Tag Archives: gent

Future President Ben Carson Wrote 6 Books. We Read Them So You Don’t Have To.

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Former neurosurgeon Ben Carson rallied Republicans at the Iowa Freedom Summit on Saturday, stirring up speculation once more that the conservative activist will seek his party’s presidential nomination next year. Carson has never run for office and only recently registered as a Republican, but as the author of six books over more than two decades, he does have a considerable paper trail—and it’s starting to get him into trouble.

In his 1992 book Think Big, for instance, Carson proposed a national catastrophic health care plan modeled on federal disaster insurance, which would be funded by a 10-percent tax on insurance companies. He also proposed re-thinking best practices concerning end-of-life care, advocating for a “national discussion that would help us all rethink our culture’s mind-set about death, dying, and terminal illness”—similar to the provisions of the Affordable Care Act that conservatives now dismiss as “death panels.” (A Carson spokesman told BuzzFeed last week that the health care proposal is “as relevant to his view today as our current military action in Afghanistan is compared to our military strategy in Afghanistan two decades ago.”)

Although filled with inspiring stories of medical miracles and his own rough-and-tumble roots, Carson’s books also reflect the views of a social-values warrior whose anti-gay comments recently caused him to withdraw as a commencement speaker at Johns Hopkins University, his longtime employer. A sampling:

On intelligent design (from Take the Risk):

From what I know (and all we don’t know) about biology, I find it as hard to accept the claims of evolution as it is to think that a hurricane blowing through a junkyard could somehow assemble a fully equipped and flight-ready 747. You could blow a billion hurricanes through a trillion junkyards over infinite periods of time, and I don’t think you’d get one aerodynamic wing, let alone an entire jumbo jet complete with complex connections for a jet-propulsion system, a radar system, a fuel-injection system, an exhaust system, a ventilation system, control systems, electronic systems, plus backup systems for all of those, and so much more. There’s simply not enough time in eternity for that to happen. Which is why not one of us has ever doubted that a 747, by its very existence, gives convincing evidence of someone’s intelligent design.

On the failing of the fossil record (from Take the Risk):

For me, the plausibility of evolution is further strained by Darwin’s assertion that within fifty to one hundred years of his time, scientists would become geologically sophisticated enough to find the fossil remains of the entire evolutionary tree in an unequivocal step-by-step progression of life from amoeba to man—including all of the intermediate species.

Of course that was 150 years ago, and there is still no such evidence. It’s just not there. But when you bring that up to the proponents of Darwinism, the best explanation they can come up with is “Well…uh…it’s lost!” Here again I find it requires too much faith for me to believe that explanation given all the fossils we have found without any fossilized evidence of the direct, step-by-step evolutionary progression from simple to complex organisms or from one species to another species. Shrugging and saying, “Well, it was mysteriously lost, and we’ll probably never find it,” doesn’t seem like a particularly satisfying, objective, or scientific response. But what’s even harder for me to swallow is how so many people who can’t explain it are still willing to claim that evolution is not theory but fact, at the same time insisting anyone who wants to consider or discuss creationism as a possibility cannot be a real scientist.

On abortion (from America the Beautiful):

This situation perhaps crystallizes one of the major moral dilemmas we face in American society today: Does a woman have the right to terminate another human life because it is encased in her body? Does ownership convey absolute power of life and death over the owned subject? If it does, then NFL quarterback Michael Vick was unfairly imprisoned for torturing and killing dogs in Atlanta.

On gay parents (from The Big Picture):

Recently a homosexual couple brought a child in to be examined on one of our neurosurgical clinical days. During lunch, after the couple had left, one of my fellow staff members commented favorably on the couple’s obvious love and commitment to the child. He said to me, “I know you don’t approve of homosexual relationships and wouldn’t consider their home a healthy atmosphere in which to raise a child. But I was impressed by that couple. I think their sexual orientation is their business. Think what you want, but it’s just your opinion.”

My response wasn’t nearly that politically correct. “Excuse me, but I beg to differ,” I said. “How I feel and what I think isn’t just my opinion. God in his Word says very clearly that he considers homosexual acts to be an ‘abomination.'”

On how gay marriage brought down the Roman Empire (from America the Beautiful):

I believe God loves homosexuals as much as he loves everyone, but if we can redefine marriage as between two men or two women or any other way based on social pressures as opposed to between a man and a woman, we will continue to redefine it in any way that we wish, which is a slippery slope with a disastrous ending, as witnessed in the dramatic fall of the Roman Empire.

