If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Use corn to reduce car emissions or use corn to increase cow emissions. Oil industry may be banking on cow emissions   (edition.cnn.com) divider line 65
    More: Followup, United States Secretary of Agriculture, temperature records, food shortage, ethanol  
•       •       •

795 clicks; posted to Politics » on 11 Aug 2012 at 10:09 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



65 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-11 08:57:11 AM
Using food for fuel was always a bad idea. I remember seeing articles about that years ago.

Plus the economics of ethanol never made sense for the U.S., and with new sources of oil becoming productive, like the oils sands in Alberta, and shale oil, it makes even less sense.

But go ahead, keep raising the price of a staple food for the poor of the Americas. I am sure the peasants of Mexico smile as they pay 2-3 times the price for corn meal they used to, just for the pleasure of knowing they assuaged some environmentalists rage at petroleum.
 
2012-08-11 10:09:22 AM

tomWright: Using food for fuel was always a bad idea. I remember seeing articles about that years ago.

Plus the economics of ethanol never made sense for the U.S., and with new sources of oil becoming productive, like the oils sands in Alberta, and shale oil, it makes even less sense.

But go ahead, keep raising the price of a staple food for the poor of the Americas. I am sure the peasants of Mexico smile as they pay 2-3 times the price for corn meal they used to, just for the pleasure of knowing they assuaged some environmentalists rage at petroleum.


Not to mention that global warming is currently hammering the corn crops and sending prices through the roof.
 
2012-08-11 10:18:18 AM

tomWright: Using food for fuel was always a bad idea. I remember seeing articles about that years ago.

Plus the economics of ethanol never made sense for the U.S., and with new sources of oil becoming productive, like the oils sands in Alberta, and shale oil, it makes even less sense.

But go ahead, keep raising the price of a staple food for the poor of the Americas. I am sure the peasants of Mexico smile as they pay 2-3 times the price for corn meal they used to, just for the pleasure of knowing they assuaged some environmentalists rage at petroleum.


The corporate farm lobby has more to do with ethanol than environmentalists.
 
2012-08-11 10:18:49 AM
How about the uses for corm???

i303.photobucket.com
 
2012-08-11 10:31:05 AM
With articles in the news about the shortage of corn this year, let's use it as a source of fuel instead of a source of food. Food is overrated anyway.
 
2012-08-11 10:34:33 AM

Marcus Aurelius: tomWright: Using food for fuel was always a bad idea. I remember seeing articles about that years ago.

Plus the economics of ethanol never made sense for the U.S., and with new sources of oil becoming productive, like the oils sands in Alberta, and shale oil, it makes even less sense.

But go ahead, keep raising the price of a staple food for the poor of the Americas. I am sure the peasants of Mexico smile as they pay 2-3 times the price for corn meal they used to, just for the pleasure of knowing they assuaged some environmentalists rage at petroleum.

Not to mention that global warming is currently hammering the corn crops and sending prices through the roof.


Global warming is not hammering the corn crop. Go ahead and believe that if you want to but it is not true. Regional droughts happen every year in some part of the country or another.

It is easy to blame it on global warming but how does an average increase of less than one degree C do such things?
 
2012-08-11 10:44:12 AM
Haven't studies been done that show ethanol is actually worse for the environment than gasoline?
 
2012-08-11 10:45:09 AM

Marcus Aurelius: Not to mention that global warming is currently hammering the corn crops and sending prices through the roof.


I'm all for being environmentally responsible but we need to tone down the alarm bells, I think we are years off from seeing effects like these caused by the greenhouse effect. Droughts have impacted agriculture since we first got the idea to stop chasing our food and grow it,
 
2012-08-11 10:49:22 AM

machoprogrammer: Haven't studies been done that show ethanol is actually worse for the environment than gasoline?


Not sure, but the MTBE they forced us to put in the gas was poisoning the water supply. If they'd quit trying to reformulate gasoline and just let us use plain old gas, we could put the corn back on our plates and stop poisoning ourselves with the additives we don't need.
 
