General Discussion

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)

115. Why is it so very important to keep it a secret from the public? If the public misunderstands,

Tue Sep 2, 2014, 02:35 PM

Sep 2014

the big corporations have enough money to educate them, but instead chooses to keep them in the dark, because, apparently the public is too stupid to make a good decision.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

322 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Hillary Clinton is Just Plain Wrong on GMOs [View all] eridani Sep 2014 OP

She's paid well to be wrong. HooptieWagon Sep 2014 #1

my guess would be AtomicKitten Sep 2014 #3

+1 n/t area51 Sep 2014 #116

Yes. LWolf Sep 2014 #60

+1 a whole fucking bunch. Enthusiast Sep 2014 #172

How much has the wealthy spent to subdue the science? HuckleB Sep 2014 #313

We agree on this, eridani. Cha Sep 2014 #2

It would be a good thing if Clinton supporters contacted eridani Sep 2014 #4

Yes, those who care about our environment. We're fighting GMOs tooth and nail so Cha Sep 2014 #5

Yes, because we really want our candidates to ignore science! HuckleB Sep 2014 #134

Why do some people thing that "science" = "corporate domination"? eridani Sep 2014 #170

Someone hijacked your whole thread to force feed us Generic Other Sep 2014 #180

I get it. HuckleB Sep 2014 #299

Why do you think that you can ignore science by pushing bad propaganda? HuckleB Sep 2014 #298

Great--let's make monarch butterflies extinct with pesticides eridani Sep 2014 #320

Here is a link to an NPR article on the decline of the Monarch Butterfly population CentralMass Sep 2014 #6

Here's one. There are plenty out there. pnwmom Sep 2014 #47

BTW, that same Monsanto Attorney Michael Taylor you mention above.... bvar22 Sep 2014 #102

That's unfortunate. n/t pnwmom Sep 2014 #104

Yep it is unfortunate. And it is unfortunate that over the last truedelphi Sep 2014 #107

And what does that tell us? Enthusiast Sep 2014 #173

I don't see a huge difference between anti-GMO folks and anti-vaxxers. Nye Bevan Sep 2014 #7

I don't think that your comparison is a good one. CentralMass Sep 2014 #8

Plus one. You are correct. Enthusiast Sep 2014 #174

You are making many claims, but offering no peer reviewed evidence. HuckleB Sep 2014 #212

Hillary is pro-Monsanto corporate sociopathology eridani Sep 2014 #9

Exactly! Texano78704 Sep 2014 #10

They are entirely separate issues. No one ever decreed in 1992 that henceforth pnwmom Sep 2014 #12

What? CSStrowbridge Sep 2014 #18

They would not allow their seeds to be used in research unless these "independent" researchers pnwmom Sep 2014 #22

No there have not been Tumbulu Sep 2014 #40

+ a million laundry_queen Sep 2014 #221

Her position is based on old information. HuckleB Sep 2014 #78

That's 'cause the anti-GMO people don't have a mechanism for the GMO to cause harm. jeff47 Sep 2014 #21

They don't need one. We don't have a mechanism of action for many drugs pnwmom Sep 2014 #23

And we test them because we have even more drugs that cause harm jeff47 Sep 2014 #24

Without labeling, there is zero way of determining zero harm in the greater population. pnwmom Sep 2014 #25

Sure there is. jeff47 Sep 2014 #27

Hey, Mr. Science, what happened to "control subjects"???? closeupready Sep 2014 #38

They're the Europeans. jeff47 Sep 2014 #71

Nope, wrong answer. Some are, some aren't. closeupready Sep 2014 #79

I listed two countries where GMO food is banned jeff47 Sep 2014 #95

Sorry that you're training in science was so incompetent. closeupready Sep 2014 #96

If you actually weren't spewing bullshit jeff47 Sep 2014 #99

lol closeupready Sep 2014 #100

There is a difference where GMO foods affect our environment at large... cascadiance Sep 2014 #160

Unless you are arguing against all hybrid technologies, you got nothing! HuckleB Sep 2014 #201

Are you even responding to my post or still just parroting GMO marketing propaganda? cascadiance Sep 2014 #202

I'm responding to real world content. HuckleB Sep 2014 #213

I think YOU don't have any ability to discuss issues, when you have NO DETAIL... cascadiance Sep 2014 #222

