Search Members Help

» Welcome Guest
[ Log In :: Register ]

1 members are viewing this topic
>Guest

Page 5 of 12<<123456789>>

[ Track This Topic :: Email This Topic :: Print this topic ]

reply to topic new topic new poll
Topic: First Amendment Right, or breaking the law?< Next Oldest | Next Newest >
 Post Number: 41
irisheyes Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Super Administrators
Posts: 3040
Joined: Oct. 2003
PostIcon Posted on: Apr. 07 2012,8:43 am  Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Santorini @ Apr. 06 2012,9:51 am)
QUOTE
Mine is quite simple:  most everyone screams for protection under the 1st Amendment...yet, most want nothing to do with personal responsibility...anything goes regarding interpretation of expression.

No, not everything goes.  But I get nervous when you keep talking about taking away freedoms based on YOUR interpretation of what peoples' responsibilities are.  I don't like the idea of limiting the 1st, 2nd, 4th, or 5th (or any other) Amendments because YOU don't think this or that person is responsible enough.

QUOTE
Especially most recently with the Trayvon Martin case.   Like it is not tragic enough, then the media outlets NBC, msnbc, CNN all LIED and manipulated the 911 recording of the call!!


You don't like edited tapes, I thought you were a FOX viewer.   :oops:

I never heard the edited tape until I searched for it after you mentioned this, and I agree they shouldn't omit words to make it sound even worse than it was.  Because the unedited tape was bad enough considering what happened.  It was obvious his mind was made up long before he shot the guy.  But once again I bet you could care less that your friends on FOX have been caught editing tapes many times.

Hell, conservatives still love Breitbart and him and O'Keefe were great at editing stuff out.  I bet you never even saw or heard a single unedited piece of film from those guys.


--------------
You know it's going to be a bad day when you cross thread the cap on the toothpaste.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 42
irisheyes Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Super Administrators
Posts: 3040
Joined: Oct. 2003
PostIcon Posted on: Apr. 07 2012,9:27 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(jimhanson @ Apr. 05 2012,10:57 am)
QUOTE
If this "science" is settled--where are the Obamunists on the issue?  Wouldn't you THINK that the advocates of big government and government control would make this illegal? :dunno:

MAYBE it's because there has been no proof of your contentions.

Considering how much resistance there's been to proving other things (birth certificates, evolution, and climate change), we might have our hands full.  If they're using high pressure chemicals to frack near groundwater sources, would you be drinking from the tap after that?

It's usually a LONG time before regulatory agencies will say anything against companies causing illnesses.  The examples are endless, those same companies make one phone call to their favorite politician and you can bet whatever agency steps out of line is going to get taken to the woodshed.

QUOTE
QUOTE
People whose land and water is damaged by fracking can't even sell their property and leave. Nobody in their right mind would buy it.[/
 People won't buy an OIL or GAS well? :p


Mineral rights can be worth a lot where they think there's oil and gas, but mineral rights and land rights can often be two separate things.  At least they are in the North Dakota region where they're fracking.  You can own land where your house is, but not own mineral rights underneath it, and vice versa.  I haven't checked on the Pennsylvania and Kentucky areas though, just throwing it out there.  But some areas they have more controversy over fracking depending on how close to groundwater the fracking is, which is why you don't hear near as much about this in the Dakotas.

QUOTE
ISN'T IT INTERESTING that the "Occupiers" that oppose fracking and demand "clean air and water" cause such filth in the very public parks they "occupy"?


I thought the Occupy crowd didn't know what they were protesting?  Now you say they want clean air and water.  Please, learn about the other things they're protesting and let FOX and Rush know, they seem to not know what's going on.


Attached Image
Attached Image

--------------
You know it's going to be a bad day when you cross thread the cap on the toothpaste.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 43
Santorini Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 2015
Joined: Nov. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: Apr. 07 2012,12:08 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(irisheyes @ Apr. 07 2012,8:43 am)
QUOTE

(Santorini @ Apr. 06 2012,9:51 am)
QUOTE
Mine is quite simple:  most everyone screams for protection under the 1st Amendment...yet, most want nothing to do with personal responsibility...anything goes regarding interpretation of expression.