2012-08-11 10:52:03 AM
Overall corn is worse. The extra corn (govt subsidized) feeds the cows in stinky feedlots, wallowing in their own shiat. Since the cows aren't genetically predisposed to corn and they wallow in poop all day, they have to be pumped full of antibiotics and hormones to survive, which explains why your daughters all have c cups at age 10, and food borne illness is on the rise. The rest of all that corn goes into HIGH FRUCTOSE FREAKIN CORN SYRUP which infests all your processed foods, and it is the reason why your sons all have C cups at age 10.
 
2012-08-11 11:01:57 AM

tequilasundae: ... and it is the reason why your sons all have C cups at age 10.


...

and what size is YOUR tinfoil hat?
 
2012-08-11 11:08:00 AM
When corn prices go up, people biatch. When meat prices go up, people biatch. When fuel prices go up, people biatch. You can't have it all, people.

The worst drought in 50 years (this isn't regional, it's nationwide) combined with some of the hottest temperatures on record is kicking corn's ass. Same with soybeans and likewise any number of other crops. At this point you can't say it isn't global warming any more than you can say it positively is, and responsible observers will refrain from declaring it one way or another. If this is the beginning of a trend, however, and many scientists think it could be, then we're going to be screwed for a long time while we figure out a way to adapt.
 
2012-08-11 11:11:18 AM

shotglasss: machoprogrammer: Haven't studies been done that show ethanol is actually worse for the environment than gasoline?

Not sure, but the MTBE they forced us to put in the gas was poisoning the water supply. If they'd quit trying to reformulate gasoline and just let us use plain old gas, we could put the corn back on our plates and stop poisoning ourselves with the additives we don't need.


considering the rates of diabeetus in this country, corn shouldn't be on our plates. it shouldn't be in the gas tank either, ethanol from switchgrass uses a lot less resources to produce.
 
2012-08-11 11:19:27 AM

Fart_Machine: tomWright: Using food for fuel was always a bad idea. I remember seeing articles about that years ago.

Plus the economics of ethanol never made sense for the U.S., and with new sources of oil becoming productive, like the oils sands in Alberta, and shale oil, it makes even less sense.

But go ahead, keep raising the price of a staple food for the poor of the Americas. I am sure the peasants of Mexico smile as they pay 2-3 times the price for corn meal they used to, just for the pleasure of knowing they assuaged some environmentalists rage at petroleum.

The corporate farm lobby has more to do with ethanol than environmentalists.


Very good point.

I have said for a long time:
When profit or politics enter an argument, truth is thrown out the window.

Corollary:
When both profit and politics enter an argument, truth is raped, strangled, dismembered, buried in an abandoned basement and cemented over.
 
2012-08-11 11:24:13 AM

TheZorker: tequilasundae: ... and it is the reason why your sons all have C cups at age 10.

...

and what size is YOUR tinfoil hat?


there may be more correlation than causation in that thinking but there certainly is room for some serious studying. while i applaud the bigger female boobies the rise in antibiotic resistant disease is scary.

and IMO the corporate framers benefit too much from corn ethanol and it's time to look into another biomass.
 
2012-08-11 11:26:19 AM
Relevant:

i16.photobucket.com
 
2012-08-11 11:28:02 AM

whatsupchuck: When corn prices go up, people biatch. When meat prices go up, people biatch. When fuel prices go up, people biatch. You can't have it all, people.


And the only reason those are all connected is because corn is used for everything. And the only reason it's used for everything is because an absurd and unnecessary government subsidy on corn.
 
2012-08-11 11:30:45 AM
Also, the variety of corn used for feed is unfit for human consumption, and I imagine similar distinctions exist for ethanol. So it's not like "We have x number of bushels of corn, how should we divide it?" It's more along the lines of "How many acres of x corn should we plant vs y corn vs z corn?"
 
2012-08-11 11:35:20 AM
Is this the thread that I am supposed to abandon to go make fun of Paul Ryan as veep pick?
 
2012-08-11 11:35:30 AM
TheZorker:
and what size is YOUR tinfoil hat?

Tinfoil is required for speaking the truth now? Everything he said was factually true although the assumption of pre-puberty man boobs was a bit of hyperbole it isn't that far off.
 
2012-08-11 11:36:20 AM

chuckufarlie: Marcus Aurelius: tomWright: Using food for fuel was always a bad idea. I remember seeing articles about that years ago.

Plus the economics of ethanol never made sense for the U.S., and with new sources of oil becoming productive, like the oils sands in Alberta, and shale oil, it makes even less sense.

