“Good Christ almighty - As if shutting down meth labs wasn't a good enough reason for requiring a prescription. Evidently none of you folks is a homeowner. A house or garage in which meth has been cooked has to be torn down or gutted, because of the TOXIC materials ingrained into the walls and floors and ceilings as a result of meth cooking. For every pound of meth produced, five pounds of toxic materials are produced - and meth cookers, oddly enough, aren't exactly particular about where they dump them. I emphasize TOXIC because these are materials that are immediately dangerous to people who come into contact with them - hence the "moon suit" response teams that show up at that nice-looking house down the block. No, it won't stop use - but it can sure as hell make my neighborhood safer.”
“Ever hear of a place called Geysers? Know why it's been shut down?”
wild1a on May 26, 2011 at 19:58:54
“Tou know nothing about Enhanced Geotttthermal Systems, formerlly known as Dry Rock Trchnology. The development began in 1974 resulting in the Fenton Hills project which proved the science. MIT under a grant from the Dept. of Energy did the research and the development. The Geysers used the traditional methodology which provides in other countries substantial amounts of energy. Because of the limited and often unrelliable source of heated subsurface steam sources Dry Rock Technology was developed to provide wide ranging souces of usable controlable heat not dependent on natural subsurface phenomena often associated withh volcanic activity. Do some research..”
“You must not have Depression-era parents, or you would understand the amount of secret stashing that folks who lived through that crisis did. And no, they didn't tell anybody about it, or mention it in their wills. It was a rainy-day fund in case everything went smash again. It belongs to the previous owners' heirs, every bit as much as if they'd accidentally left a coat or something of similar SMALL value behind. Why people think that should change when the value increases is a mystery to me.”
“Boy, your screen name says it all. Somebody does something genuinely honest and aboveboard and you give him crap about it. Get to Wall Street with the other greedheads who are destroying our country.”
“Not sure what your calling "bad behavior" .... being an ignoramus about finding out who actually put the money there, since there is absolutely no proof of ownership .... or giving the money to the previous owners children (when his own family is in need) when it is quite possible it was left by someone else previous to 1966. Please think this through! This article has many missing elements. Maybe this is a way to rationalize stupid behavior!”
“To be truthful, I absolutely would have returned the money. IT WASN'T MINE. Sad that you need to think that your narrow dishonest little viewpoint is everyone's. It's not.”
tonypray41 on May 22, 2011 at 01:35:36
“Ya , sure you would ! you should read the rest of the responses to my post then if you really believe that , lol”
Ambar Pansari on May 21, 2011 at 03:05:33
“Agreed. I'm astonished that people think otherwise. What kinds of values were some of these folks raised with? Even if I were starving, I would have returned the money. Forget about my own shame, I would never dishonor my parents by keeping something that I didn't get completely through my own hard work.”
“Yeah there is. Absolutely he did the right thing. And Scoobistyl used to know that.”
scoobistyl on May 21, 2011 at 03:02:43
“Who is it? lol I know more than I did 15 years ago. Most of the time you need to rely on other people to do the right thing which is basically be honest and not lie. Which, this story has nothing to do with. If I were confronted, asked, or told before I moved in to the house I would return it. But, if not even aware of anything like that being in my house and I happen to come across it. Then that is my small treasure people. Who's to say you go to return it to the owner and its not even theirs. Whould they say thats not mine, see ya.. Or would they claim it. I wouldn't take that chance.
Ah, every one is titled to their own opinion. Thats all it is. Me personally, no bills and a nice little luck for once for doing the right thing the other 26 yrs of my life would be more of a peace of mind than giving it to someone who isn't looking for it.”
“In principle, I agree with Michael Moore. One of the things that supposedly sets us apart from "less-civilized" nations is our insistence on due process, and the principle that we are innocent until proven guilty. The truly vindictive part of me would have taken a certain amount of perverse satisfaction in slapping OBL in solitary for the rest of his life, out of contact with anyone but his lawyer, and being careful to preserve that life just as long as possible. That being said, I suppose I've grown more pragmatic with the years, so I also consider the following questions: What on earth would they do with him while waiting for trial? Congress won't even allow the president the funds to relocate the Gitmo detainees into the US. What would they do with OBL after a conviction? What on earth would happen if by some fluke he WEREN'T convicted? I totally agree that the partiers were out of line. It's morbid; as a friend said, it's like going to a hanging for entertainment.”
“The State of Hawaii has twice confirmed that Obama's birth certificate is genuine and that he was born in Hawaii. This is such an incredible time-waster. Attack him on his policies if you will, but this is just jerkwater stuff.”
jak007 on Mar 29, 2011 at 18:50:36
“Actually, the Governor of Hawaii can't seem to find his certificate either:
“Oh, give me a break. So if I tap someone on the shoulder to get their attention, I'm guilty of physical abuse? Whoopi did not even "poke" this flimsy excuse for a real human being; she placed her hand on Salahi's side. Have we all lost so many brain cells that we can no longer tell the difference between casual contact and abuse?”
Feb 25, 2010 at 16:52:14
“Obviously a debated topic, but I'm very, very disappointed in Dr. Northrup for citing the following: "The United States has high rates of HIV and the highest rate of circumcision in the West. The "experiment" of using circumcision to stem HIV infection has been running here for decades. It has failed miserably..."
This is NOT a controlled experiment, and Dr. Northrup is very well aware of that. A controlled experiment would compare rates of HIV infection among circumcised males to that of uncircumcised males - in other words, the same type of study that HAS been conducted in Africa.
This hyperbole does nothing to advance the discussion and is misleading, at best. Shame on you, Dr. Northrup!”
goodfoot on Feb 25, 2010 at 18:01:19
“My biggest disappointment is the fact that she COMPLETELY glossed over the medical research out there that is the reason for why the CDC and the AAP might actually change their official stands on the subject of male circumcision. The recent research she refers to include well designed, large-scale studies, many of which were actually stopped EARLY because the data was so clear that circumcision was a protective factor against HIV, HPV, syphilis, etc, that was considered unethical to continue any longer without reporting the results.
Her comparisons of circumcision to female genital mutilation are simply preposterous.
I'm all for an educated discussion on this matter, but the points she makes against circumcision are unscientific, inaccurate and fallacious.”
dctackett on Feb 25, 2010 at 17:52:39
“wasn't she refuting the opposite claim using the same "methods" as the author of that opposing claim...
someone uses anecdotal evidence to try to prove something... so I can show the opposite is true using the same type of anecdotal evidence... shows that their use of that "evidence" is meaningless.”
Moshe on Feb 25, 2010 at 17:04:34
“It seemed pretty clear that Dr. Northrup started with an emotional conclusion and then tried to work backwards, selectively using evidence, and discounting evidence that did not support her pre-determined emotional conclusion.
There are lots of comments here from people who know virtually nothing about circumcision, especially religious circumcision.
But that's free speech. People get to express opinions, even when they know little or nothing about the subject.
ben392 on Feb 25, 2010 at 16:56:37
“No, no, you must not suggest that she use actual scientific methods . . .”