On WashingtonRedacted owner Dan Snyder (from One Nation):

On the other hand, many of the greatest achievers in our society never finished college. That includes Bill Gates Jr., Steve Jobs, and Dan Snyder, who is the owner of the Washington NFL franchise.

(Carson elsewhere defended Snyder’s refusal to change his team’s name and called the oft-criticized owner “far from the demonic characterization seen in the gullible press that allows itself to be manipulated by those wishing to bring about fundamental change in America.”)

On Independence Day (from Think Big):

I do not get to see many movies, but when I watched the video of Independence Day with my sons, I was struck by the portrayal of the resistance efforts mounted against the alien invaders from outer space. The frail and arbitrary distinctions so often made between various segments of society, even between different countries and ideologies, instantly melted away as the people of the entire world focused not on their differences but upon a common threat and the common goal uniting them—the protection of the planet from alien invaders.

Unlike some of his fellow candidates, though, Carson has made little effort to sugar-coat his most polarizing views. Even before he revealed any political ambitions, he’d moonlighted as a traveling Creationism advocate, giving speeches on the subject and even debating skeptic Richard Dawkins on evolution in 2006:

Visit link:  

Future President Ben Carson Wrote 6 Books. We Read Them So You Don’t Have To.

Posted in alo, Anchor, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Future President Ben Carson Wrote 6 Books. We Read Them So You Don’t Have To.

Road Funding Isn’t Broken. Why Fix It?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

James Pethokoukis is skeptical that even with gasoline prices plunging toward the two-dollar mark, Congress will consider raising the gasoline tax. Me too. But then there’s this:

Of course, another idea — as transportation experts Matthew Kahn and David Levinson wrote in a 2011 report — is to just freeze the gas tax as is and use revenue solely to bolster existing roads and bridges, including the addition of new pricing schemes to reduce congestion. Funding for new capacity would come from a new federal highway bank, which would loan money to states contingent on meeting stringent performance tests and demonstrating ability to repay the loans. Other options include axing the tax completely and letting states fund their own projects or public-private partnerships. How about some fresh, innovative thinking on infrastructure rather than defaulting to the status quo?

There are plenty of places where we could use fresh thinking. But is this really one of them? It’s infrastructure development. The simplest and most straightforward way of doing it is to raise money via taxes and then spend it. Loans aren’t innovative. Dumping it all on the states isn’t innovative. Public-private partnerships aren’t innovative.

In fact, all of this is the opposite of innovative. They’re just Rube Goldberg mechanisms to avoid transparent taxation and spending, something that we already do way too much of via subsidies and tax expenditures. Here’s my idea of innovative:

  1. We figure out how much we want to spend on transportation infrastructure.
  2. We decide which taxes are the fairest, most efficient funding source.
  3. We set tax rates to match (1) and (2).
  4. We spend the money.

That’s clear and transparent. It’s reasonably efficient. It’s an appropriate way to fund public goods. What’s not to like?

Generally speaking, my point here is that just because something is traditional doesn’t mean it’s a dinosaur. We should pick and choose our targets for reform and innovation, not use them merely as buzzwords. If you want to build a road, nothing much has changed over the past century. You just need to raise the money and then break ground. You might want to do more or less of it, or build different kinds of roads, or build roads to different places. But funding them? We already know how to do that. Why muck it up?

Original post: 

Road Funding Isn’t Broken. Why Fix It?

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Road Funding Isn’t Broken. Why Fix It?

Why this U.N. climate summit is especially important

Why this U.N. climate summit is especially important

By on 1 Dec 2014commentsShare

Thousands of diplomats from around the world are gathering today in Lima, Peru, in the latest round of wrangling to hammer out a deal to address climate change. This two-week conference is the COP20 — meaning, it is the 20th conference of parties to 1992’s U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Yes, we’ve been having a lot of these climate-related U.N. summits — one every year, in fact, plus the summit in New York City earlier this year, which wasn’t an official conference of parties. You, dear Grist reader, are more likely than most to reside in that small minority that finds every U.N. summit on climate change worth paying attention to — but this COP is really important, and even more worth paying attention to than the rest of them. That’s because negotiations are both more urgent and seem more likely to accomplish something than in years past.

First, the urgency: This conference is the last before the big one in Paris in 2015. That conference, the COP21, has taken on great significance among climate hawks because it could very well be the last chance for nations to cut a deal to avoid 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) of warming, a target scientists have said will likely allow us to dodge some of the truly awful effects of global warming.

