|
| Author |
Message |
Brad S
Rancher
Joined: 15 Feb 2005
Posts: 1190
Location: west of Soapweed
|
 Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2005 11:38 pm Post subject: there he goes again |
 |
|
"steak is good" = FOR
"I really shouldn't eat 10# of steak per day"" = Against
If you agree with the previous statements, either you are a "flipflopper" or you have proof SH is an unimaginative internet troll.
PS "I can only respect someone that can only see 1 side if an issue" Homer Simpson
|
|
| Back to top |
|
sw
Rancher
Joined: 14 Feb 2005
Posts: 1374
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 12:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
SH,
keep up with the posts, I am so tired of this BS coming from Leo, Pat Goggins and the Reverend Bullard, it is hard for me to read the bull sessions, have already dropped the Goggins papers and the Lee Pitts papers. Hey, do you have a couple of barrels of ink and some paper? Maybe we could get our own followers and get rich off of the North Ameican Beef Industry. Just a thought.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Bull Burger
Member
Joined: 14 Feb 2005
Posts: 212
Location: Fruited Plains of western SD
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 12:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| rancher wrote: |
| SH, I started reading your rant, what a spin you put on how Leo feels, never got past the first 1/3 and I was so dizzy I had to stop. |
| Haymaker wrote: |
| Well you did better than me Rancher I just got about a fourth read,I wonder what that Damn prarie dawg has been drinking ,well I guess I better head upstairs ...............good luck |
| Sandhusker wrote: |
| I hope you had fun with that, SH. |
| Oldtimer wrote: |
| Anything born in Canada and brought into the US will have a CAN hot brand on it- anything from Mexico is branded with an MX-- If its born in US, goes to Canada to feed and comes back it packs the CAN brand--everything else is product of US....And it is not a violation of any world trade rules as long as its required on all beef and no country is discriminated against.... |
| Brad S wrote: |
"steak is good" = FOR
"I really shouldn't eat 10# of steak per day"" = Against
If you agree with the previous statements, either you are a "flipflopper" or you have proof SH is an unimaginative internet troll.
PS "I can only respect someone that can only see 1 side if an issue" Homer Simpson |
~SH~,
You have to type way slower for these people to follow the point you're trying to make. Your point being how King LEO of R-CALF bounces around on M'ID. None of the five posters above refuted your quotes! But only rancher and Haymaker actually admitted they couldn't finish reading LEO's dizzying comments. Sandhusker diverts again. Oldtimer (dreaming he's in Chihuahua, Mexico) rants on about branding irons and Brad S spills a full beer on his keyboard in a maddened attempt at responding. Go figure.
BB
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Oldtimer
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 24735
Location: Northeast Montana
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 1:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Tam wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Anything born in Canada and brought into the US will have a CAN hot brand on it- anything from Mexico is branded with an MX-- If its born in US, goes to Canada to feed and comes back it packs the CAN brand--everything else is product of US....And it is not a violation of any world trade rules as long as its required on all beef and no country is discriminated against.... |
Oldtimer you wrote everything else is product of US..
does that include all the Canadian cattle that were imported into the US before the May 2003 ban was put on. Those animals don't have a CAN brand and I doubt they will be back across the border to get one either. |
Tam , since the USDA refuses to track down those prior to the ban cattle, the lawmakers had proposed grandfathering them- meaning they would for the purposes of COOL be considered a US cow .... Some articles I have read figure that since the majority of these cattle were either dairy cattle that are milked out in a few years or bulls, that that number is steadily declining and many have already gone to slaughter....I would prefer they tracked as many down as possible and tested them first..........
|
|
| Back to top |
|
~SH~
Rancher
Joined: 14 Feb 2005
Posts: 5426
Location: South Western SD
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 4:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
FLIP: "USDA should track down those Canadian cattle that were imported prior to the ban."
FLOP: "M"ID Prohibited from "M"COOL!
It never ends!
Big Muddy,
Sure glad you can comprehend the written word and identify those who keep parroting the same contradictions over and over.
Nobody can defend against the truth on the "school lunch program" falacy. All they can do is recite what they "WANT" "M"COOL to be or what they "THINK" "M"COOL should be. NOT WHAT IT IS!
The law that Leo calls a good law contradicts itself by stating (paraphrasing) that "anyone who supplies a covered commodity to a retailer must provide origination information of said commodity" in contrast "M"COOL Prohibits "M"ID.
If I was USDA, I would have R-CALF implement and enforce their flawed law instead of listening to them act like they know what they are talking about. Then invite the press to give us play by coverage so the whole world can see these phonies for what they are.
"Hey boys, we got another one coming in with smudged out hot iron brands. I think one of them is an "M". How should that one be labeled Leo???"
I could only wish that R-CALF had to face the consequences for their stupidity instead of sitting in the critical throne of judgement.
~SH~
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