In other words... HuckleB Sep 2014 #297

If you want to ban glyphosate, ban glyphosate. jeff47 Sep 2014 #225

No, YOU are lumping all of our arguments under your scripted "glyphosate" anecdote. cascadiance Sep 2014 #238

Exactly. HuckleB Sep 2014 #305

There are too many confounding variables for this to work, without even knowing pnwmom Sep 2014 #48

You're making a claim that there is large-scale, significant harm jeff47 Sep 2014 #72

No, I am not. pnwmom Sep 2014 #94

Either you are, or you're wasting everyone's time. jeff47 Sep 2014 #98

Wrong. We don't require foods/drugs to be unsafe on a large scale before they are regulated. pnwmom Sep 2014 #103

Because, again, we have a mechanism by which they could cause harm. jeff47 Sep 2014 #226

No, because there was EVIDENCE that they caused harm because of research pnwmom Sep 2014 #228

Reality is not the friend of anti-GMO folks. HuckleB Sep 2014 #141

And of course you know what "reality" is. Philosophers struggle explaining reality, but YOU rhett o rick Sep 2014 #157

"Corporate overlords" = philosophical bent. HuckleB Sep 2014 #161

Why would you deny the public their right to know? rhett o rick Sep 2014 #163

"claiming" is the operative word. Enthusiast Sep 2014 #175

The public already can know. HuckleB Sep 2014 #184

You keep trying to change the argument to whether or not GMO's are safe and away from the rhett o rick Sep 2014 #189

You're the one who fails to respond on topic. HuckleB Sep 2014 #192

What a bunch of crap. This has nothing to do with anti-GMO. This has to do with truth in rhett o rick Sep 2014 #219

No, it doesn't. HuckleB Sep 2014 #248

nice link. thanks. mopinko Sep 2014 #279

Why do you care what I do or do not want to eat? Generic Other Sep 2014 #167

I don't. HuckleB Sep 2014 #186

I do not want to consume your product. Generic Other Sep 2014 #209

No one is force feeding you. Please don't pretend that they are. HuckleB Sep 2014 #301

I don't want to consume your what you arer selling Generic Other Sep 2014 #318

"The GHWBush FDA declared that all GMO's would automatically be considered safe" Veilex Sep 2014 #37

-- G_j Sep 2014 #62

Monsanto's 2013 Net Revenue was approximately $2.4 billion closeupready Sep 2014 #80

What does Monsanto's revenue have to do with it? HuckleB Sep 2014 #82

The claim that labeling is too expensive, that's what. closeupready Sep 2014 #83

There is no connection whatsoever. HuckleB Sep 2014 #85

I am not your servant. If your link is important, summarize it here. closeupready Sep 2014 #89

Ah, so you're just spouting off, without knowing what you're talking about. HuckleB Sep 2014 #121

"Lame" that "you won't bother learn[ing] about the matter" - yeah, closeupready Sep 2014 #125

That's so cool. HuckleB Sep 2014 #126

Hoisted on your own petard? closeupready Sep 2014 #129

And you have no response. HuckleB Sep 2014 #131

And yet GMOs go through the USDA for approval, with a great deal of oversight. HuckleB Sep 2014 #81

Hmm... Veilex Sep 2014 #91

Wow. broad brush used on a very complex topic. NRaleighLiberal Sep 2014 #13

Yes, when stymied, change the subject. Well done, Lucian. closeupready Sep 2014 #15

It is not anti-GMO, It is Pro-lablilng GMO. Live and Learn Sep 2014 #20

If GMOs are so good for you, then these companies should WANT it labeled... cascadiance Sep 2014 #162

Yep. Anti-science strangeness. ZombieHorde Sep 2014 #26

Or anti-corporate sanity. If I choose not to support corporate dictatorship over our eridani Sep 2014 #56

Not at all surprised to see you take a stand on the side of H. Clinton-Sachs and Corp-America rhett o rick Sep 2014 #32

PLUS ONE! Enthusiast Sep 2014 #176

Yes, this is the ridiculous latest meme from you guys Tumbulu Sep 2014 #36

It doesn't work that way. jeff47 Sep 2014 #93

All your "science" is inaccurate Tumbulu Sep 2014 #112

So you would prefer the older, much worse pesticides/herbicides. HuckleB Sep 2014 #135