No, not everything goes.  But I get nervous when you keep talking about taking away freedoms based on YOUR interpretation of what peoples' responsibilities are.  I don't like the idea of limiting the 1st, 2nd, 4th, or 5th (or any other) Amendments because YOU don't think this or that person is responsible enough.

QUOTE
Especially most recently with the Trayvon Martin case.   Like it is not tragic enough, then the media outlets NBC, msnbc, CNN all LIED and manipulated the 911 recording of the call!!


You don't like edited tapes, I thought you were a FOX viewer.   :oops:

I never heard the edited tape until I searched for it after you mentioned this, and I agree they shouldn't omit words to make it sound even worse than it was.  Because the unedited tape was bad enough considering what happened.  It was obvious his mind was made up long before he shot the guy.  But once again I bet you could care less that your friends on FOX have been caught editing tapes many times.

Hell, conservatives still love Breitbart and him and O'Keefe were great at editing stuff out.  I bet you never even saw or heard a single unedited piece of film from those guys.

Taking away freedoms??!!  Like what?
You cannot have personal rights without personal responsibility.  What limits are you talking about with 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th??  The bill of rights sets limits on the government.  You keep bringing up Fox...you must be an avid viewer?!  When has Fox purposely edited tapes?


--------------
"Things turn out best for those who make the best
 of the way things turned out."    Jack Buck
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 44
jimhanson Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Moderator
Posts: 8491
Joined: Aug. 2003
PostIcon Posted on: Apr. 07 2012,2:37 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

Irish--
QUOTE
But I get nervous when you keep talking about taking away freedoms based on YOUR interpretation of what peoples' responsibilities are.
 Isn't that what libbies have been doing for years?  Every time you pass a law, you take away someone's freedom.  EVEN WORSE--when you pass a law, implementation is left up to unelected bureaucrats, who impose THEIR interpretation of the law.  These bureaucrats are the biggest threat to personal liberty today--they write and interpret regulations constantly--and it is a constant pushback to beat them back.

Irish--
QUOTE
I never heard the edited tape until I searched for it after you mentioned this, and I agree they shouldn't omit words to make it sound even worse than it was.  Because the unedited tape was bad enough considering what happened.  It was obvious his mind was made up long before he shot the guy.
 Perhaps if you HAD been watching Fox, you would have known that the tapes were edited to fit the liberal agenda--and it was these fake tapes that ignited the firestorm.

What did you find  wrong with the unedited tape?  The guy was a neighborhood watch captain.  Tyrone was trespassing on private property, in people's back yard.  Zimmerman called the cops.  According to Zimmerman, Tyrone attacked HIM when he went to the corner to get a street address.  It was ZIMMERMAN'S voice calling for help, according to those who heard it.  Then there are those pesky facts of how Zimmerman got scalp and facial wounds.  How can you say that "his mind was made up before he shot the guy'?   :dunno:


--------------
"If you want to anger a Conservative, tell him a lie.  If you want to anger a LIBERAL, tell him the TRUTH!"
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 45
jimhanson Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Moderator
Posts: 8491
Joined: Aug. 2003
PostIcon Posted on: Apr. 07 2012,3:05 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

I asked Irish why, if the science of fracking is settled, why the Obamunists in big government haven't intervened.  He replied --
QUOTE
Considering how much resistance there's been to proving other things (birth certificates, evolution, and climate change), we might have our hands full.  If they're using high pressure chemicals to frack near groundwater sources, would you be drinking from the tap after that?



"WE"?  Should I put you down as a big-government Obamunist? :p

I'll agree--Obummer is really playing catch-up--trying to explain the birth certificate, trying to put a spin on the failed stimulus, trying to weasel-word his lack of energy policy (other than to make it much more EXPENSIVE!) and trying to defend his indefensible Obamacare from a public that doesn't want it and a Supreme Court that will likely find it unconstitutional--explain his threat to the Supreme Court (calling into question his claim that he was a "Constitutional Professor") that would have produced a failing grade in any high school civics class (now, if we only knew WHAT classes he took in high school!) :rofl:

Nonetheless--I'm sure that the vast Federal Bureacracy is more than capable of legislating if fracking can be found to be detrimental--they don't need the "Commander in Chief" to make THAT decision.  After all, they DID make the unpopular decision to stop Keystone Pipeline, didn't they? :sarcasm:  :rofl:

Irish--
QUOTE
It's usually a LONG time before regulatory agencies will say anything against companies causing illnesses
 That would beg the question, then--WHY DO WE HAVE THESE TOOTHLESS REGULATOR AGENCIES--AT COST OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS?   :p

It just MIGHT be that they have no evidence--other than the anecdotes of those who are perpetually outraged and afraid.