But go ahead, keep raising the price of a staple food for the poor of the Americas. I am sure the peasants of Mexico smile as they pay 2-3 times the price for corn meal they used to, just for the pleasure of knowing they assuaged some environmentalists rage at petroleum.

Not to mention that global warming is currently hammering the corn crops and sending prices through the roof.

Global warming is not hammering the corn crop. Go ahead and believe that if you want to but it is not true. Regional droughts happen every year in some part of the country or another.

It is easy to blame it on global warming but how does an average increase of less than one degree C do such things?


one degree is more than the difference between frozen and not frozen.
 
2012-08-11 11:47:02 AM
Two things:
#1. You have corn? Where do you have corn? Even New York's Sweet Corn crops (notorious for either being awesome or drowning) are getting drought killed.
#2. Both of the ways of making ethanol in the US *also* produce animal (and people) feed, corn starch and a whole bunch of products (that corn based road salt that doesn't work, for example, the 'preemergent' stuff you throw in the grass to dehydrate weed seeds, the stuff added to pet food, fish food, anything based around 'distiller's grain'). Most ethanol plants also bottle their CO2...

The "ethanol OR food" thing is a fiction.

/Corn isn't the best thing to make ethanol from, by a long shot, but you should complain "HFCS" or "Real Food" if you really want to make a point.
//I learned all this shiat preparing a beauty queen to be the corn queen or some title like that.
 
2012-08-11 12:13:44 PM

whatsupchuck: If this is the beginning of a trend, however, and many scientists think it could be, then we're going to be screwed for a long time while we figure out a way to adapt.


Maybe those Mayans weren't so dumb after all, eh?
 
2012-08-11 12:18:41 PM
If only there was some kind of market where the relative rate of supply and demand between different goods is arbitrated with a generic unit of accountable value at the transactional level between individuals who seek to balance their inventories and accumulate these trade units to hedge against seasonal variation in production capacity, we could be sure to get the best use of our dirt. Theoretically you could drive to a store to get corn and cheeseburger at the same time if this system works.
 
2012-08-11 12:47:18 PM
If they take the ethanol out of gasoline, how will I afford to drive to the store to buy corn?
 
2012-08-11 01:16:26 PM

foo monkey: If they take the ethanol out of gasoline, how will I afford to drive to the store to buy corn?


Ethanol costs more than gasoline.
 
2012-08-11 01:17:06 PM

whatsupchuck: When corn prices go up, people biatch. When meat prices go up, people biatch. When fuel prices go up, people biatch. You can't have it all, people.


Likewise, if you make corn into fuel, people gripe. If you feed it to livestock, people gripe. If instead you put it in food, people gripe.

But that's not so much due to economics as it is to young people getting their facts by watching an internet movie.
 
2012-08-11 01:18:55 PM

Fart_Machine: tomWright: Using food for fuel was always a bad idea. I remember seeing articles about that years ago.

Plus the economics of ethanol never made sense for the U.S., and with new sources of oil becoming productive, like the oils sands in Alberta, and shale oil, it makes even less sense.

But go ahead, keep raising the price of a staple food for the poor of the Americas. I am sure the peasants of Mexico smile as they pay 2-3 times the price for corn meal they used to, just for the pleasure of knowing they assuaged some environmentalists rage at petroleum.

The corporate farm lobby has more to do with ethanol than environmentalists.


environmentalists are the proximate cause. it was their dumb idea that they pushed hard on until it was a law. and while the sierra club isn't for increasing the ethanol mandate at this point, they fall short of calling for its repeal because of misplaced priorities.
you don't get out of it that easy.
 
2012-08-11 01:48:12 PM
Read The Omnivore's Dilemna by Michael Pollan, Also in Netflix watch King Corn (you see where it all goes and how the government has been behind it since the 70's) and of course Food INC and Supersize Me. Pretty much explains what I'm talking about.
 
2012-08-11 01:55:50 PM

relcec: environmentalists are the proximate cause. it was their dumb idea that they pushed hard on until it was a law.


You mean apart from the fact that it was used for auto fuel in the early 1900's and the spike in it's use was primarily as a replacement for MTBE which was toxic. It was one of many alternatives proposed by environmentalists in conjunction with other alternative fuel sources which wasn't a "dumb thing". The lobbying however to make it predominant came from the Farm Lobby. But yeah, nuance sucks.
 
