HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » pbmus » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Next »


Profile Information

Member since: Wed Aug 22, 2012, 08:01 PM
Number of posts: 10,902

Journal Archives

ISIS Day to Day since 2013

WTF -- 206

A Town Demands Protection from Monsanto Pesticides

The dramatic photograph brought attention to the problems of Avia Terai, giving its residents the courage to speak out about their concerns. Now conditions have improved in the town. Residents have sought advance notice of aerial pesticide spraying and are lodging complaints. Farm workers are demanding better on-the-job protections, says Alejandra Gomez, a lawyer and co-founder of Red Salud, a volunteer network of doctors, lawyers, and scientists. And authorities have taken some action, so pesticides are no longer sprayed in Aixa’s neighborhood or close to schools on weekdays.

But while some things have changed for the better for Aixa and others living in Avia Terai, pesticide use has not stopped altogether, so worries continue. The community also is without running water, which exacerbates the health concerns.

What Avia Terai has been dealing with is not an isolated problem for those living and working in Argentina’s agricultural regions, where pesticides are used extensively. Argentina grows more soybeans than any other country except the United States and Brazil. It also is the world’s third largest grower of genetically engineered crops, primarily soybeans engineered to resist the herbicide glyphosate. This engineering allows farms to spray the herbicide to kill weeds without damaging their crops.


Missing on GOP debate stage: A future president

(CNN)This was no presidential debate.

It was a verbal cage fight. There was no winner -- only a loser, the American people.

Fox News' Bret Baier started the debate by asking the audience to behave as if they were sitting between a library and Red Wings game.

It was a request the audience ignored by hooting, jeering, cheering and booing throughout the entire debate.

Is Mitt Romney a hypocrite on Donald Trump?
It went downhill from there, fast.

As the first question went to Trump, my husband said, "He says the same thing every time." I answered: "Yes because it works and he's winning."

In less than seven minutes, Trump was making a reference to his own penis size.

"Rubio) referred to my hands, if they're small, something else must be small," he said. "I guarantee you, there's no problem."

This debate was somewhere between a cage fight and a reality show. It had plenty of insults, bickering, private parts and bad spray tans. But it lacked what America needs,!


Zika virus can be carried by more common mosquito, scientists say

Source: Guardian

Research by scientists in Brazil indicates that a mosquito more common than the one primarily known to transmit Zika infections may possibly be able to carry the virus, a development that could further complicate efforts to limit its spread.

The mosquito species Aedes aegypti has been identified as the main transmitter of Zika infections, which have been linked to thousands of birth defects as the virus spreads rapidly in Brazil and other countries in Latin America and the Caribbean.

But the scientists in Brazil announced on Wednesday that they were able to infect another species, Culex quinquefasciatus, with the virus in a laboratory, raising concerns that Zika could be carried by a species more prevalent than Aedes aegypti. They said much more research is needed to learn whether the Culex mosquitoes can transmit Zika infections

Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/03/zika-virus-carried-more-common-mosquito-scientists-say?CMP=oth_b-aplnews_d-1

OMG -- breathe, breathe, I know he is very flexible

OMG -- "I have no problem down there" Trumpster

Hollywood A-Listers To Protest Guns At The Oscars: ‘I’m Wearing The Victim Of Gun Violence

Hollywood A-Listers To Protest Guns At The Oscars: ‘I’m Wearing The Victim Of Gun Violence’

MARLOW STERN02.28.1610:38 AM ET

Brady Campaign President Dan Gross on why several Oscar nominees will be wearing a bracelet to bring awareness to gun violence at tonight’s Academy Awards ceremony.
“What are you wearing?” It’s the question awards nominees dread the most on the red carpet, forcing them to feign interest in whatever fashion house hooked them up with free designers duds. But this year, several Academy Award nominees will give a very unique answer to Ryan Seacrest’s favorite query: I’m wearing the victim of gun violence.

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence has decided to join forces with Hollywood for the movie industry’s biggest event in order to shed light on the 33,000 Americans killed every year by gun violence. Best Director nominee Adam McKay (The Big Short), Best Actor nominee Bryan Cranston (Trumbo), Oscar winner Patricia Arquette, Steve Carell, and others will be donning black and gold bracelets as part of Brady’s #ENOUGH campaign—an effort to bring awareness to scourge of gun violence in America, and the importance of strict background checks in order to prevent firearms from falling into the wrong hands.

“We developed the concept first and started reaching out once we got the concept, and the reaction was overwhelmingly positive,” Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign, told The Daily Beast. “It seemed like a natural fit with the Oscars and awards season, because one of the most common questions you hear is, ‘What are you wearing?’ and we felt it would be a powerful statement to say, ‘I’m wearing the victim of gun violence.’”



Irony dripping irony

Looking Back On Scalia

Antonin Scalia, who died this month, after nearly three decades on the Supreme Court, devoted his professional life to making the United States a less fair, less tolerant, and less admirable democracy. Fortunately, he mostly failed. Belligerent with his colleagues, dismissive of his critics, nostalgic for a world where outsiders knew their place and stayed there, Scalia represents a perfect model for everything that President Obama should avoid in a successor. The great Justices of the Supreme Court have always looked forward; their words both anticipated and helped shape the nation that the United States was becoming. Chief Justice John Marshall read the new Constitution to allow for a vibrant and progressive federal government. Louis Brandeis understood the need for that government to regulate an industrializing economy. Earl Warren saw that segregation was poison in the modern world. Scalia, in contrast, looked backward.

His revulsion toward homosexuality, a touchstone of his world view, appeared straight out of his sheltered, nineteen-forties boyhood. When, in 2003, the Court ruled that gay people could no longer be thrown in prison for having consensual sex, Scalia dissented, and wrote, “Today’s opinion is the product of a Court, which is the product of a law-profession culture, that has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda, by which I mean the agenda promoted by some homosexual activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct.” He went on, “Many Americans do not want persons who openly engage in homosexual conduct as partners in their business, as scoutmasters for their children, as teachers in their children’s schools, or as boarders in their home. They view this as protecting themselves and their families from a life style that they believe to be immoral and destructive.”

But it was in his jurisprudence that Scalia most self-consciously looked to the past. He pioneered “originalism,” a theory holding that the Constitution should be interpreted in line with the beliefs of the white men, many of them slave owners, who ratified it in the late eighteenth century. During Scalia’s first two decades as a Justice, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist rarely gave him important constitutional cases to write for the Court; the Chief feared that Scalia’s extreme views would repel Sandra Day O’Connor, the Court’s swing vote, who had a toxic relationship with him during their early days as colleagues. (Scalia’s clashes with O’Connor were far more significant than his much chronicled friendship with Ruth Bader Ginsburg.) It was not until 2008, after John G. Roberts, Jr., had succeeded Rehnquist, that Scalia finally got a blockbuster: District of Columbia v. Heller, about the Second Amendment. Scalia spent thousands of words plumbing the psyches of the Framers, to conclude (wrongly, as John Paul Stevens pointed out in his dissent) that they had meant that individuals, not just members of “well-regulated” state militias, had the right to own handguns. Even Scalia’s ideological allies recognized the folly of trying to divine the “intent” of the authors of the Constitution concerning questions that those bewigged worthies could never have anticipated. During the oral argument of a challenge to a California law that required, among other things, warning labels on violent video games, Justice Samuel Alito interrupted Scalia’s harangue of a lawyer by quipping, “I think what Justice Scalia wants to know is what James Madison thought about video games. Did he enjoy them?”


Fed Up

Go to Page: « Prev 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Next »