Still NO scientific evidence that fracking is dangerous--despite its widespread use, MILLIONS OF PEOPLE DO DRINK THAT GROUNDWATER with no bad effects.  Has there been even ONE successful court case proving that fracking caused issues--despite its widespread use, millions of people exposed, and an army of lawyers that would just love to jump on the issue? :dunno:  

Irish--
QUOTE
I thought the Occupy crowd didn't know what they were protesting?
 The "occupiers" are emblematic of those that are perpetually complaining.  Just look at the widespread issues in the cartoon--these professional agitators are outraged about EVERYTHING--yet though they constantly demand "change"--they don't specify HOW that change should come about--or what those changes should be.  Knowing what you want--how articulate it--and how to get it is the mark of an adult.  These kids are like all OTHER kids--they think that simply saying "I WANT" and throwing a tantrum, the adults will give it to them. :dunce:

The probably learned it from Mr. "Hopey-Cangey" HIMSELF--just say the words, and your "Hopes" will "Change."  That only worked for Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz!  If you really believe in these fairy tales,  click those ruby slippers together 3 times, and think "There's no place like home!  :sarcasm:  :rofl:

nullMy Webpage


--------------
"If you want to anger a Conservative, tell him a lie.  If you want to anger a LIBERAL, tell him the TRUTH!"
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 46
alcitizens Search for posts by this member.
Albert Lea
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 3664
Joined: Jul. 2009
PostIcon Posted on: Apr. 07 2012,4:46 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

You right-wing republican kooks always talk big government and freedom and yet are passing laws to restrict women's reproductive rights, restrict voting rights, restrict workers rights and on and on.. Stay the frik out of my life you oppressive bunch of loons..

Groups Promoting Oppression or Right-Wing Agendas

http://www.publiceye.org/research/directories/dem_grp_undermine.html

Imperialism, Oppression, Terrorism and the Far-Right Wing

http://readersupportednews.org/pm-sect...ht-wing
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 47
jimhanson Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Moderator
Posts: 8491
Joined: Aug. 2003
PostIcon Posted on: Apr. 07 2012,5:40 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

You can always tell who is losing an argument when they fly off the handle.

"Women's reproductive rights"?  Who is proposing to limit them, and in what way?.  Either you believe in abortion, or you don't--there is no middle ground.  The pendulum has swung from pro-abortion to "pro-life"--yet contrary to left-wing dogma, the majority of the people believe that Roe V. Wade should not be repealed, or should be a state issue.  What's wrong with that position--or having the discussion? :dunno:

You aren't confusing Fluck the Flake with reproductive rights, are you?  Nobody even TALKED about it until left-wing plant Snuffleoffugus brought it up in the debates, and was thoroughly laughed at.  Contrary to the left-wing claims by Fluck the Flake, nobody proposed making contraception illegal, either--only not forcing people with religious beliefs to provide them--or making the TAXPAYERS pay for her fun.

"Restrict Voting Rights"?  As in upholding the law, and NOT LETTING FELONS VOTE?  As in "Don't let people vote multiple times?"  As in "Not letting illegals vote"?  As in "Prove you are a resident of the city or county you want to vote in"?  As in "Don't let Black Panthers intimidate voters at the polls?  I would say that these measures PROMOTE VOTING RIGHTS by assuring that those that are eligible are able to vote.