The hope is that the Lima conference will produce a draft document for nations to commit to in Paris in December 2015. In theory, between now and next spring, each nation will come up with a goal for how much they can cut their emissions, and announce their intention to meet that goal. Then, next December, world leaders will sign an agreement acknowledging those commitments, with plans to reconvene and assess how each nation is doing.

For a while, nations haven’t been willing to make these kinds of commitments — but things feel a bit more optimistic this time. Though it has its naysayers, the recent joint U.S.-China announcement that both nations have timelines in place for limiting their emissions made a difference. The announcement demonstrated that the two largest polluters are taking climate change seriously. The deal, in turn, puts the heat on the other big polluters — both those that bare a historical responsibility for global warming, like the U.S. does, and those that only recently industrialized, like China — to come up with a climate plan. The European Union recently announced a timeline to reduce emissions by 40 percent over 1990 levels, which only makes the pressure greater on countries like India, Russia, Brazil, Japan, Australia, and Canada to commit to their own timelines.

Still, in many of those countries, even with the building momentum, commitments face considerable hurdles. India has been wishy-washy, mostly indicating we shouldn’t expect an emission-reduction plan anytime soon. Canada and Australia have the significant impediment of being run by leaders who don’t really give a hoot about global warming. And even if commitments are made, they may swing into effect too late. Writes The New York Times’ Coral Davenport:

The problem is that climate experts say [emissions reduction] almost certainly will not happen fast enough. A November report by the United Nations Environment Program concluded that in order to avoid the 3.6 degree increase, global emissions must peak within the next 10 years, going down to half of current levels by midcentury.

But the deal being drafted in Lima will not even be enacted until 2020. And the structure of the emerging deal — allowing each country to commit to what it can realistically achieve, given each nation’s domestic politics — means that the initial cuts by countries will not be as stringent as what scientists say is required.

That’s bad news for the inhabitants of low-lying islands, farmers in the developing world, and even vulnerable communities in the United States, who are already at high risk.

But even though we’re going to have to deal with some climate changes no matter what, taking action sooner is far better than taking it later. Whether or not the world manages to stay below 2 degrees of warming, emissions will eventually have to be reduced significantly. We’re not on that path yet, but we may be getting closer. That’s why we’ll be watching the news from Lima.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get stories like this in your inbox

AdvertisementAdvertisement

Visit link:  

Why this U.N. climate summit is especially important

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Why this U.N. climate summit is especially important

Bluesman Gary Clark Jr. Is the Guitar Hero for Our Time

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Gary Clark Jr.
Live
Warner Bros.

A guitar hero for the modern era, Gary Clark Jr. plays bluesy rock with a blistering urgency that makes the hoariest conventions feel brand new. For all his flashy expertise, the muscular solos and buzzing riffs never feel gratuitous, while Clark’s terse, tough singing nicely complements his fretwork. This 15-track, 97-minute feast is the perfect showcase for his brilliance, mixing versions of standards like “Three O’Clock Blues” (popularized by B.B. King) and “Catfish Blues” (also covered by Jimi Hendrix) with pungent originals, from sleek boogie (“Travis County”) to tender soul (“Please Come Home”), with lots of fireworks in between. While it’s tempting to view him as the next coming of Hendrix, especially in light of his take on Jimi’s “Third Stone from the Sun,” Clark is closer in spirit to Stevie Ray Vaughan: less an exotic, godlike genius than a gifted guardian of tradition who never fails to thrill.

View original post here – 

Bluesman Gary Clark Jr. Is the Guitar Hero for Our Time

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Stout, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Bluesman Gary Clark Jr. Is the Guitar Hero for Our Time

How To Throw Shade

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Last night, PBS aired “America After Ferguson,” a town hall about race in America. A lot of really interesting and intelligent things were said! You should watch the whole thing. In addition to the really interesting and intelligent things that were said, there were also very stupid and offensive things said. Dearly oppressed white conservative dumb dumb columnist for the American Spectator Ross Kaminsky’s contributions to the evening could probably best be classified more the latter than the former.

Look, I am not going to address this dude’s points in any serious way. (You can watch them for yourself if you’re into that sort of thing beginning around minute 14 above.) They was all very much “blah blah reverse racism blah blah white people are the real victims blah blah.” And here’s the thing: This is America. You can believe whatever stupid nonsense you want. It is quite literally the reason the pilgrims crossed the ocean. So, you do you, Ross Kaminsky. But know that whenever you spout off this insidious white man’s burden bullshit, the rest of us are going to be throwing you the type of shade this amazing kid threw your way all night long.

Have a nice weekend.