Yeah! Bring back DDT! It was thoroughly tested! Enthusiast Sep 2014 #178

Thanks for the pointless response. HuckleB Sep 2014 #185

Oh, here you are! Tumbulu Sep 2014 #235

Your posts are filled with lies. HuckleB Sep 2014 #252

please list for all of us here how you have reduced pesticide use in your own life Tumbulu Sep 2014 #245

Name one pesticide that I use in my garden. HuckleB Sep 2014 #253

Thank you! PatSeg Sep 2014 #140

+1 an entire shit load. Enthusiast Sep 2014 #177

I'm sick and tired of folks who claim.. sendero Sep 2014 #266

Well stated!!!! Thank you nt Tumbulu Sep 2014 #277

You can be sick and tired all you want. HuckleB Sep 2014 #293

I don't see a huge difference between pro-GMO folks and pro-lifers. Crunchy Frog Sep 2014 #50

Hillary's position is a right wing position on this. You should have said 'anti-environment 'folks'. sabrina 1 Sep 2014 #51

PLUS ONE, a whole bunch! Enthusiast Sep 2014 #179

Regulation. Feral Child Sep 2014 #61

Exactly. HuckleB Sep 2014 #73

So is the scientific community I suppose. alp227 Sep 2014 #11

Fuck safety. This is about corporate dictatorship, period eridani Sep 2014 #14

So why do they fear fair and honest labeling? nm rhett o rick Sep 2014 #33

I have answered that loaded question 100s of times already. alp227 Sep 2014 #35

Asking for honest labeling and you call it a loaded question? Honest labeling has too high of costs? rhett o rick Sep 2014 #39

If the goal is "honest labeling" Orrex Sep 2014 #49

Honest labeling is not what you're actually looking for. jeff47 Sep 2014 #76

Once again you are preaching for secrecy to protect the stupid public. That's very rhett o rick Sep 2014 #114

And you want to label one technology, but not all technologies. HuckleB Sep 2014 #122

Labels change all the time. It's called marketing. roody Sep 2014 #44

So you agree with Dan Quayle and Bush Sr. I remember when the Left was totally opposed to that sabrina 1 Sep 2014 #52

I keep seeing "right to know" thrown around about GMO labelling. alp227 Sep 2014 #53

I want to know what is genetically altered and what is not. Why do you want to control sabrina 1 Sep 2014 #55

All our food plants are genetically altered. HuckleB Sep 2014 #77

So Monsanto hasn't done well? What are their revenues like? closeupready Sep 2014 #58

Baloney. What the big companies do not realize is that truedelphi Sep 2014 #108

Why do you want to label only one technology? HuckleB Sep 2014 #84

Why is it so very important to keep it a secret from the public? If the public misunderstands, rhett o rick Sep 2014 #115

No one is keeping anything secret. HuckleB Sep 2014 #123

Transparency is the liberal thing to do. As is fighting the dominance of big corporations. rhett o rick Sep 2014 #150

And you want selective transparency, which is, well, dishonest. HuckleB Sep 2014 #151

Apparently you can't put forth an argument without putting words in my mouth. rhett o rick Sep 2014 #159

You have not asked for total transparency, ever. HuckleB Sep 2014 #187

That's a distraction from the issue. Why doesn't Monsanto want the public to know rhett o rick Sep 2014 #191

Nothing contains GMOs. HuckleB Sep 2014 #198

"Nothing contains GMO's" Seriously, now that's your argument. "Don't worry, nothing contains GMO's rhett o rick Sep 2014 #214

And the usual, "I can't respond to reality, so I'll just shout, 'MONSANTO'!" response... HuckleB Sep 2014 #216

I can tell when a poster has nothing left when they resort to "Wow." rhett o rick Sep 2014 #220

You've never had anything to say HuckleB Sep 2014 #254

If there is no label, it is secret. We want consumers to make the choice. Enthusiast Sep 2014 #181

So, why weren't you clamoring for labels for other hybrid technologies? HuckleB Sep 2014 #188

It is hardly hypocrisy as hybridization is an entirely different technology Enthusiast Sep 2014 #239

It is a different technology, but the dangers are actually greater. HuckleB Sep 2014 #309

Pfft! Enthusiast Sep 2014 #321

Because they know people are stupid and ignorant. Donald Ian Rankin Sep 2014 #149

bought off and paid for by corporate masters Tumbulu Sep 2014 #42

Prove it. HuckleB Sep 2014 #137

Well that begs the question Caretha Sep 2014 #264

I'm not. HuckleB Sep 2014 #265

Except for the AAAS, these organizations are, in this case, shills. NYC_SKP Sep 2014 #88

