SodaHead - conrman's Answers & Comments

Would you watch "American Idol" if Kanye West was a judge?

2010-01-26T22:04:53Z

Would you watch "American Idol" if Kanye West was a judge?
(Entertainment)

52 answers, +3 raves

conrman answered
No
and said : course I don't watch it now.

"Moscow mayor calls gay pride march 'Satanic" What do you think of this?

2010-01-26T22:02:40Z

"Moscow mayor calls gay pride march 'Satanic" What do you think of this?
(News & Politics)

32 answers, +8 raves

"The mayor of Moscow, known for his overtly homophobic statements, said Monday that he would never allow a gay pride parade in the city, calling it "Satanic" and saying marchers should be punished. "A gay parade... cannot be called anything but a Satanic act," Yury Luzhkov told an education conference, quoted by Interfax news agency. "We haven't permitted such a parade and we won't permit it in the future." Luzhkov called for gay marchers to be punished. "It's high time that we stop propagating nonsense discussions about human rights, and bring to bear on them the full force and justice of the law," he said. Gay rights campaigner Nikolai Alexeyev reaffirmed that plans for this year's gay pride parade will go ahead despite the ban. "We don't plan to make any changes. We still plan to hold a gay parade on May 29," Alexeyev told AFP. Luzhkov first called the gay pride parade "Satanic" in 2007, prompting gay rights campaigners to sue him for libel -- unsuccessfully. Organisers have never been granted permission to hold gay pride parades by the city authorities, leading to violent clashes with police and anti-gay protestors. Last year's parade took place on the day of the Eurovision Song Contest final held in Moscow. In a public relations disaster for the city, Alexeyev and other campaigners were brutally dragged into police vans by riot police in front of a crowd of international journalists." http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.4136ab6e388ce2129...

conrman answered
I think this...
and said : I think the Mayor of moscow isn't gay

How Do You Feel About Priests Blogging?

2010-01-26T22:01:41Z

How Do You Feel About Priests Blogging?
(News & Politics)

25 answers, +1 raves

Pope Benedict XVI has a new method for priests struggling to spread the Gospel: go forth and blog! Benedict has also encouraged young priests in seminary to use new technologies to open dialogue with online users. The 82-year-old Pope warns however that priests should be less known for being tech savvy and more for "their priestly heart, their closeness to Christ." The Vatican has opened a Youtube page dedicated to Pope Benedict XVI, and its website Pope2You, features a Facebook application allowing users to send postcards with photos and quotes of Benedict. How do you feel about priests blogging the Gospel online?

conrman answered
Having more priests blogging online would be great!
and said : Why not, we have books online, and electronic books.....bring on the chanting....

Do you believe the military should kill an enemy combatant if he is a U.S. citizen?

2010-01-26T22:00:29Z

Do you believe the military should kill an enemy combatant if he is a U.S. citizen?
(News & Politics)

367 answers, +72 raves

Anwar Al Awlaki is an admitted Al Qaida recruiter who has called for the murder of Americans in the name of jihad. He was instrumental in inspiring the mass-murder at Fort Hood by Major Nidal Malik Hassan. The U.S. military has not killed Awlaki because he is a U.S. citizen: "White House lawyers are mulling the legality of proposed attempts to kill an American citizen, Anwar al Awlaki, who is believed to be part of the leadership of the al Qaeda group in Yemen behind a series of terror strikes, according to two people briefed by U.S. intelligence officials. One of the people briefed said opportunities to "take out" Awlaki "may have been missed" because of the legal questions surrounding a lethal attack which would specifically target an American citizen." Do you believe the U.S. military should kill enemy combatants like Anwar Al Awlaki even if he is a U.S. citizen?

conrman answered
Yes, kill the terrorists no matter what passport they carry
and said : waste em' There are tons of poor Haitian children who'd like a chance, any chance (and a glass of water, any glass of water). Why limit it to terrorist, trade a life term inmate for two Haitian kiddos. Blue collar criminals could cover a portion of the program cost in fines. Violent offenders could help with the disposal of the bodies. Or is that insensitive?

Can social media help heal Haiti?

2010-01-26T21:46:13Z

Can social media help heal Haiti?
(Business)

18 answers, +2 raves

None

conrman answered
Yes. Social media can help organize relief efforts.

Anti-Semitism At Highest Level Since Holocaust: Jews A Scapegoat For World Problems?