2012-08-11 01:56:48 PM

friday13: chuckufarlie: Marcus Aurelius: tomWright: Using food for fuel was always a bad idea. I remember seeing articles about that years ago.

Plus the economics of ethanol never made sense for the U.S., and with new sources of oil becoming productive, like the oils sands in Alberta, and shale oil, it makes even less sense.

But go ahead, keep raising the price of a staple food for the poor of the Americas. I am sure the peasants of Mexico smile as they pay 2-3 times the price for corn meal they used to, just for the pleasure of knowing they assuaged some environmentalists rage at petroleum.

Not to mention that global warming is currently hammering the corn crops and sending prices through the roof.

Global warming is not hammering the corn crop. Go ahead and believe that if you want to but it is not true. Regional droughts happen every year in some part of the country or another.

It is easy to blame it on global warming but how does an average increase of less than one degree C do such things?

one degree is more than the difference between frozen and not frozen.


that is a remarkable display of the intelligence level required to believe in such things as AGW. You could be the poster boy.

Sadly, we are raising an entire generation that has been taught WHAT to think but not HOW to think.
 
2012-08-11 01:57:26 PM
LMFAO this is all hilarious considering we are in a drought and there is limited corn this year.
 
2012-08-11 01:58:55 PM

Aye Carumba: If only there was some kind of market where the relative rate of supply and demand between different goods is arbitrated with a generic unit of accountable value at the transactional level between individuals who seek to balance their inventories and accumulate these trade units to hedge against seasonal variation in production capacity, we could be sure to get the best use of our dirt. Theoretically you could drive to a store to get corn and cheeseburger at the same time if this system works.


another non-thinker. The choice of fuel of food is made long before the market gets a chance to dictate which way to go. But don't let the facts get in the way of "sound thinking".
 
2012-08-11 02:00:09 PM

LabGrrl: Two things:
#1. You have corn? Where do you have corn? Even New York's Sweet Corn crops (notorious for either being awesome or drowning) are getting drought killed.
#2. Both of the ways of making ethanol in the US *also* produce animal (and people) feed, corn starch and a whole bunch of products (that corn based road salt that doesn't work, for example, the 'preemergent' stuff you throw in the grass to dehydrate weed seeds, the stuff added to pet food, fish food, anything based around 'distiller's grain'). Most ethanol plants also bottle their CO2...

The "ethanol OR food" thing is a fiction.

/Corn isn't the best thing to make ethanol from, by a long shot, but you should complain "HFCS" or "Real Food" if you really want to make a point.
//I learned all this shiat preparing a beauty queen to be the corn queen or some title like that.


while it may not be the best thing to use, it is being used. That makes your argument pointless.
 
2012-08-11 02:02:45 PM

GranoblasticMan: Also, the variety of corn used for feed is unfit for human consumption, and I imagine similar distinctions exist for ethanol. So it's not like "We have x number of bushels of corn, how should we divide it?" It's more along the lines of "How many acres of x corn should we plant vs y corn vs z corn?"


That corn that is unfit for human consumption is used for a variety of other things - feed for animals, corn starch and a host of other things that all end up on our plates.

BTW, city boy, who told you that there is such a thing as corn unfit for human consumption? Did you read that on the internet?
 
2012-08-11 02:03:29 PM

chuckufarlie: friday13: chuckufarlie: Marcus Aurelius: tomWright: Using food for fuel was always a bad idea. I remember seeing articles about that years ago.

Plus the economics of ethanol never made sense for the U.S., and with new sources of oil becoming productive, like the oils sands in Alberta, and shale oil, it makes even less sense.

But go ahead, keep raising the price of a staple food for the poor of the Americas. I am sure the peasants of Mexico smile as they pay 2-3 times the price for corn meal they used to, just for the pleasure of knowing they assuaged some environmentalists rage at petroleum.

Not to mention that global warming is currently hammering the corn crops and sending prices through the roof.

Global warming is not hammering the corn crop. Go ahead and believe that if you want to but it is not true. Regional droughts happen every year in some part of the country or another.

It is easy to blame it on global warming but how does an average increase of less than one degree C do such things?

one degree is more than the difference between frozen and not frozen.

that is a remarkable display of the intelligence level required to believe in such things as AGW. You could be the poster boy.