Are those organizations wrong about all science then? alp227 Sep 2014 #90

Talk about your non-sequitur. What I mean is that there is a bias and an agenda. NYC_SKP Sep 2014 #92

Indeed. The organic industry works hard to foment fear in order to increase profits. HuckleB Sep 2014 #138

If you're going to claim factual errors, you better not make them yourself. jeff47 Sep 2014 #16

The progressive movement must be a fact-based movement. CSStrowbridge Sep 2014 #19

EXACTLY! Alas, it's so frustrating to see how powerful fiction-based fear remains. HuckleB Sep 2014 #74

In other words it's ok for Corporations to lie to the American public, because the public rhett o rick Sep 2014 #41

Where is the lie? jeff47 Sep 2014 #70

I can see that if your reality parallels the propaganda of the Big Corporations and their rhett o rick Sep 2014 #117

Again, where is the lie? jeff47 Sep 2014 #227

Lies, lies and more lies. I never once "spewed massive quantities of" whatever FUD is. rhett o rick Sep 2014 #232

Yes, you did. HuckleB Sep 2014 #284

You continue to try to make this about me. I will restate my position. rhett o rick Sep 2014 #288

Companies that have nothing to hide PatSeg Sep 2014 #291

You forget that the organic industry is focused on profit. HuckleB Sep 2014 #300

"Oddly, you don't seem to care about that." This is not about me. rhett o rick Sep 2014 #322

Not to mention that EVERY reputable scientific body disagrees with the OP's article. wyldwolf Sep 2014 #68

Thank God for Norman Ernest Borlaug! William769 Sep 2014 #17

He was a traditional plant breeder Tumbulu Sep 2014 #46

Yup! HuckleB Sep 2014 #75

I seriously want someone else as our candidate. She is NO friend to the planet. glinda Sep 2014 #28

well, the, better get working on that... brooklynite Sep 2014 #59

Sometimes it is a good idea to glinda Sep 2014 #64

"Just plain wrong" what kind language. . . littlemissmartypants Sep 2014 #29

Kicking. Thank you, eridani. nt littlemissmartypants Sep 2014 #30

I agree. It seems GMOs are affecting our ecosystem in Cleita Sep 2014 #31

k&r. Thanks for posting. nm rhett o rick Sep 2014 #34

This is why I cannot support Hillary KauaiK Sep 2014 #43

Thank you, KauaiK~ It's the Environment Stupid.. to borrow frrom her era. Cha Sep 2014 #54

People in Kauai have worked so hard and fought so much. truedelphi Sep 2014 #110

We're not done until we run them off island KauaiK Sep 2014 #118

Can you explain how it is that the County was sued so it could not accept the truedelphi Sep 2014 #128

I'm not sure... I think KauaiK Sep 2014 #217

Kaua’i anti-GMO ‘Witch Trials’ continue, as Mayor faces death threats for bill veto HuckleB Sep 2014 #130

Well if some of you really want GMOs off the market cstanleytech Sep 2014 #45

2-4-D plus RoundUp plus ??? KurtNYC Sep 2014 #113

You are convoluting substances. HuckleB Sep 2014 #127

Dow has petitioned the EPA to approve another herbicide bc weeds are now Round-Up Ready KurtNYC Sep 2014 #148

Yes, Dow has. HuckleB Sep 2014 #153

Glyphosate has been linked to breast cancer Generic Other Sep 2014 #287

Yes you want the labels and I would like them myself however cstanleytech Sep 2014 #183

Who gives a shit? I think I am entitled to avoid supporting with my consumer dollars eridani Sep 2014 #237

1. You are certainly allowed to choose on how to spend your money. cstanleytech Sep 2014 #260

There certainly is a problem with them--monarch butterflies are dying off eridani Sep 2014 #261

Thats a problem for the milkweed plant and the butterflies but they arent going cstanleytech Sep 2014 #281

Yes thank you for pointing out the existing parallel between what is happening truedelphi Sep 2014 #133

... and a flotilla of other issues. Scuba Sep 2014 #57

The demobots in this country marym625 Sep 2014 #63

Why is she always on the wrong side of every damn issue that matters??? Generic Other Sep 2014 #65