2010-01-26T21:37:26Z

Anti-Semitism At Highest Level Since Holocaust: Jews A Scapegoat For World Problems?
(News & Politics)

28 answers, +1 raves

The Jewish Agency For Israel (JAFI) reported that 2009 showed a large rise in anti-Semitism throughout the world. Following Israel's military operation in the Gaza Strip at the beginning of 2009, 631 anti-Jewish incidents took place; 113 of these actions were violent, and these numbers are just from the first half of 2009. Anti-Semitic actions of 2009 occurred in such countries as France, the Netherlands, Ukraine, Hungary, and the United States. Two anti-Jewish murders took place in the United States including the shooting of a guard at the Holocaust Memorial in Washington D.C. Over and over throughout history, the Jewish people have been used as a scapegoat for the problems of the world, from World War II to the Crusades to Biblical times. With the world suffering through the current recession among a plethora of other hardships, history could be repeating itself once again. Is the current rise in anti-Semitism an example of Jews being used as a scapegoat for world problems?

conrman answered
No, the rise in anti-Semitism has been caused by...
and said : Don't know, but I recently discovered that the first slave ships that brought slaves to the US were owned and directed by Jewish companies. The whole slave industry was engineered by Jewish Masons according to the article .....something to that effect. Here is the link.....check the source and research the details.....food for thought. http://video.google.com/video...

Are MTV's Jersey Shore Cast Members Getting Paid Too Little?

2010-01-26T21:30:52Z

Are MTV's Jersey Shore Cast Members Getting Paid Too Little?
(Entertainment)

21 answers, +4 raves

For season two of Jersey Shore, MTV offered Jersey Shore cast members a signing bonus of $10,000, with an additional $5,000 payment per episode for the 12-episode season. Jersey Shore members rejected the payment of $5,000 per episode, to which MTV doubled their wages to $10K per episode. However, MTV said that any Jersey Shore members unhappy with the new wages will be replaced. Jersey Shore crew members have already been racking in additional income by making appearances at local bars and clubs; they earn approximately $10,000 per appearance. Then again, The Hills cast members are getting paid well over $50K per episode. Lauren Conrad was making $75K per episode before being replaced with Kristin Cavallari, who now makes $63,000 per episode. Do you think Jersey Shore cast members are getting paid too little?

conrman answered
I think Jersey Shore...
and said : Does anyone watch this garbage, really? Find a new cast.....then see what the old crew demands.

New Hampshire Fires First Shot?

2009-02-06T19:21:42Z

New Hampshire Fires First Shot?
(News & Politics)