Sadly, we are raising an entire generation that has been taught WHAT to think but not HOW to think.


Because melting ice won't result in loss of habitat or flooding in other parts of the world. You're a farking genius.
 
2012-08-11 02:04:52 PM
I have an alternative idea. How about we cut out ethanol completely. But in turn take the large subsidies that are going to ethanol and instead use that to help farmers set up methane collection systems. Currently the biggest issue with methane collection systems are power companies, the amount of money a farmer gets from selling electricity they produce from methane collection system is significantly lower than the price electric companies sell you electricity for, plus power companies expect the farmer to pay to put up the lines to allow the transfer from the farmers system to the electrical system (something that costs in the hundreds of thousands of dollars). Electric companies pay nothing yet have instant returns.



Ethanol was retarded from the get go, all around stupid the only reason it was pushed was because of a combination of ignorant environmentalists and greedy farmers.
 
2012-08-11 02:12:31 PM

chuckufarlie: Aye Carumba: If only there was some kind of market where the relative rate of supply and demand between different goods is arbitrated with a generic unit of accountable value at the transactional level between individuals who seek to balance their inventories and accumulate these trade units to hedge against seasonal variation in production capacity, we could be sure to get the best use of our dirt. Theoretically you could drive to a store to get corn and cheeseburger at the same time if this system works.

another non-thinker. The choice of fuel of food is made long before the market gets a chance to dictate which way to go. But don't let the facts get in the way of "sound thinking".


I'm thinking more of the dirt, not so much what becomes of it. The UN would like to dictate what to do with it. In my model, they can bid on it just like anybody else, and the market dictates. If burning some or eating some in the form of cheeseburgers wins over, so be it. I don't think this model is too far from what goes on, otherwise there would be troops with blue helmets running around our corn fields.
 
2012-08-11 02:13:58 PM

chuckufarlie:
BTW, city boy, who told you that there is such a thing as corn unfit for human consumption? Did you read that on the internet?


The strain of Bt used in Bt-modified corn (that's corn that produces Bacillus thuringiensis on its own) uses a strain of Bt that renders it unfit for human consumption. Most of your stories about the wrong corn leaking into the foodstream are Bt corn (kills hornworm/cutworm.) The FDA labels it..."Unfit for Human Consumption."
Bt's weird. Some of the strains are really helpful, killing mosquitoes, whiteflies and almost nothing else, and other strains kill everything, even intestinal flora and fauna in people.
 
2012-08-11 02:19:52 PM

Fart_Machine: relcec: environmentalists are the proximate cause. it was their dumb idea that they pushed hard on until it was a law.

You mean apart from the fact that it was used for auto fuel in the early 1900's and the spike in it's use was primarily as a replacement for MTBE which was toxic. It was one of many alternatives proposed by environmentalists in conjunction with other alternative fuel sources which wasn't a "dumb thing". The lobbying however to make it predominant came from the Farm Lobby. But yeah, nuance sucks.


you are really denying they were the driving force behind this? that without them this never would have happened? that's not nuance, that is bullshiat.
 
2012-08-11 02:29:39 PM
How about using corn as part of the food supply and stop wasting it on sh*t like this?

Novel idea, isn't it?
 
2012-08-11 02:32:37 PM

relcec: Fart_Machine: relcec: environmentalists are the proximate cause. it was their dumb idea that they pushed hard on until it was a law.

You mean apart from the fact that it was used for auto fuel in the early 1900's and the spike in it's use was primarily as a replacement for MTBE which was toxic. It was one of many alternatives proposed by environmentalists in conjunction with other alternative fuel sources which wasn't a "dumb thing". The lobbying however to make it predominant came from the Farm Lobby. But yeah, nuance sucks.

you are really denying they were the driving force behind this? that without them this never would have happened? that's not nuance, that is bullshiat.


Reading comprehension is hard isn't it? Environmentalists supported it as one type of alternative fuel. The Farm Lobby specifically pushed for it as the primary source because it benefited them directly. Guess which one has more power in US politics? Hint, it's not the environmentalists.
 
2012-08-11 02:40:06 PM

Fart_Machine: relcec: Fart_Machine: relcec: environmentalists are the proximate cause. it was their dumb idea that they pushed hard on until it was a law.

