Just for the sake of discussion

[Soapweed]

Sandbag,

Soap knows that by lecturing me on THE MANNER IN WHICH I POST he can gain brownie points with blamers like you. It gives you common ground where as I don't need a support group. I'm a lone wolf and prefer it that way. The truth isn't always a popular position but it's more important to me than being accepted by blamers. Those who can think for themselves will find the truth on their own.

The truth is that I'm not seeking brownie points from anybody. The truth is that I just get dang sick of your yapping.

 

[Anonymous]

Soapweed: "The truth is that I'm not seeking brownie points from anybody. The truth is that I just get dang sick of your yapping."

How can you get sick of what it is you supposedly never read?

Keep your story straight Soapweed.

Truth is, I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU THINK OF MY POSTS so why would you think anyone else does?

QUIT READING THEM THEN! Geeeeez!


~SH~

 

[Anonymous]

I think that NCBA originally got on the bandwagon thinking COOL was a good idea. Upon further reflection, they realized the costly logistics of implementing such a program, and realized it would be an unrecoverable cost to producers. Unless it has traceback (mandatory identification), it would be of no use anyway. I personally don't want mandatory ID just because it would be a lot of hassle. For the same reason, I don't want COOL. Life is good just the way it is.

It is bad enough just giving all the preconditioning shots. Believe it or not, I am an honest man even if I am an NCBA member. If I say the calves have had their shots, they have had their shots. The darned vaccine costs way too much money to just go bury it in a blowout and not go ahead and give it to the calves.

Well actually Soap- I have to admit a form of plagerism- that wasn't my original thought, it was one made to me by a cattle buyer- so apparently some are already thinking it .. :wink:

At least you are honest, to admit that you almost weren't honest, by copying someone else's original thought. :wink:

Soap- Most of those costs that NCBA saw or did not see to make them do their flipflop are no longer there...Since that time we've had 9/11-Homeland Security Act- & BSE...All imported foods have to be verified and tracked thru retail now- all they don't have to do is tell the customer the truth...The beef is coming in in labeled and lotted boxes--All live cattle coming into the US have to be identified, tagged, and branded...Most all the cost is already there- the only thing that is missing is the requirement for the Packer/Retailer to tell the truth...But I guess that truth is not a business concept that means much anymore

 

[Soapweed]

Soapweed: "The truth is that I'm not seeking brownie points from anybody. The truth is that I just get dang sick of your yapping."

How can you get sick of what it is you supposedly never read?

Keep your story straight Soapweed.

Truth is, I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU THINK OF MY POSTS so why would you think anyone else does?

QUIT READING THEM THEN! Geeeeez!


~SH~

You can have the Last Word, Lone Wolf. Adios'.

 

[Soapweed]

Soap- Most of those costs that NCBA saw or did not see to make them do their flipflop are no longer there...Since that time we've had 9/11-Homeland Security Act- & BSE...All imported foods have to be verified and tracked thru retail now- all they don't have to do is tell the customer the truth...The beef is coming in in labeled and lotted boxes--All live cattle coming into the US have to be identified, tagged, and branded...Most all the cost is already there- the only thing that is missing is the requirement for the Packer/Retailer to tell the truth...But I guess that truth is not a business concept that means much anymore

Guess I'll take your word for it, OT. I might as well, because I'm having absolutely no luck this evening in trying to outtalk anybody. :wink: :roll: :?

 

[Sandhusker]

SH, "I'm a lone wolf and prefer it that way."

:lol: :lol: :lol: You're a lone idiot! A legend in your lone mind! :lol: :lol: :lol:

SH, "Do you agree with R-CALF when they state that the US has the "world's safest beef"? "

No, I don't. I didn't agree when Mike Johanns or Ben Nelson said it, either.

 

[Tam]

Tam, when have I ever said the US had the world's safest beef?

Lets see, Sandhusker expects to sell US raised labeled beef to US consumers BUT the BEEF Organization he belongs to are in Federal court claiming all beef coming from a country affect with BSE is unsafe, only to have BSE found in their own herd. They claim theydon't trust the USDA that are in charge of the safety of US beef that in now affected by BSE . They also don't trust the packers that process that beef. If that is not bad enough, Now he is telling us that he himself doesn't agree with his own organizations statements about the US have the WORLD SAFEST BEEF.

Great sales pitch Sandhusker if I were a US beef consumer I would just jump at the chance to by a piece of meat with that label, verses a country that has some trust within the industry and credibility with the rest of the world on how they are handling things!!!!!!!!!

BTW if you don't think the US has the safest Beef in the World can you tell us just what the risk is to consumers if they eat your beef? You belong to an organization that expects definitive answers, so tell us how low is low when it comes to US BSE?