95 answers, +34 raves

New Hampshire, little state, BIG statement. Should more states fallow suit with New Hampshire? New Hampshire Fires First Shot Of Civil War - Resolution Immediately Voids Several Federal Laws, Threatens Counterstrike Against Federal “Breach Of Peace” February 4th, 2009 Posted By Pat Dollard. The New Hampshire state legislature took an unbelievably bold step Monday by introducing a resolution to declare certain actions by the federal government to completely totally void and warning that certain future acts will be viewed as a “breach of peace” with the states themselves that risks “nullifying the Constitution.” This act by New Hampshire is a clear warning to the federal government that they could face being stripped of their power by the States (presumably through civil war! The remarkable document outlines with perfect clarity, some basics long forgotten. For instance, it reminds Congress “That the Constitution of the United States, having delegated to Congress a power to punish treason, counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States, piracies, and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences against the law of nations, slavery, and no other crimes whatsoever;. . . . . therefore all acts of Congress which assume to create, define, or punish crimes, other than those so enumerated in the Constitution are altogether void, and of no force;” Federal gun crime laws? Void. Federal drug crime laws? Void. The gazzillion other federal criminal laws that deal with anything other than the specific enumerated crimes? ALL VOID. One would think that if any lawyer anywhere in the entire country was worth his salt, all federal criminal trials would have ended years ago. This seems to prove that most lawyers are dullards. New Hampshire deals a complete death blow to the pending federal hate crimes legislation by pointing out “That, therefore, all acts of Congress of the United States which do abridge the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, are not law, but are altogether void, and of no force; . . . . .” Later in the Resolution, New Hampshire makes clear what the feds are now risking if they proceed further: The removal of all powers from the federal government by the States! Quoting directly from the Resolution: “That any Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President of the United States of America or Judicial Order by the Judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not delegated to the government of United States of America by the Constitution for the United States of America and which serves to diminish the liberty of the any of the several States or their citizens shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the United States of America by the government of the United States of America. Acts which would cause such a nullification include, but are not limited to: I. Establishing martial law or a state of emergency within one of the States comprising the United States of America without the consent of the legislature of that State. II. Requiring involuntary servitude, or governmental service other than a draft during a declared war, or pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law. III. Requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of persons under the age of 18 other than pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law. IV. Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government. V. Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press. VI. Further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition; and That should any such act of Congress become law or Executive Order or Judicial Order be put into force, all powers previously delegated to the United States of America by the Constitution for the United States shall revert to the several States individually.” I have reported on this blog for quite some time that we here in the United States are heading toward Civil War. Many of you told me I was a nut for thinking that. The simple fact is that we are long overdue for another Rebellion in this nation and I heartily endorse the idea of having one again very soon; preferably starting THIS year! We must stop our federal government dead in its tracks because it is out of control and very dangerous. If stopping them means attacking them and destroying them by force, then so be it. The full New Hampshire resolution is printed below, or you can to the Government’s website and read it there. HCR 6 – AS INTRODUCED 2009 SESSION 09-0274 09/01 HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 6 A RESOLUTION affirming States’ rights based on Jeffersonian principles. SPONSORS: Rep. Itse, Rock 9; Rep. Ingbretson, Graf 5; Rep. Comerford, Rock 9; Sen. Denley, Dist 3 COMMITTEE: State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs ANALYSIS This house concurrent resolution affirms States’ rights based on Jeffersonian principles. 09-0274 09/01 STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Nine A RESOLUTION affirming States’ rights based on Jeffersonian principles. Whereas the Constitution of the State of New Hampshire, Part 1, Article 7 declares that the people of this State have the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves as a free, sovereign, and independent State; and do, and forever hereafter shall, exercise and enjoy every power, jurisdiction, and right, pertaining thereto, which is not, or may not hereafter be, by them expressly delegated to the United States of America in congress assembled; and Whereas the Constitution of the State of New Hampshire, Part 2, Article 1 declares that the people inhabiting the territory formerly called the province of New Hampshire, do hereby solemnly and mutually agree with each other, to form themselves into a free, sovereign and independent body-politic, or State, by the name of The State of New Hampshire; and Whereas the State of New Hampshire when ratifying the Constitution for the United States of America recommended as a change, “First That it be Explicitly declared that all Powers not expressly & particularly Delegated by the aforesaid are reserved to the several States to be, by them Exercised;” and Whereas the other States that included recommendations, to wit Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Rhode Island and Virginia, included an identical or similar recommended change; and Whereas these recommended changes were incorporated as the ninth amendment, the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people, and the tenth amendment, the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people, to the Constitution for the United States of America; now, therefore, be it Resolved by the House of Representatives, the Senate concurring: That the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a General Government for special purposes, — delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force; that to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party: that the government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress; and That the Constitution of the United States, having delegated to Congress a power to punish treason, counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States, piracies, and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences against the law of nations, slavery, and no other crimes whatsoever; and it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people,” therefore all acts of Congress which assume to create, define, or punish crimes, other than those so enumerated in the Constitution are altogether void, and of no force; and that the power to create, define, and punish such other crimes is reserved, and, of right, appertains solely and exclusively to the respective States, each within its own territory; and That it is true as a general principle, and is also expressly declared by one of the amendments to the Constitution, that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people;” and that no power over the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, or freedom of the press being delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, all lawful powers respecting the same did of right remain, and were reserved to the States or the people: that thus was manifested their determination to retain to themselves the right of judging how far the licentiousness of speech and of the press may be abridged without lessening their useful freedom, and how far those abuses which cannot be separated from their use should be tolerated, rather than the use be destroyed. And thus also they guarded against all abridgment by the United States of the freedom of religious opinions and