"Restrict Workers Rights"?  As in "card check"--eliminating secret ballots?  If that is so good, why don't we eliminate secret ballots for ALL elections, and do away with voting booths? :sarcasm:   "Restricting Workers Rights"--as in NOT FORCING WORKERS TO JOIN A UNION in order to work?  As in PUTTING THE WORKER'S INSURANCE UP FOR BID--INSTEAD OF GOING TO THE UNION SLUSH FUND?  :dunno:

You want conservatives to "stay out of my life"--yet you support big governments FORCED intrusion into every facet of your life and every other citizen? :p


--------------
"If you want to anger a Conservative, tell him a lie.  If you want to anger a LIBERAL, tell him the TRUTH!"
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 48
Liberal Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Moderator
Posts: 11451
Joined: Aug. 2003
PostIcon Posted on: Apr. 07 2012,11:06 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

QUOTE

I'll agree--Obummer is really playing catch-up--trying to explain the birth certificate

Birth Certificate? :crazy:



--------------
The people are masters of both Congress and courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert it!
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 49
alcitizens Search for posts by this member.
Albert Lea
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 3664
Joined: Jul. 2009
PostIcon Posted on: Apr. 08 2012,4:22 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

Republican Gov. Scott Walker Quietly Repeals Wisconsin Equal Pay Law

Women earn 77 cents for every dollar that men make. In Wisconsin, it's 75 cents, according to the Wisconsin Alliance for Women’s Health (WAWH), which also estimates that families in the state "lose more than $4,000 per year due to unequal pay."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012...0000009


Attached Image
Attached Image
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 50
Rosalind_Swenson Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 1527
Joined: May 2011
PostIcon Posted on: Apr. 09 2012,12:18 am Skip to the previous post in this topic.  Ignore posts   QUOTE

Naw, I don't need any MORE. I'd just like you to provide any case of a SUCCESSFUL LAWSUIT or EPA FINDING.  What you have provided, as mentioned, is only anecdotal evidence.

If this is the problem you make it out to be, where is the vaunted Federal Government?  Like most libbies, you seem to trust them--why aren't you angry at THEM for their FAILURE to do what they are charged with doing?

Is it because FAILURE IS AN OPTION--just like most Federal programs? :sarcasm:

QUOTE
Still NO scientific evidence that fracking is dangerous--despite its widespread use, MILLIONS OF PEOPLE DO DRINK THAT GROUNDWATER with no bad effects.  Has there been even ONE successful court case proving that fracking caused issues--despite its widespread use, millions of people exposed, and an army of lawyers that would just love to jump on the issue?"


QUOTE
Seriously Jim? Because the companies doing the fracking have the BIGGEST army of lawyers. But, anyways, here's a short list of documented proof of problems for you. No court case yet, but I have a feeling there will be some very very soon:
Logan Mountain Colorado, 2008http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_13535728

2008?  You mean that in 4 YEARS they can't prove their case?
----------
QUOTE
Pavillion Wyoming Health Survey:
People here are sick. Our water, air, soil, and our health are all connected, says John Fenton, Pavillion resident with a contaminated drinking water well. Thanks to the EPA we will know what chemicals are in our water. Now we need to know the chemicals in our air, our homes and our bodies.

Well, what did the EPA have to say? :dunno:  Guess all we have to go on is ONE PERSONS OPINION.

QUOTE
Since the development of the oil and gas resources in the area, Pavillion residents have reported contamination and health impacts that they suspect are coming from Encana's Pavillion/Muddy Ridge gas-field. Residents' symptoms have ranged from rashes and headaches to neurological disorders and cancers. The survey found 94% of participants reported health impacts that are known effects of chemicals identified last year in drinking water wells.

If this is clear-cut--why hasn't the vaunted EPA shut it down? :dunno:

QUOTE
A significant survey finding also includes 81% of participants reporting respiratory ailments. This indicates that a primary pathway of human exposure to chemicals in the area may be occurring through air pathways, such as industrial releases and from showering or washing dishes with contaminated water. Based on the survey, the landowners and groups are calling for regulators to identify the source of contamination, conduct residential and regional air-monitoring, and to implement medical monitoring in which residents with health impacts can receive blood and urine testing.

