• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Does the NCBA really represent the Cattle man?

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Who does the NCBA really represent ?

  • Beef industry

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Cattle industry

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Both

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
8,789
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
Does the NCBA really represent the Cattle man?..................good luck
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
Well..... they didn't do a good job of representing those who drafted and/or voted for those 11 points, did they?
 

Murgen

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
2,108
Reaction score
0
Location
Ontario
RCALF didn't really fulfill their mandate either, did they?

I think the RCALF members should really feel let down that their organization could not present a solid case in court, that would standup to scrutiny!
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
Murgen said:
RCALF didn't really fulfill their mandate either, did they?

I think the RCALF members should really feel let down that their organization could not present a solid case in court, that would standup to scrutiny!

I'm satisfied. They happened to get overturned by the court that gets overturned themselves more than anybody else. They argued the USDA did not to their job, which they didn't. The Birkenstock no-under-God- bunch seems to think we should just trust the USDA.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
What kind of a victory would it be if R-CULT had won the 9th circuit court decision?

9TH CIRCUIT COURT AGREES WITH R-CULT'S POSITION THAT HAVING BSE IN YOUR NATIVE HERD CREATES A "HIGH RISK" TO CONSUMERS.

What kind of victory would that be?

I think some of these hypocrites are sighing a great sigh of relief that they will never face the consequences of their political stupidity.



~SH~
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Sandhusker said:
Murgen said:
RCALF didn't really fulfill their mandate either, did they?

I think the RCALF members should really feel let down that their organization could not present a solid case in court, that would standup to scrutiny!

I'm satisfied. They happened to get overturned by the court that gets overturned themselves more than anybody else. They argued the USDA did not to their job, which they didn't. The Birkenstock no-under-God- bunch seems to think we should just trust the USDA.
The man that didn't do his job was Cebull and that is probably why this statement was included in the Court of Appeals written ruling
Contrary to the district court's conclusion, we conclude that the Final Rule will likely survive judicial scrutiny under the correct legal standard
You are satisfied that on every count R-CALF and Cebull were hammered? After what it cost the membership I think you would have expected alot more from the lawyers than that. How much more are you willing to donate to the cause just so you can be satified with losing? :roll:
 

Murgen

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
2,108
Reaction score
0
Location
Ontario
What are you saying Tam. Could all that money donated to the Auctions and fundraisers have been spent in a more beneficial way. Put away for a rainy day, or towards starting up a branded beef product etc. Sheep lead astray, you say?

Isn't the legal system great? "no, really I can win this case, all I need is $$$$."
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
You win some you lose some. With the USDA, its a David and Goliath situation. It's just one battle in the war.
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Murgen said:
What are you saying Tam. Could all that money donated to the Auctions and fundraisers have been spent in a more beneficial way. Put away for a rainy day, or towards starting up a branded beef product etc. Sheep lead astray, you say?

Isn't the legal system great? "no, really I can win this case, all I need is $$$$."

But the lawyers tried, they honestly did. And as long as Sandhusker is satified with a costly slam dunk lose what can we say. It satified me too. :lol2:
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Sandhusker said:
You win some you lose some. With the USDA, its a David and Goliath situation. It's just one battle in the war.

Sandhusker can you tell us just what R-CALF has won. They got M"ID" taken out of M"COOL but what did that do. Oh it made it so you don't have a trace back system in place to find diseased animals and where they came from in the US. Way to go R-CALF. They held up the border but in the end the court of appeals openned it anyway. All that cost the US beef industry was a couple thousand jobs and billions in lost trade. Another way to go R-CALF. They sure didn't win the media campaign they wages on Canadian beef as the demand for beef increased 7 to 8 % while the Canadian boxed beef was entering the US. Check off, no they lost that one, IBP no, Dumping charges against Canada No, CAFTA, no they lost that one this morning. If I belonged to a team that lost as much as R-CALF, I would ask to be traded. :wink:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
Tam said:
Sandhusker said:
You win some you lose some. With the USDA, its a David and Goliath situation. It's just one battle in the war.

Sandhusker can you tell us just what R-CALF has won. They got M"ID" taken out of M"COOL but what did that do. Oh it made it so you don't have a trace back system in place to find diseased animals and where they came from in the US. Way to go R-CALF. They held up the border but in the end the court of appeals openned it anyway. All that cost the US beef industry was a couple thousand jobs and billions in lost trade. Another way to go R-CALF. They sure didn't win the media campaign they wages on Canadian beef as the demand for beef increased 7 to 8 % while the Canadian boxed beef was entering the US. Check off, no they lost that one, IBP no, Dumping charges against Canada No, CAFTA, no they lost that one this morning. If I belonged to a team that lost as much as R-CALF, I would ask to be traded. :wink:

R-CALF's actions kept the border closed from March 2005 to July 2005. They cost thousands of jobs and billions in lost trade during 5 months? R-CALF has taken no position on the checkoff. They were not a plaintiff in Pickett. They won the dumping case against Canada. Got anything else you want to share?
 

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
8,789
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
Sandhusker said:
Tam said:
Sandhusker said:
You win some you lose some. With the USDA, its a David and Goliath situation. It's just one battle in the war.