exercises, and retained to themselves the right of protecting the same. And that in addition to this general principle and express declaration, another and more special provision has been made by one of the amendments to the Constitution, which expressly declares, that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press:” thereby guarding in the same sentence, and under the same words, the freedom of religion, of speech, and of the press: insomuch, that whatever violated either, throws down the sanctuary which covers the others, and that libels, falsehood, and defamation, equally with heresy and false religion, are withheld from the cognizance of federal tribunals. That, therefore, all acts of Congress of the United States which do abridge the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, are not law, but are altogether void, and of no force; and That the construction applied by the General Government (as is evidenced by sundry of their proceedings) to those parts of the Constitution of the United States which delegate to Congress a power “to lay and collect taxes, duties, imports, and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States,” and “to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the powers vested by the Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof,” goes to the destruction of all limits prescribed to their power by the Constitution: that words meant by the instrument to be subsidiary only to the execution of limited powers, ought not to be so construed as themselves to give unlimited powers, nor a part to be so taken as to destroy the whole residue of that instrument: that the proceedings of the General Government under color of these articles, will be a fit and necessary subject of revisal and correction; and That a committee of conference and correspondence be appointed, which shall have as its charge to communicate the preceding resolutions to the Legislatures of the several States; to assure them that this State continues in the same esteem of their friendship and union which it has manifested from that moment at which a common danger first suggested a common union: that it considers union, for specified national purposes, and particularly to those specified in their federal compact, to be friendly to the peace, happiness and prosperity of all the States: that faithful to that compact, according to the plain intent and meaning in which it was understood and acceded to by the several parties, it is sincerely anxious for its preservation: that it does also believe, that to take from the States all the powers of self-government and transfer them to a general and consolidated government, without regard to the special delegations and reservations solemnly agreed to in that compact, is not for the peace, happiness or prosperity of these States; and that therefore this State is determined, as it doubts not its co-States are, to submit to undelegated, and consequently unlimited powers in no man, or body of men on earth: that in cases of an abuse of the delegated powers, the members of the General Government, being chosen by the people, a change by the people would be the constitutional remedy; but, where powers are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy: that every State has a natural right in cases not within the compact, (casus non foederis), to nullify of their own authority all assumptions of power by others within their limits: that without this right, they would be under the dominion, absolute and unlimited, of whosoever might exercise this right of judgment for them: that nevertheless, this State, from motives of regard and respect for its co-States, has wished to communicate with them on the subject: that with them alone it is proper to communicate, they alone being parties to the compact, and solely authorized to judge in the last resort of the powers exercised under it, Congress being not a party, but merely the creature of the compact, and subject as to its assumptions of power to the final judgment of those by whom, and for whose use itself and its powers were all created and modified: that if the acts before specified should stand, these conclusions would flow from them: that it would be a dangerous delusion were a confidence in the men of our choice to silence our fears for the safety of our rights: that confidence is everywhere the parent of despotism — free government is founded in jealousy, and not in confidence; it is jealousy and not confidence which prescribes limited constitutions, to bind down those whom we are obliged to trust with power: that our Constitution has accordingly fixed the limits to which, and no further, our confidence may go. In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution. That this State does therefore call on its co-States for an expression of their sentiments on acts not authorized by the federal compact. And it doubts not that their sense will be so announced as to prove their attachment unaltered to limited government, whether general or particular. And that the rights and liberties of their co-States will be exposed to no dangers by remaining embarked in a common bottom with their own. That they will concur with this State in considering acts as so palpably against the Constitution as to amount to an undisguised declaration that that compact is not meant to be the measure of the powers of the General Government, but that it will proceed in the exercise over these States, of all powers whatsoever: that they will view this as seizing the rights of the States, and consolidating them in the hands of the General Government, with a power assumed to bind the States, not merely as the cases made federal, (casus foederis,) but in all cases whatsoever, by laws made, not with their consent, but by others against their consent: that this would be to surrender the form of government we have chosen, and live under one deriving its powers from its own will, and not from our authority; and that the co-States, recurring to their natural right in cases not made federal, will concur in declaring these acts void, and of no force, and will each take measures of its own for providing that neither these acts, nor any others of the General Government not plainly and intentionally authorized by the Constitution, shall be exercised within their respective territories; and That the said committee be authorized to communicate by writing or personal conferences, at any times or places whatever, with any person or person who may be appointed by any one or more co-States to correspond or confer with them; and that they lay their proceedings before the next session of the General Court; and That any Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President of the United States of America or Judicial Order by the Judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not delegated to the government of United States of America by the Constitution for the United States of America and which serves to diminish the liberty of the any of the several States or their citizens shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the United States of America by the government of the United States of America. Acts which would cause such a nullification include, but are not limited to: I. Establishing martial law or a state of emergency within one of the States comprising the United States of America without the consent of the legislature of that State. II. Requiring involuntary servitude, or governmental service other than a draft during a declared war, or pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law. III. Requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of persons under the age of 18 other than pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law. IV. Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government. V. Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press. VI. Further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition; and That should any such act of Congress become law or Executive Order or Judicial Order be put into force, all powers previously delegated to the United States of America by the Constitution for the United States shall revert to the several States individually. Any future government of the United States of America shall require ratification of three quarters of the States seeking to form a government of the United States of America and shall not be binding upon any State not seeking to form such a government; and That copies of this resolution be transmitted by the house clerk to the President of the United States, each member of the United States Congress, and the presiding officers of each State’s legislature.