(h/t to my friend @sobendito)

Source – 

How To Throw Shade

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on How To Throw Shade

Butterball Goes ‘Humane’ for Thanksgiving. Really?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

It’s becoming a Thanksgiving tradition as hoary as NFL football or the bloviations of your drunken uncle: days before the national feast, an animal-welfare group releases an undercover video documenting vile conditions within industrial-scale turkey facilities (see 2013, 2012, 2008).

This year, the largest turkey producer of all, Butterball—which churns out a billion pounds of turkey meat annually, a fifth of US production—has made a bold move to get ahead of these appetite-snuffing PR debacles. By fall 2014, presumably in time for Thanksgiving, all of its products will bear the American Humane Certified label, the company announced Tuesday.

Continue Reading »

Originally posted here:

Butterball Goes ‘Humane’ for Thanksgiving. Really?

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Oster, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Butterball Goes ‘Humane’ for Thanksgiving. Really?

Bobby Jindal: “I’m Not an Evolutionary Biologist”

Mother Jones

At a breakfast event today, a journalist reportedly questioned Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal about whether he believes in evolution. This is pretty pertinent. Several years ago Jindal signed into law the so-called Louisiana Science Education Act. The law, according to the National Center for Science Education, “invites lessons in creationism and climate change denial.” Jindal himself has said in the past that he has “no problem” if school boards want to teach creationism or intelligent design.

Jindal’s response to today’s question (as reported by TPM) was all too familiar. “The reality is I’m not an evolutionary biologist,” he said. Jindal went on to say that while “as a father, I want my kids to be taught about evolution in their schools,” he also believes that “local school districts should make decisions about what should be taught in their classroom.”

The reply brings to mind numerous other Republicans saying “I’m not a scientist” (or Marco Rubio’s “I’m not a scientist, man“) to dodge uncomfortable questions about scientific topics like evolution and climate change. It looks an awful lot like somebody wrote a memo, doesn’t it?

Here’s why this “I’m not a scientist” patter represents such an indefensible dodge. Nobody expects our politicians to be scientists. With a few exceptions, like Rush Holt, we know they won’t be. But it is precisely because they are not experts that we expect them to heed the consensus of experts in, er, areas in which they are not experts.

When politicians fail to do this, claiming a lack of scientific expertise is no excuse. Rather, it’s the opposite: A condemnation.

View original article – 

Bobby Jindal: “I’m Not an Evolutionary Biologist”

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Bobby Jindal: “I’m Not an Evolutionary Biologist”

BP convicted of gross negligence in Deepwater Horizon spill, really salty about it

BP convicted of gross negligence in Deepwater Horizon spill, really salty about it

4 Sep 2014 3:46 PM

Share

Share

BP convicted of gross negligence in Deepwater Horizon spill, really salty about it

×

Today, U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier of the New Orleans federal court issued a ruling finding BP guilty of gross negligence in the Deepwater Horizon disaster of 2010. Halliburton and Transocean, companies also involved in operating the rig, received lesser smackdowns in the same ruling. BP, of course, will be appealing the decision, because why not drag these legal proceedings out for a few more years!

The ruling has coincidentally come about at the same time as the Society of Environmental Journalists conference — also taking place in New Orleans — where Geoff Morrell, BP’s vice president of U.S. communications, had a lot of crybaby-ish things to say about the media’s handling of BP’s behavior in the aftermath of the crisis.

In that regard, we imagine* that the handing down of this decision may have gone a little like this:

Judge Carl Barbier: So listen … four years ago, y’all fucked up. Big time. You know this!

BP: PROVE IT.

CB: What — ? That’s really not my job. Do you know how the U.S. judicial system works? I’m the judge, you morons — I don’t have to prove shit. But just to review: your Deepwater Horizon rig spilled over 200 million gallons of oil, contaminated 650 miles of coastline and 87,000 square miles of the Gulf, and killed 11 people. Not to mention, you impacted the livelihoods of 20 million people in the United States alone.

Halliburton and Transocean, in unison: Okay, fair, but really not our fault.

CB: I’ll get to you bozos in a minute. Anyway, BP, I’m aware this isn’t your first federal court rodeo. You’ve already pleaded guilty to no fewer than 14 federal charges, including 11 for manslaughter, and also one for deliberately lying about the size of the oil spill. And now we’ve spent the past few months hearing — in detail — how your enormous screw-up­ has been detrimental to the environment, food system, and economy of the Gulf region. Do you have anything to say for yourself?

BP: Thank you for asking. We’ve set aside $46 billion to cover all of the cleanup, legal fees, and penalties that we may or may not be responsible for. That’s a lot of money! It should be more than enough.