"We have spent thousands on doctors and tests", says Jeff Locker, a Pavillion landowner with contaminated water. Locker and his wife have struggled with respiratory and neurological symptoms, constant nausea and headaches, and aggressive pre-cancerous growths. "It's big profit over people's health. Our health officials need to step forward. "

Let's see the results of those tests--and what EPA has to say about them. :p

QUOTE
While Encana and regulators claim that the source of the water contamination has not been identified, oil and gas production is the only industrial activity in the area. The EPA is planning to release additional drinking water tests to the public on August 31st. The State of Wyoming's Department of Environmental Quality is slated to place an air monitor in the Pavillion area in late September that will assess regional air quality.
-------     The EPA has just recently verified that fracking has poisoned this town's water, air and land.-----------------
Let's see the report.  You said you could provide more.

QUOTE
Poplar Montana:
Oil companies have agreed to pay $320,000 to the northeastern Montana city of Poplar to relocate water wells and take other steps to deal with a 40 million gallon plume of pollution seeping into drinking supplies.

Environmental Protection Agency scientist Sarah Roberts said Tuesday that Poplar's water so far remains safe to drink but faces imminent danger.

Federal officials have been tracking the underground plume's spread from the East Poplar oil field for decades. It is moving toward Poplar and reached city water supplies in 2010.

"Tracking for decades?  How long has fracking been accomplished there? :oops:

QUOTE
Some wells outside town already have been rendered undrinkable by the plume of salty pollution
http://billingsgazette.com/news...44.html
--------------
August 2010:
A new report by the Pennsylvania Land Trust Association said the state has identified 1,435 violations by 43 Marcellus Shale drilling companies since January 2008, prompting environmental groups to call for quick legislative action to protect water and land resources.

According to Monday's report, 952 of the violations were identified as having or likely to have an impact on the environment. Those included 100 violations of the state Clean Stream Law, 268 for improper construction of waste water impoundments; 277 for poor erosion and sedimentation plans during well pad, road and piping construction; 16 for improper blowout prevention; and 154 for discharging industrial waste, including drilling waste water containing toxic chemicals, onto the ground or into streams.http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/10215/1077192-454.stm
All of those violations, yet they couldn't find ONE for fracking! :p
-----------
QUOTE
Franklin Township Pennsylvania March 2012:
The Department of Environmental Protection has asked a natural gas drilling company to step in and help three Franklin Twp. families whose well water contains high levels of methane.

State environmental regulators have not determined the source of the gas and are not saying WPX Energy is responsible for the methane, DEP spokeswoman Colleen Connolly said. But in a letter to the driller Friday, regulators asked that WPX help address the problem.

"They can offer to put in (methane) mitigation systems. They can offer to buy bottled water. We did ask them to vent at least one well," Ms. Connolly said.

"We're looking at a situation where some temporary fixes need to be put in, and we're putting the ball in WPXs court"
They have no evidence, but WPX is supposed to prove that they are NOT guilty? :p



QUOTE
The department began investigating elevated methane in the water wells in December when residents along Route 29 in the hamlet of Franklin Forks noticed discolored water and intermittent eruptions of gas and water from their well.
http://thetimes-tribune.com/news...f1SCBiU
---------We're not saying you are responsible, but pretty please help them out?
Two days later they put in vents and offer free supplies of clean water. Just to be nice?
http://thetimes-tribune.com/news...1289112
Ms. Hadlick's water also contained high levels of salts. Her methane level, 58.3 milligrams per liter, is more than twice the concentration state regulators have called the "true level of concern": when the water is so full of gas it begins to release it to the air.
"It makes your hair really dried out and yucky feeling," Ms. Hadlick said. "My son has had sores in his mouth from using the water to brush his teeth."
--------------------
Pennsylvania doctors now have a gag order on them so they can't tell patients what chemicals they might be exposed to.
      Under a new law, doctors in Pennsylvania can access information about chemicals used in natural gas extraction -- but they won't be able to share it with their patients. A provision buried in a law passed last month is drawing scrutiny from the public health and environmental community, who argue that it will "gag" doctors who want to raise concerns related to oil and gas extraction with the people they treat and the general public.
REALLY?  With all of these links, why isn't there a link to this supposed "gag" order?  Why isn't the EPA allowing doctors to talk about this, if there really is an issue? :p


     
QUOTE
There is good reason to be curious about exactly what's in those fluids. A 2010 congressional investigation revealed that Halliburton and other fracking companies had used 32 million gallons of diesel products, which include toxic chemicals like benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene, in the fluids they inject into the ground. Low levels of exposure to those chemicals can trigger acute effects like headaches, dizziness, and drowsiness, while higher levels of exposure can cause cancer.

