two evils battle next year and considering the other options are Mr. If you aren't a christian I'm gonna hunt you down, Mrs. I will seriously say any soundbite people give me without trying to fact check (showing she doesn't have a brain) Mrs no I'll fact check it then tell you how yes they say its wrong but that's because the fact checkers are biased... and Mr. Corporations are people) I just don't have any thought as to how ANY of those would do a better job and not just cause our country to completely collapse. I don't like that the guy from Monsanto is heading the FDA and I have no idea who suggested him to Obama or if he gets how bad this could be for organics and chemicals in our food. He's done some good things but much like every president isn't perfect I just already am sure I don't want the other guy ya know?
It comes down to that fact that no one is paying any attention to Monsanto and what they are doing. They are bullying people to get their way.
Funny how Monsanto's scientists say nothing is wrong with GM crops; when all independent scientists say Wait a damn minute...wtf? There is something seriously wrong here.
There are other options than Romney, Palin, Bachman, and Perry. The problem is people need to seriously look at them and stop letting the media choose their presidents.
I realize that other choices might exist in theory the thing is I was taught and agree with my gramps that at the end of the day you put your support by the person who has the closest ideals to yours that has the most realistic chance of winning i.e. Unless the green party makes it to the double digits I suspect I will be going with Obama again because at the end of the day while he isn't as great as I had hoped he isn't horrid either! The republican options including Paul this year scare me!
And that philosophy is why we're in the shape we're in. If people would vote more how they feel, perhaps parties like the Green party would have a chance... and we wouldn't end up with the lesser of 2 evils (which honesly I'd take Paul ANYDAY over Obama).
You do know that this is not new, right? Taylor's appointment as "senior advisor" happened in 2009 and his appointment to his present "food czar" position happened in January 2010. Not that it makes life any better and frankly after reading about this guy (and the PR-spin way his bio is presented on the FDA website), I'm more frightened about life under Monsanto (his bio has 1 TINY line about his working for Monsanto at the VERY end). Food safety? Proper Labelling? Yeah right.
Monsanto is a bunch of douchenozzles, yes. That said: being required to label GM food as GM food would, technically, require that all food consumed anywhere in the world be labeled as GM food.
People are irrationally afraid of "frankencorn" and for some reason don't know that "corn" was -- yes, I'm going to say it -- genetically engineered from previous species that weren't very good eats. In the past, we did our genetic modifications by selective breeding -- hence, for instance, cows, dogs, cats, wheat, and corn -- but now we do it with microscopes and thingers and THEREFORE BAD. I also Googled "third generation GM" and found, in admittedly ten minutes of searching, exactly zero peer-reviewed studies that backed up the claims presented in the HuffPo etc. articles.
You can find, quite easily, just as many peer-reviewed articles touting the truth of Intelligent Design theory. This should maybe be a clue.
But, as I feel I should reiterate: Monsanto is a giant sack of jackasses.
They're also promoting organic farming, which is arguably worse for the environment than non-organic. Sure, they don't use "engineered" pesticides etc., but that doesn't mean they don't use pesticides. Shockingly, it turns out that the pesticides they use aren't as good at killing beasties and weedsies as the ones non-organic farmers use, so organic farmers have to use more of them. Sometimes quite a lot more. And that's bad for the environment.
You've got to consider the source whenever you're reading an argument. People with skin in the game are less reliable than bystanders. For example, just like you shouldn't trust me to give an accurate prediction about whether the Cubs will win the series this year (IT COULD STILL HAPPEN OK), you shouldn't trust someone who sells homeopathic remedies to give you an accurate assessment of whether homeopathy works or not.
Comments 12
Reply
Funny how Monsanto's scientists say nothing is wrong with GM crops; when all independent scientists say Wait a damn minute...wtf? There is something seriously wrong here.
There are other options than Romney, Palin, Bachman, and Perry. The problem is people need to seriously look at them and stop letting the media choose their presidents.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
People are irrationally afraid of "frankencorn" and for some reason don't know that "corn" was -- yes, I'm going to say it -- genetically engineered from previous species that weren't very good eats. In the past, we did our genetic modifications by selective breeding -- hence, for instance, cows, dogs, cats, wheat, and corn -- but now we do it with microscopes and thingers and THEREFORE BAD. I also Googled "third generation GM" and found, in admittedly ten minutes of searching, exactly zero peer-reviewed studies that backed up the claims presented in the HuffPo etc. articles.
You can find, quite easily, just as many peer-reviewed articles touting the truth of Intelligent Design theory. This should maybe be a clue.
But, as I feel I should reiterate: Monsanto is a giant sack of jackasses.
Reply
Reply
Check that site, they link to a LOT of different news - BBC articles, NYT blog and NYT articles, Reuters, etc.
Reply
You've got to consider the source whenever you're reading an argument. People with skin in the game are less reliable than bystanders. For example, just like you shouldn't trust me to give an accurate prediction about whether the Cubs will win the series this year (IT COULD STILL HAPPEN OK), you shouldn't trust someone who sells homeopathic remedies to give you an accurate assessment of whether homeopathy works or not.
Reply
Leave a comment