You mean apart from the fact that it was used for auto fuel in the early 1900's and the spike in it's use was primarily as a replacement for MTBE which was toxic. It was one of many alternatives proposed by environmentalists in conjunction with other alternative fuel sources which wasn't a "dumb thing". The lobbying however to make it predominant came from the Farm Lobby. But yeah, nuance sucks.

you are really denying they were the driving force behind this? that without them this never would have happened? that's not nuance, that is bullshiat.

Reading comprehension is hard isn't it? Environmentalists supported it as one type of alternative fuel. The Farm Lobby specifically pushed for it as the primary source because it benefited them directly. Guess which one has more power in US politics? Hint, it's not the environmentalists.


Yeah, but without God there would be no environmentalists.

Thanks a lot God, you fark.
 
2012-08-11 02:55:49 PM
I remember during the last campaign, Obama told a big group in Iowa that corn for biofuel wasn't necessarily the smartest thing, and that we should be looking into serious alternatives like switchgrass. I thought that was pretty cool. Maybe next term.
 
2012-08-11 03:00:52 PM

TheZorker: tequilasundae: ... and it is the reason why your sons all have C cups at age 10.

...

and what size is YOUR tinfoil hat?


Pretty sure its size C

//He's probably right, but I'm more scared of excess soy in our foods.
 
2012-08-11 03:01:17 PM

machoprogrammer: Haven't studies been done that show ethanol is actually worse for the environment than gasoline?


This one does. Link
 
2012-08-11 03:12:50 PM

GranoblasticMan: whatsupchuck: When corn prices go up, people biatch. When meat prices go up, people biatch. When fuel prices go up, people biatch. You can't have it all, people.

And the only reason those are all connected is because corn is used for everything. And the only reason it's used for everything is because an absurd and unnecessary government subsidy on corn.


Don't forget the high tariffs on cane sugar imports. High fructose corn syrup is in damn near everything. The countries that would love to sell us cane sugar are poor and would benefit greatly from selling us sugar, but our government likes to protect rich corn farmers, instead.
 
2012-08-11 03:14:21 PM

tequilasundae: Read The Omnivore's Dilemna by Michael Pollan, Also in Netflix watch King Corn (you see where it all goes and how the government has been behind it since the 70's) and of course Food INC and Supersize Me. Pretty much explains what I'm talking about.


Why would I want to get my information from movies---in particular, persuasive "documentary" movies made by people with obvious ideological positions against their subjects?

Shouldn't I be persuaded by scientific data instead of a poignant soundtrack and convincing cinematography and editing?

What you should do is go through these movies, summarize their claims in paper form, provide actual citations for their various statements, and then see how well it survives peer review for a journal. That way we have something that is scientifically vetted, and can be convinced by facts and argument divorced from the various persuasive tactics of film.

For Super-size me, you may have to redo the experiment if the reviewers object to a sample size of 1, the complete lack of blinding and the an obvious conflict of interest with the authors.
 
2012-08-11 03:23:23 PM
XCott..you sound like a corn farmer..or lobbyist. I bet you don't believe in man made climate change either,

whidbey: How about using corn as part of the food supply and stop wasting it on sh*t like this?

Novel idea, isn't it?


it permeates the food supply already, we just don't eat it directly.
 
2012-08-11 03:35:53 PM

Aye Carumba: chuckufarlie: Aye Carumba: If only there was some kind of market where the relative rate of supply and demand between different goods is arbitrated with a generic unit of accountable value at the transactional level between individuals who seek to balance their inventories and accumulate these trade units to hedge against seasonal variation in production capacity, we could be sure to get the best use of our dirt. Theoretically you could drive to a store to get corn and cheeseburger at the same time if this system works.

another non-thinker. The choice of fuel of food is made long before the market gets a chance to dictate which way to go. But don't let the facts get in the way of "sound thinking".

I'm thinking more of the dirt, not so much what becomes of it. The UN would like to dictate what to do with it. In my model, they can bid on it just like anybody else, and the market dictates. If burning some or eating some in the form of cheeseburgers wins over, so be it. I don't think this model is too far from what goes on, otherwise there would be troops with blue helmets running around our corn fields.


I see. What sort of drugs are you on?
 
Displayed 50 of 65 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report