conrman answered
Undecided
and said :

Which one are you!

2009-02-06T18:34:05Z

Which one are you!
(Business)

104 answers, +25 raves

A natural born lover or a natural born hater?

conrman answered
I am a natural born lover all the way

Shouldn't we have the most intelligent people in the country fix the economy?

2009-02-06T18:27:24Z

Shouldn't we have the most intelligent people in the country fix the economy?
(Business)

134 answers, +25 raves

Why not put our most successful businessmen in charge of reviving our economy instead of career politicians? Our leaders look clueless. Hire businessmen and women to do the job. Who's the genious economist these days? We've got work for that person to do.

conrman answered
Undecided
and said : The people caused the problem ( arguably including businesses and their operations), the government allowed it with unchecked lending and borrowing practices. Most everyone was making money, so very few were questioning what was happening. The public is going to have to change its way of thinking and doing business, for any long term recovery. I don't believe that anyone can wave a magic wand or create policy that will FIX the economy (ours or the rest of the worlds). The best of the best are working on it, debates among universities world wide continue as to what could help.....It is mostly speculation, as the variables are numerous. The problem has been years in the making.....the final solution may take years to engineer, as dynamic interactions will create issues and hurdles within each solution.

Can you sign the McCain petition against the Stimulus (spending) plan?

2009-02-05T16:33:49Z

Can you sign the McCain petition against the Stimulus (spending) plan?
(News & Politics)

136 answers, +46 raves

http://www.countryfirstpac.com/petition/economic.aspx The Senate recently began debate on an economic stimulus package that is intended to get our economy get back on track and help Americans who are suffering through these difficult times. Unfortunately, the proposal on the table is big on the giveaways for the special interests and corporate high rollers, yet short on help for ordinary working Americans. I cannot and do not support the package on the table from the Democrats and the Obama Administration. Our country does not need just another spending bill, particularly not one that will load future generations with the burden of massive debt. We need a short term stimulus bill that will directly help people, create jobs, and provide a jolt to our economy. Please join me in saying no to this stimulus package as it currently exists by signing the petition to the right and telling your friends about our efforts. John McCain Chair, Country First PAC

conrman answered
YES I CAN
and said : It's called throwing good money on top of bad..... Stimulus money will go into savings accounts of the financially responsible, pay down bills of the off balanced / or laid off citizen, and buy bling for the clueless and financially ignorant. Bling purchases are unlikely to stimulate much, Paying down household bills will buy the unemployed time and satisfy the banks for a few months. Financially responsible folks would simply put the money away "just in case things got worse" in a rainy day fund, stimulating very little if anything but a little peace of mind. The packages for the corporations are difficult to monitor and open the door for corruption. Then there are the special interest groups who helped fund our new leaders campaign..... Its not a good plan....

Where's the pickle man?

2009-02-04T21:37:56Z

Where's the pickle man?
(Fun)

7 answers, +2 raves

conrman answered
None of the above
and said : Where the pickle?.....with the beef!!! Of course!

Should someone smoking pot be headline news?

2009-02-04T19:54:17Z

Should someone smoking pot be headline news?
(Sports)

162 answers, +32 raves

The media is now ,officially completely tabloid. Micheal Phelps smoked weed. Big freakin deal. It's normal for people his age to try weed. It's one of those things that many people do when they are young. Why all of the fascination with what stars do in their private time? Why do you care?

conrman answered
Undecided
and said : They are on the news all the time (just closet potheads)......

Steeler or Cards fan....it was an AWESOME game! What was your favorite moment?

2009-02-04T19:40:22Z

Steeler or Cards fan....it was an AWESOME game! What was your favorite moment?
(Entertainment)

43 answers, +8 raves

conrman answered
other
and said : Watching the Office after wards.......funny..... My team was blown out long ago.....so, the game didn't really matter:(

FDA to Approve Genetically Engineered Animals; DNA of such animals is treated as private property that can be held under patent. Should we have the right to know if the meat that we buy is genetically engineered?