Sandhusker can you tell us just what R-CALF has won. They got M"ID" taken out of M"COOL but what did that do. Oh it made it so you don't have a trace back system in place to find diseased animals and where they came from in the US. Way to go R-CALF. They held up the border but in the end the court of appeals openned it anyway. All that cost the US beef industry was a couple thousand jobs and billions in lost trade. Another way to go R-CALF. They sure didn't win the media campaign they wages on Canadian beef as the demand for beef increased 7 to 8 % while the Canadian boxed beef was entering the US. Check off, no they lost that one, IBP no, Dumping charges against Canada No, CAFTA, no they lost that one this morning. If I belonged to a team that lost as much as R-CALF, I would ask to be traded. :wink:

R-CALF's actions kept the border closed from March 2005 to July 2005. They cost thousands of jobs and billions in lost trade during 5 months? R-CALF has taken no position on the checkoff. They were not a plaintiff in Pickett. They won the dumping case against Canada. Got anything else you want to share?


I just humor Miss Tam,she is deathly afraid of R CALF,and has stated more than once she is afraid an ole mean R CALFER will get her,I guess she just feels guilty for all the fact twisting she does ,patterns herself after sh.I heard a rumor the other day there was a lil ole short legged strawberry blonde in big beaver in the 200 block of Centre st with her head stuck in the sand,and her big butt shining :D :D :D ........good luck
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
R-CALF has taken no position on the checkoff.

Herman Schumacher stated that we had to go after the checkoff to get to the NCBA. Herman is a director of R-CALF. Are you saying Herman does not speak for R-CALF?


They were not a plaintiff in Pickett.

They supported the plaintiffs in the case and stated so many times.

They lost!


They won the dumping case against Canada.

That's a damn lie!

They lost!


As long as they keep lying, they will keep losing!



~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
Herman, as an individual, can say whatever he wants. Any comments he made were NOT official R-CALF policy. R-CALF has taken no official stand on the checkoff. You're really reaching there.

Now a quote from Jon Lauke; University of Minnesota Law School;
Major Issues in Trade Disputes and Future Direction
Jon Lauck, University of Minnesota Law School
It is my intention to make some comments on the current health of the international trading system, specifically where agriculture is concerned. Much of the present controversy is linked to the adoption of the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement, which served as a model for the adoption of NAFTA and the Uruguay Round agreement in 1994, which created the WTO. One of the most prominent areas of trade friction in recent years has centered on the cattle industry; in particular, the sharp increase in the number of Canadian and Mexican cattle imported into the United States and the absence of a comparable increase in U.S. exports of cattle. American producers believe that the surge in imports is related to the collapse in prices and have accused the Canadians of dumping in the R-Calf case of 1998. In the end, the relevant agencies found that in fact Canada was dumping cattle in the United States, but they found that the dumping did not cause a "material injury," a seemingly implausible and contradictory finding that aggravated American cattlemen who were barely hanging on to their livelihoods.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Once again Sandman, an opinion that supports your bias Sandbeenies into a fact.

WHAT DID THE COURT RULE SANDMAN????

You lost!

Want to bet you will lose on the "captive supply reform act" too?

When you start stepping on the cattlemen's right to market cattle through forward contracts you will get your blaming head handed to you. Write it down.

The fact that most forward contracts have negotiated base prices proves once again the stupidity behind the law.


To the original question, does the NCBA represent the cattleman?

Absolutely! Far more than the lying deceptive R-CULT!




~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
SH, "To the original question, does the NCBA represent the cattleman?
Absolutely! Far more than the lying deceptive R-CULT! "

How do you explain the 11 points debacle then? Those boys in Texas sure didn't think NCBA was representing them.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I voiced those same concerns the very first time I read them. I disagreed wtih 2 of NCBA's 11 directives.

I felt they were throwing the import blamers a bone and not taking a stronger stand against isolationists like you.

I'll take that over R-CULT's position that if you have BSE in your native herd your beef is "high risk" and "contaminated" any day of the year.

Only R-CULT would be so ignorant as to risk the integrity of 80% of our U.S. beef consumption to stop the importation of 5% of our U.S. beef consumption.

NCBA may not have been able to live up to their 11 directives but they certainly didn't lie about the impact of BSE because they were too ignorant to understand the ecomomic impact of Canadian live cattle imports.

Hell if we had listened to Bill Bullard we wouldn't have any trade at all.

If we had listened to Dennis McDonald we would not be slaughtering cull cows.

Comparing NCBA to R-CULT is like comparing conservative Republicans to government mandate loving blaming democrats.

Doesn't matter whether it's R-CULT's ignorance and hypocrisy on "M"COOL, their communist packer ban, or their anti trade positions. They're continually wrong!

R-CULT thinks they represent producers but they only represent the blaming segment.


~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
Typical that you would turn an example of the NCBA clearly not following the direction of it's members into another R-CALF rant. :roll:

Doesn't matter if you agree with them or not. NCBA leadership abandoned their membership and followed the packers. No matter how you twist it or try to divert it into a R-CALF bash, the facts remain. :lol: :lol:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Hey I can at least admit when I disagree with NCBA.

R-CULT is always wrong and you follow their pied pipers unconditionally like the R-CULT clone you are.


~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
~SH~ said:
Hey I can at least admit when I disagree with NCBA.

R-CULT is always wrong and you follow their pied pipers unconditionally like the R-CULT clone you are.


~SH~

Yada yada yada pied piper yada yada clone yada yada blamer yada yada :lol: :lol:

Can you admit the NCBA leade ship did NOT follow the instructions of their members?
 

Latest posts

Top