cattle prices

[SMS]

:lol:

This debate about half truths and half story's is starting to sound like the teenage daughter coming home and saying "I am sort of pregnet".

 

[Anonymous]

Sandhusker: "However, you have to be a graduate of the SH School of Distorted Comprehension if you think saying that someone presenting their half of the story means they are lying half the time."

Surely you can provide the proof to back up the allegation that I said R-CALF is lying half the time when they are reporting their usual partial information can't you????

Sandhusker (expected response): "No I can't and stop calling me Shirley"

I have never accused anyone of lying where I did not provide the lie and the proof that it was a a lie. Nor has anyone been able to refute those lies.

A few of those lies being....

1. Bullard: "USDA does not care about food safety"
2. Bullard in (2002): "We have been in a trade deficit position for two years now"
3. Bullard: "Canadian beef is contaminated"
4. McDonnel: "That is how the law is written" (Leo suggesting that "M"COOL can be implemented and enforced like the school lunch program when the qualifications are not the same)

Good job Tim H. for keeping Sandhusker less dishonest!



~SH~

 

[Bull Burger]

.....................if you think saying that someone presenting their half of the story means they are lying half the time

Notice how Sandhusker slipped in the word "their" in his sentence.

R-CALF might present "their" half of the story, but.........


...........they also present half of the story.



According to the "Sandhusker Theory", if you run over your neighbors dog and don't tell him, you are innocent.

 

[Sandhusker]

.....................if you think saying that someone presenting their half of the story means they are lying half the time

Notice how Sandhusker slipped in the word "their" in his sentence.

R-CALF might present "their" half of the story, but.........


...........they also present half of the story.



According to the "Sandhusker Theory", if you run over your neighbors dog and don't tell him, you are innocent.

Oh, I see. When was the last time you told R-CALF's side of the story, or is it only R-CALF that you demand make a point for the opposition?

 

[Anonymous]

NA

 

[Anonymous]

Sandhusker: "Oh, I see. When was the last time you told R-CALF's side of the story, or is it only R-CALF that you demand make a point for the opposition?"

R-CALF's side of the trade equation is the economic impact of imports.

Agman and I have both offered the economic impact of imports.

Has R-CALF ever acknowledged the total value of beef trade in dollars prior to the Canadian border closing?

Has R-CALF every acknowledged that imported lean trimmings from Australia and New Zealand is a value added product for us?


On "M"COOL, I can acknowledge the value in the argument of a "consumer's right to know" the 5% of our domestic U.S. beef consumption that would be labeled as imported providing that it doesn't also get channeled towards food service.

Does R-CALF acknowledge that 75% of the imported beef is exempt from labeling under "M"COOL? NO!

Does R-CALF acknowledge that "M"COOL without "M"ID is unenforceable? NO!

Does R-CALF acknowledge that the qualifications for "M"COOL and the "School Lunch Program" are not the same? NO, in fact they lie to the contrary.

R-CALF is deceptive by nature because they have no conscience. The end (keeping the Canadian border closed to live cattle) justifies their means (lies and deception).

They are a pathetic bunch as are their followers who can't conduct their own research on these issues.



~SH~