Recent comments

  • Reply to: Lauria Quit Cigarettes, But Now He's on the Bottle   14 years 1 month ago
    What no one here is mentioning, which is why I drink bottled water is the FLUORIDE in our tap water. It's been proved not to promote healthier teeth, and it's listed as POISON. Very few other places on earth allow fluoride to be added to their water, because they aren't as stupid as we are... Some brands of bottled water are just tap water poured into the bottles, so you've got to be careful.
  • Reply to: Getting Off the Bottle   14 years 1 month ago

    I have read most of the pros and cons about drinking bottled water, and agree that if you are certain the water from your spigot is potable, go with it. However, there is still a need for bottled water in those homes where a personal well supplies the household water, and that water is full of iron and reeks of sulfur. You, the homeowner, may get used to both the taste and the smell of such water, but if you find relatives/friends bringing jugs of water with them when they come to visit, you had better consider supplying them with water from a source other than your tap. I happen to live in one mid-sized community among several mid-sized communities, where each home draws from its own personal well, and where the supplying aquifer stratum is full of iron. I use bottled water for drinking, ice cubes, and making coffee/tea, soups, etc.
    Additionally, natural gas drilling is threatening water resources in NY and the midwest. At issue is whether drilling companies know enough about how to protect groundwater sources from contamination by a drilling procedure called "fracking," the term used for the hydraulic fracturing of rock formations to make them produce more gas. Land owners report that exposure to fracking chemicals has made them sick and that fracking has contaminated streams and drinking water wells on their property, rendering them unusable.

  • Reply to: Iraq Troop "Withdrawal" Propaganda   14 years 1 month ago

    We are the world's police force. When a country needs aid or protection, they call on the U.S. because of their capabilities for getting the job done. If the U.S. did not have these bases, response to tragic disasters or acts of evil would be inadequate and deadly.

    If you want to point the finger, perhaps you should also include those countries who have agreed to have U.S. bases built there. You shouldn't be so one-sided which makes you look naive or stupid. They want the money and American protection. Despite what you think, the U.S. has made the world a more peaceful place.

    It is precisely the bad news people remember and cling on to and not the good news because it is considered too boring.

  • Reply to: Iraq Troop "Withdrawal" Propaganda   14 years 1 month ago

    What number would be good for you? What is illogical about having 50,000 troops in Iraq?

  • Reply to: Iraq Troop "Withdrawal" Propaganda   14 years 1 month ago

    This article's author is extremely misinformed. Being misinformed and having this much influence is alarming. Questioning everything doesn't make you smarter or more knowledgeable. The drawdown of troops in Iraq is not an end to presence but an end to combat operations which is what the mainstream media (CNN, MSNBC, HLN, ABC, NBC,New York Times, Washington Post, and CBS) are actually reporting contrary to what the author is reporting. The 50,000 troops remaining are there to train and provide backup to the ISF (Iraqi Security Forces) in case Iranian, Syrian, Jordanian, Saudi, and Lebanese influences prove too much for them. It is both naive and foolish to think that the aforementioned countries are not attempting to influence Iraq in its own image. These foreign forces have been in Iraq since 2003. For example, remember the Jordanian, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi?

Pages