Well this issue doesn't matter Shivering Jemmy Sep 2014 #132

How is this the "wrong side" of this issue? HuckleB Sep 2014 #147

Shill it to someone who cares Generic Other Sep 2014 #155

I get it. You prefer fiction-based fear over science. HuckleB Sep 2014 #158

Why do you think you have the right to force feed me??? Generic Other Sep 2014 #168

No one is force feeding you. HuckleB Sep 2014 #190

I don't wish to consume your product Generic Other Sep 2014 #196

I do appreciate the bizarre confession. HuckleB Sep 2014 #197

I do not want to consume your product Generic Other Sep 2014 #199

No one is making you consume anything. HuckleB Sep 2014 #200

I want to know when your product is in my food because I do not want Generic Other Sep 2014 #208

I have no product. HuckleB Sep 2014 #250

I don't want to consume what you are pushing Generic Other Sep 2014 #286

You don't have to eat safe foods. HuckleB Sep 2014 #307

Maybe Hillary should have a GMO label..er...logo attached. Tierra_y_Libertad Sep 2014 #66

GMO as in Goldman Money Org? L0oniX Sep 2014 #258

Another site that says someone is 'wrong' on science but doesn't quote science wyldwolf Sep 2014 #67

Genetic engineering is a process. A tool. Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #69

Those ancient Mesoamericans were really geniuses eridani Sep 2014 #87

That's pretty similar to the point I'm trying to make. Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #97

Try to keep up... CanSocDem Sep 2014 #101

Oh, yes, I live on McDonalds and as such I'm vulnerable to the spooky Monsanto conspiracy. Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #119

Farmers work to use less pesticides. HuckleB Sep 2014 #136

Warren DeMontague -- there are huge differences between what humans have done with truedelphi Sep 2014 #111

I'm not terrified of the technology, like I said it's a tool. Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #120

I wonder who to trust on this matter, Arundhati Roy or Hillary... JaydenD Sep 2014 #86

No third way Democrat for president can convince me to vote mmonk Sep 2014 #105

And if Hillary can't get even THAT one right, God help us if she becomes POTUS ~nt 99th_Monkey Sep 2014 #106

Mrs Clinton might be wrong, but she has the power. truedelphi Sep 2014 #109

She's right, and showing that she will go with science is a good sign. HuckleB Sep 2014 #124

I know you are not that naive PatSeg Sep 2014 #144

I'm not naive. That's why I know she is going with the science. HuckleB Sep 2014 #146

Sounds like PatSeg Sep 2014 #154

So you have no actual evidence to support anything you are "supporting." HuckleB Sep 2014 #156

I have plenty of evidence PatSeg Sep 2014 #164

No, you don't. HuckleB Sep 2014 #251

Actually, she has power of the GMO based corporations for whom she carries the H2O... MrMickeysMom Sep 2014 #139

That's quite the hyperbolic rant. HuckleB Sep 2014 #143

I don't think there is a preponderance of peer reviewed scientific studies, much due to the industry MrMickeysMom Sep 2014 #171

Some people don't want evidence or logic, PatSeg Sep 2014 #194

There are 600 plus independently funded studies that have been done. HuckleB Sep 2014 #195

Pseudo-Scientific Defense of GMO Safety is Smoke and Mirrors PatSeg Sep 2014 #204

I appreciate your reply, PatSeg... MrMickeysMom Sep 2014 #206

You're welcome PatSeg Sep 2014 #210

So you don't understand the terminology of pseudoscience. HuckleB Sep 2014 #249

Well then... MrMickeysMom Sep 2014 #207

Yes PatSeg Sep 2014 #211

You would? HuckleB Sep 2014 #256

Snarky PatSeg Sep 2014 #267

You've read the nearly 1800 studies that have shown no concerns about GMOs? HuckleB Sep 2014 #271

297 scientists and experts agree GMOs not proven safe PatSeg Sep 2014 #280

Claiming to be a scientist doesn't make you one. HuckleB Sep 2014 #282

Right back at you dear PatSeg Sep 2014 #289

No, they are not!!!! HuckleB Sep 2014 #311

dozens... hundreds of scientist deny global warming or that it's man made. wyldwolf Sep 2014 #314