Yet NOT ONE MENTION OF METHANE. :p


   
QUOTE
The latest move in Pennsylvania has raised suspicions among the industry's critics once again. As Walter Tsou, president of the Philadelphia chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility, put it, "What is the big secret here that they're unwilling to tell people, unless they know that if people found out what's really in these chemicals, they would be outraged?"
http://www.theatlantic.com/health...0
-----------------
All that leftover fracking water has to be stored some place. Alot of it is being pumped deep underground in Ohio:
Yet, "carbon sequestration"--pumping carbon back deep underground, is OK with these same eco-nuts? :p

QUOTE
All that underground space has made Ohio a leading importer of wastewater from other states. Last year, oil and gas companies injected 511 million gallons into Ohio’s wells, the most on record, according to the state’s Department of Natural Resources. More than half came from elsewhere. Of the 94.2 million gallons of drilling wastewater that Pennsylvania’s Marcellus shale operators sent to disposal wells last year, 98 percent went to Ohio.
Oil and gas companies haven’t put up as much of a fight over the proposed regulations, perhaps because they were introduced in the aftermath of a series of bizarre earthquakes near Youngstown that have been linked to the underground wastewater. There had been no record of quakes in the area before D&L Energy, based in Youngstown, began injecting wastewater into a well about 9,200 feet underground in December 2010. Starting in March, there were 12 quakes within a mile of the well ranging from magnitude 2.1 to a 4.0 quake that hit on New Year’s Eve.
----Ohio's earthquakes:
 The ODNR's 20-page preliminary investigation report released Friday based its findings on evidence from seismic monitors, the locations of the epicenters of 12 minor earthquakes within one mile of the disposal well, and the discovery of a heretofore unknown fault in the underlying bedrock.
"We made the determination that, while it's difficult to induce seismic activity, the depth of this well reached a previously unmapped fault and there is a likelihood it lubricated the fault, resulting in seismic activity," ODNR spokesman Carlo LoParo said.

The earthquakes registered magnitudes of 2.7 to 4.0, rattling dishes in homes but causing no structural damage. A 4.0-magnitude earthquake has a seismic energy yield equivalent to detonating a small atomic bomb.

The first earthquakes occurred three months after the high-pressure injection of wastewater began. Several quakes occurred in December 2011, with the last and most powerful on New Year's Eve, less than 24 hours after state regulators asked the company to shut down the well.
http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/12070/1215767-503-0.stm
---------
Fracking is also responsible for many earthquakes in Oklahoma and the UK. Just google it.
-----------
Unfortunately there are plenty more instances of fracking poisoning water, land and air, so just ask if you want more. Also, it is getting harder for the media, EPA and drillers to hide it. Too many people are sick, it is happening too often, too many people are finally finding out about it, and too many people are mad.
--------------------------------------------
 


You seem to believe that all of societies ills--from bad-tasting water to earthquakes, are the result of "big oil companies."  Inexplicably, you put your faith in the Federal Government--which doesn't seem to share your views as they've done nothing to support your views or to stop the practice.

Which is it--

A.  Is the science NOT settled, or
B.  has the Federal Government colluded with "big oil" to not allow the practice?

Since you are a good liberal and don't like the practice, I'd expect that you would not use natural gas for heating--would boycott electrical companies that use it for producing electricity when the windmills don't work--and wouldn't use petroleum products from companies that engage in the practice.

They used to have bumper stickers in Texas that said "For those that don't like oil, let 'em freeze to death in the dark!"


--------------
And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
118 replies since Mar. 30 2012,3:09 pm < Next Oldest | Next Newest >

[ Track This Topic :: Email This Topic :: Print this topic ]


Page 5 of 12<<123456789>>
reply to topic new topic new poll

» Quick Reply First Amendment Right
iB Code Buttons
You are posting as:

Do you wish to enable your signature for this post?
Do you wish to enable emoticons for this post?
Track this topic
View All Emoticons
View iB Code
Emoticon Emoticon Emoticon Emoticon Emoticon Emoticon Emoticon Emoticon Emoticon Emoticon Emoticon