2009-02-04T16:50:30Z

FDA to Approve Genetically Engineered Animals; DNA of such animals is treated as private property that can be held under patent. Should we have the right to know if the meat that we buy is genetically engineered?
(News & Politics)

16 answers, +6 raves

The FDA has adopted new rules allowing companies to sell genetically modified animals and their products on the market, and affirming that the DNA of such animals is private property that can be held under patent. To be approved, any genetically modified animal product must be proven to the FDA's satisfaction to be safe for human use in a process similar to that undergone by new drugs. Clinical trials like those needed for drugs will not be required, however. The FDA must also show that any genetically modified animal is healthy. No FDA approval will be required for cloned animals or those intended only for research or as pets. The new rules immediately drew harsh criticism from a wide spectrum of opponents. Experts objected to the FDA's decision to allow the approval process to remain secret in order to protect the financial interests of companies that hold patents on genetically modified animals and their DNA. Environmental and consumer advocates also criticized the rules for ignoring the potential environmental impacts of genetically modified animals. "Drugs don't go out and breed with each other. When a drug gets loose, you figure you can control it. When a bull gets loose, it would be harder to corral," said Jaydee Hanson from the Center for Food Safety. Others criticized the FDA's decision to not require labeling of genetically modified animal products as long as there is no change in composition in the final product. "Consumers have the right to know if the ham, bacon or pork chops they are buying … have been engineered with mouse genes," said Jean Halloran, director of food policy initiatives at Consumers Union. Already, companies are lining up to introduce a wide variety of modified animals, from salmon that grow twice as fast as normal to pigs with meat high in omega-3 fatty acids, cows resistant to mad cow disease and animals that produce pharmaceutical products such as insulin in their milk. Researchers have also expressed interest in engineering animals that grow human organs for transplant. http://www.naturalnews.com/025481.html

conrman answered
Yes
and said : Sure if its important to you, why not? Genetic engineering just speeds up certain evolutionary probabilities, for a desired effect. Genetic engineering is going to be one answer, to feeding an ever increasing world population and decreasing resources. Anyone seen soylent green

If we didn't have politics, would we have anything to discuss

2009-02-04T13:41:22Z

If we didn't have politics, would we have *anything* to discuss
(Fun)

27 answers, +10 raves

conrman answered
Of course!
and said :

What sounds worse? Moist or Used?

2009-02-03T22:17:28Z

What sounds worse? Moist or Used?
(Fun)

11 answers, +3 raves

Or both.. ups and downs of each. ive never been able to choose.. usually i go with moist..

conrman answered
Equal
and said : Depends on the context I suppose Substandard is the one I use descriptively, to do damage. (there are very nice used things and substandard new things) Moist can be a good thing (moist lips, kisses) or used to describe substandard sealing ie. there is moisture everywhere, due to sub-standard seals installed, or substandard installation resulted in moisture. Is it damp around here or what?

I hear talk of Katrina relief funds ending up in Clinton's bank account...does anyone have any info

2009-02-03T17:02:11Z

I hear talk of Katrina relief funds ending up in Clinton's bank account...does anyone have any info
(News & Politics)

7 answers, +3 raves

conrman answered
I know nothing of this, Belle!
and said : I do know of people (fact) who received money that did not even live there at the time (but had in prior years, or claimed residency in N.O.). There were a lot of scams.....People falsifying information to get money.

What Is The First Impression You Give People?

2009-02-02T23:20:47Z

What Is The First Impression You Give People?
(Living)

745 answers, +101 raves

The most important part of meeting someone new is giving them a good impression. A good impression can open doors to many benefits like a relationship or a job. A first impression can give you respect and dignity or make you look like a complete fool. What is the first impression you give someone?

conrman answered
The first impression I give people is..
and said : Positive.....it seems.....

What Does Your Home Say About You?

2009-02-01T20:35:42Z

What Does Your Home Say About You?
(Fun)

92 answers, +39 raves

Click link below and find out! http://www.blogthings.com/whatdoesyourhomesayaboutyouquiz/

conrman answered
Your home says.................
and said : Conservative and fun, base camp for adventures. Garage is bitchen' Wife is bitchen' bout garage!?!?!