We shop for all our bulk flours & grains at Bobs Red Mill too. He is a lovely man, with a trustworthy demeanor, who I've had my picture taken with. The pre-baked bread we buy is usually Killer Daves, from the Bakery right across the street from Bob's outlet. Their family has been baking whole grain organic bread since the 1950s & we've taken the factory tour. We shop at New Seasons & farmer's markets, never at WF!
Hahahaha....well that bill seemed to be an overkill....it seems to be that it resulted to too much restrictions. It just seen the advantages of having that anti-piracy but what will be effect on the other side...
I agree that the Citizens United ruling must be overturned somehow, and that the best way to do that will be through an Amendment to the US Constitution. Said amendment should be as tightly worded as possible to only indicate groups of people (corporations and unions) in order to avoid complications and misunderstandings such as the one above.
Conflating money with speech is totally incorrect. Money is simply a means to amplify and repeat speech. This is how it is dangerous, because it distorts the discourse through repetition or in some cases replacement. It is possible for a voter to only hear/comprehend the most repeated information and to miss an alternative that has been presented. In this way, such a ruling is undemocratic, because it undermines the quality of the debate/discussion. It is here that your condemnation of the media is valid, since they follow the repetition/replacement model to create as much sensation as possible. However, they would still have speech without money, as many people on the blogosphere can attest to. Their message would simply not be as amplified.
Allowing money to amplify and repeat speech also raises another hurdle for people desiring to enter into politics, or to advance beyond their current position. Someone from a state legislative branch may be well liked and have great ideas to solve larger problems, but because they lack financing, will not be able to present those ideas except through an intermediary, or as a side project. While those choices can be viable, they could also lead to bloated mega-bills or half-solutions that have been adjusted by the intermediary. The need for financing also opens the door for collusion by corporations or individuals with available resources. These campaign promises tend to be honored more than promises to voters, especially broad promises that are hard to realize. It is far easier to argue for specifics such as adjusting a regulation than to argue vague generalities such as creating more jobs.
This leads to the other danger of this type of campaign financing, that these advertisements must be as broad and as vague as possible when talking about what the candidate will do, or specific and acerbic when talking about what an opponent will do. This cheapens the discourse into finger-pointing and mudslinging with no real ideas about what action will happen if a specific candidate is elected. Thus, it becomes far easier for demagogues to be elected, because people are more likely to vote how they feel if they have no idea what the specifics are. This turns politicians into confidence men.
Everyone is getting too worked up over this. It's a parody that draws from Team America and cliched events in the Iraq war, and is not meant to be taken seriously. If you're going to take this seriously, then you also need to start condemning other comedians who use music as their medium since they definitely don't fall under the politically correct banner either.
Rebekah,
I am a student at the Univ. of Washington in Seattle, and have been hearing a lot about sewage sludge lately. I have no research or financial interests in sewage sludge. I am merely a concerned citizen that wants to hear the full story about sewage sludge. While I think it is important to look into this form of fertilizer and assure that it is safe, I also think that it is important for people like you (that provide information to the public about sewage sludge) to take a deep and objective look into why sludge might be dangerous and how it compares with alternatives (a cost and benefit analysis might be a nice method to start with). Before CMD jumps on the progressive bandwagon opposing this substance, it is important to provide information about the specific risks of using sludge as fertilizer. There are clear benefits to closing the waste loop and returning human waste into the ecosystem, so long as it is safe.
While I agree that some of the chemicals found in sludge are harmful at certain doses, it is important to include in the discussion information about background levels of those contaminants, and the levels of contaminants found in alternative forms of fertilization. I am concerned that backlash against the use of recycled human waste or sludge will create more demand for synthetic fertilizers that create financial dependency for farmers, decrease the long-term productivity of land, increase incentives for massive monoculture farming techniques, and support an energy industry that CMD and the public have well-supported concerns about. If sewage sludge is a more harmful alternative, then I agree that it should not be used. However, I have doubts that one can draw that conclusion from the information currently presented in CMD articles.
As a representative of CMD, please provide some information to back up the apparently foregone conclusion that sewage sludge is worse for the environment than other alternatives (conventional, organic, or otherwise). The mere presence of some undisclosed amount of toxic, persistent chemicals should not suffice for you or an educated public. You could do a lot of good by providing an objective, dispassionate assessment of sewage sludge, instead of simply fomenting the distrust and half-understanding of this fertilizer. I believe that CMD would agree that reporting should not be about reinforcing your own viewpoint (or the viewpoint of your organization), but rather providing your audience with a better understanding of the issues that affect their lives. I don't need a rehash of the controversy - help me understand the issue.
Patrick Bridegam
We shop for all our bulk flours & grains at Bobs Red Mill too. He is a lovely man, with a trustworthy demeanor, who I've had my picture taken with. The pre-baked bread we buy is usually Killer Daves, from the Bakery right across the street from Bob's outlet. Their family has been baking whole grain organic bread since the 1950s & we've taken the factory tour. We shop at New Seasons & farmer's markets, never at WF!
Pages