CB: It will definitely not be even close to enough, but that’s on you. On that note, I find you guilty of reckless conduct and gross negligence in setting off the Deepwater Horizon disaster, for which you are hereby levied a penalty of $18 billion.

BP: Wow. WOW.

HB: DO YOU WANT SOME ICE FOR THAT BUUUURRRRRNNNNNN??!!

TO: HEY BP CAN YOU LOAN ME A COUPLE BIL?? OH WAIT JUST KIDDING YOU BROKE AS F –

CB: Seriously, you two — I’ll get to you in a minute.

BP: Are you kidding me with that number? I am prepared to offer you exactly $3.5 billion.

CB: Does this look like a goddamn Moroccan marketplace to you, BP? Are you seriously haggling with me right now?

HB and TO: Take that penalty and take a seat!

BP: You both need to shut up.

CB: I’m going to have to break character and agree with BP on this one. Transocean and Halliburton, I find you each guilty of negligent conduct.

BP: HA!

CB: … and you don’t have to pay anything. God damn it.

BP: WHAT.

HB: Already took care of it. (High-fives TO.)

CB: I really do just hate all of you, for the record.


*In case you couldn’t tell (!), this exchange is fictional.

Source:
BP Found Grossly Negligent in 2010 Spill; Fines May Rise

, Bloomberg.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Get stories like this in your inbox

AdvertisementAdvertisement

More:  

BP convicted of gross negligence in Deepwater Horizon spill, really salty about it

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, KTP, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on BP convicted of gross negligence in Deepwater Horizon spill, really salty about it

Quote of the Day: "We Had It Won….We Had It Won….We Had It Won."

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

From John McCain this morning, speaking about the resurgent civil war in Iraq:

We had it won. Thanks to the surge and thanks to Gen. David Petraeus, we had it won….The fact is we had the conflict won, and we had a stable government, and a residual force such as we have left behind … but the president wanted out and now we are paying a very heavy price.

John McCain is now the Donald Sterling of foreign affairs: old, angry, retrograde, and only barely in touch with the real world. This is the same guy who declared Iraq safe after taking a carefully staged stroll through a fruit market in Baghdad seven years ago, and he hasn’t been willing to engage with reality any more seriously ever since. He’s just sure that we had it won, that American troops had victory in their grasp, and now it’s all turned to ashes. And since the actual politics of the region seem to be beyond him, all he can do is rage at President Obama for somehow ruining his lovely pretend victory.

It’s a little sad in a way, and perhaps sadder still that the media continues to give him the means to keep embarrassing himself on national TV. It’s time to move on, guys.

Excerpt from:  

Quote of the Day: "We Had It Won….We Had It Won….We Had It Won."

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Sterling, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Quote of the Day: "We Had It Won….We Had It Won….We Had It Won."

Don’t Believe Anything You Read About Pomegranate Juice

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In ancient Greek mythology, pomegranates symbolized death. They were certainly a source of grief for Coca-Cola on Thursday morning, when the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the pomegranate juice company POM Wonderful can sue Coke for marketing a product that contains 99.4 percent apple and grape juice as “Blueberry Pomegranate.”

And like many Greek myths, the Supreme Court decision is also rich with irony: POM is currently locked in a separate court battle over allegations that its own pomegranate juice marketing misleads consumers.

Both companies have relied on some pretty questionable rhetoric. Coke claimed that because the Food and Drug Administration had approved its juice label, it couldn’t be sued under other trademark laws for misleading consumers. “We don’t think that consumers are quite as unintelligent as POM must think they are,” Coke’s lawyer Kathleen Sullivan told the Court in April—an argument that fell flat when Justice Anthony Kennedy responded, “Don’t make me feel bad because I thought that this was pomegranate juice.”

But as HBO’s John Oliver has pointed out, POM isn’t exactly a hero here. In September 2010, the Federal Trade Commission charged POM with falsely claiming that its products could prevent or treat a variety of medical conditions. According to the FTC, claims that POM juice has “SUPER HEALTH POWERS!… Backed by $25 million in medical research and proven to fight for cardiovascular, prostate and erectile health” have no basis in reality.

POM has contested the FDA’s complaint, but so far, judges have sided with the federal agency. The case has made its way to federal appeals court in Washington, where the judges don’t seem particularly sympathetic. At a hearing in May, Judge Merrick Garland read one of POM’s ads aloud and said, “I don’t understand if you look at those two paragraphs how you can say that it’s not misleading.”

More – 

Don’t Believe Anything You Read About Pomegranate Juice

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, oven, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Don’t Believe Anything You Read About Pomegranate Juice