Why don't you discuss this with HuckleB? PatSeg Sep 2014 #319

So you didn't know this? HuckleB Sep 2014 #255

Mono-symbolically speaking... MrMickeysMom Sep 2014 #270

"Sybolically?" HuckleB Sep 2014 #272

You can probably get people who want to believe like you do to agree... MrMickeysMom Sep 2014 #278

Actually, I have, repeatedly. HuckleB Sep 2014 #285

Ah, give it up! PatSeg Sep 2014 #276

Says the non-thinking programmer. HuckleB Sep 2014 #283

You know PatSeg Sep 2014 #290

In this case, you might want to try thinking for once. HuckleB Sep 2014 #294

You know, I think you are right PatSeg Sep 2014 #308

Awesome! Fiction-based propaganda is so cool!!!! HuckleB Sep 2014 #310

Another good reason marions ghost Sep 2014 #142

Because she doesn't kowtow to anti-science BS? HuckleB Sep 2014 #145

Hillary has no clue marions ghost Sep 2014 #152

Because she kowtow's to big Corp-America and does not represent the people. rhett o rick Sep 2014 #166

Has been tried, but corporatists don't want to fight these battles and court rejects them... cascadiance Sep 2014 #169

Got fiction? HuckleB Sep 2014 #193

And what have you got? Corp-America? We are in a fight to reestablish our rhett o rick Sep 2014 #203

The consensus of science shows GMOs to be safe. HuckleB Sep 2014 #215

So are you also going to tell us that the "consensus of science" says there's no climate change too? cascadiance Sep 2014 #224

Right here^^^^^^^^^Buddy MrMickeysMom Sep 2014 #230

Wake up, Buddy. HuckleB Sep 2014 #247

Ensser had been debunked over and over again. HuckleB Sep 2014 #246

She's also tried to use a "better vocabulary" to support the H-1B program... cascadiance Sep 2014 #165

Why, isn't she special?!? truedelphi Sep 2014 #182

Just curious PatSeg Sep 2014 #205

Just curious wyldwolf Sep 2014 #218

But there are many people who don't even respond to our details here... cascadiance Sep 2014 #223

I think you nailed it PatSeg Sep 2014 #229

…"But we don't see those threads…" MrMickeysMom Sep 2014 #231

+1,000,000 ... 000 HuckleB Sep 2014 #257

they're ideologues: "I've given my decree: why are you still DISAGREEING WITH ME?!" MisterP Sep 2014 #233

And a lot of schoolyard taunting PatSeg Sep 2014 #234

Haven't made up my mind on GMOs but I want them labeled LittleBlue Sep 2014 #236

Safety aside, I want labels so that I can choose not to support Monsanto, et al. NYC_SKP Sep 2014 #241

We are on the same wavelength PatSeg Sep 2014 #243

It was "reporting" on Monsanto and firing reporters that gave Fox permission to LIE to us! cascadiance Sep 2014 #263

Their reach and power PatSeg Sep 2014 #268

^^^This!^^^ n/t eridani Sep 2014 #244

Well said PatSeg Sep 2014 #242

The attitude that GE technology should be labeled is sick corporate fear mongering. HuckleB Sep 2014 #315

This is no surprise. H. Clinton stands with Big Corp America. She makes no pretense otherwise. rhett o rick Sep 2014 #240

If GMO food is so good why try to hide it? L0oniX Sep 2014 #259

You would think that they would LOVE the "free advertising" of labeling! cascadiance Sep 2014 #262

For the most part PatSeg Sep 2014 #269

Of course, the reality is the opposite. HuckleB Sep 2014 #312

So how is IDENTIFYING when GMOs are in food LYING about them? cascadiance Sep 2014 #316

no, no she isnt. lumping monsanto's corporate misbehavior in with the ALL the science mopinko Sep 2014 #273

Exactly!!!!!! HuckleB Sep 2014 #274

you schooled me well hb. mopinko Sep 2014 #275

I'm not smart enough to "school" anyone. HuckleB Sep 2014 #296

you showed me where to find the evidence, mopinko Sep 2014 #317

Hillary needs to listen to the American people PatSeg Sep 2014 #292

Fear mongering works! HuckleB Sep 2014 #295

Why do you NOT want to know what you are eating? cascadiance Sep 2014 #302

I do want to know what I'm eating. HuckleB Sep 2014 #303

But you are basically saying that you'd rather know nothing than everything here! cascadiance Sep 2014 #304

You have made it clear that you are focused on one thing. HuckleB Sep 2014 #306