I'm not sales pitching anything, Tam. My orginazition, as you put it, would like to know how low is low also Unfortunately, the USDA keeps a monopoly on testing so nobody will ever know.

I find it terribly hypocritical that you preach to me about trusting and credibility after questioning the USDA many times yourself. Kind of the typical anti - R-CALF actions I've come to expect. Where was your trust when you were talking about the Texas cow slipping thru, the age of the Alabama cow, you carping that we weren't testing the right ones, that there had to be more that weren't being found, etc....? You should practice what you preach.

I DON"T PREACH ABOUT HOW SAFE US BEEF IS AND HOW YOU HAVE SPENT MILLIONS IF NOT BILLIONS ON THE SAFETY OF THAT BEEF AND THEN TURN AROUND AND QUESTION THE AGENCY OF WHICH IS IN CHARGE OF THE SAFETY OF YOUR BEEF. LIKE YOU DO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I ASK YOU HOW YOU CAN CALL OUR BEEF UNSAFE AND A RISK TO HUMAN HEALTH WHEN IT IS YOUR REGULATORY AGENCIES AND BEEF INDUSTRY THAT ARE THE ONES BREAKING THE NOT AS STRINGENT RULES?

 

[Anonymous]

Sandbag: "You're a lone idiot! A legend in your lone mind!"

Blah, blah, blah! Ad nauseum! Keep telling yourself that Sandbag, it's gotta be a lot easier than defending R-CALF's positions.

Sandbag: "No, I don't. I didn't agree when Mike Johanns or Ben Nelson said it, either."

Then why did you try to claim that Leo said something he didn't? Why not just disagree with Leo when he said "we have the safest beef in the world"?

Trying to spin Leo's words didn't work so you finally had to admit that you disagreed with his position. LOL! Congratulations, "The Master of ILLUSION" finally comes to his milk.

OT: "Most of those costs that NCBA saw or did not see to make them do their flipflop are no longer there...Since that time we've had 9/11-Homeland Security Act- & BSE...All imported foods have to be verified and tracked thru retail now- all they don't have to do is tell the customer the truth...The beef is coming in in labeled and lotted boxes--All live cattle coming into the US have to be identified, tagged, and branded...Most all the cost is already there- the only thing that is missing is the requirement for the Packer/Retailer to tell the truth...But I guess that truth is not a business concept that means much anymore."

OT, you don't have a clue what costs are associated with the traceback system that would be required to enforce "M"COOL.

You still can't explain your position that the packers want to hide foreign beef from the consumer in light of the fact that some are paying premiums for source verified beef.

What would you know about truth when you lie about USDA intentionally misleading US consumers with the USDA stamp. Listening to you talk about "truth" makes me nauseous. If you cared about the truth, you'd have to admit that "M"COOL is not enforceable without a valid traceback sytem but you're not that honest. You "M"COOL proponents only wanted consumers to know where their beef comes from if it didn't burden you. Who do you think you're kidding now?


~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

Tam, "I ASK YOU HOW YOU CAN CALL OUR BEEF UNSAFE AND A RISK TO HUMAN HEALTH WHEN IT IS YOUR REGULATORY AGENCIES AND BEEF INDUSTRY THAT ARE THE ONES BREAKING THE NOT AS STRINGENT RULES? "

And you just lectured me on trusting them? :shock: I rest my case.

 

[katrina]

Excuse me for butting in: Soapweed, You say you want disagreeable on the boards apparently you want to see what she has to say, even though we don't know anything about her other than her views. Yet here is Scott who we know about. His family what he does for a living and you don't want him posting on your post... Hellooooooo.... :roll:

 

[HAY MAKER]

Tam, "I ASK YOU HOW YOU CAN CALL OUR BEEF UNSAFE AND A RISK TO HUMAN HEALTH WHEN IT IS YOUR REGULATORY AGENCIES AND BEEF INDUSTRY THAT ARE THE ONES BREAKING THE NOT AS STRINGENT RULES? "

And you just lectured me on trusting them? :shock: I rest my case.

:wink: ..................good luck

 

[Soapweed]

Excuse me for butting in: Soapweed, You say you want disagreeable on the boards apparently you want to see what she has to say, even though we don't know anything about her other than her views. Yet here is Scott who we know about. His family what he does for a living and you don't want him posting on your post... Hellooooooo.... :roll:

Katrina, did I say I didn't want Scott posting on my post? No, Scott told me not to read his responses.

There are two posters that I very seldom read. They are ~SH~ and Disagreeable. They are both disagreeable and of obsessive/compulsive irrational behavior. Scott is a very knowledgeable cattleman, and he is on the right side of the fence on cattle issues and politics (in my book). In fact, I have learned a lot from him, back when he showed both brains and diplomacy. Anymore, he is off the deep end. He is obnoxious, unflexible, stubborn, narrow-minded, and obsessively "focused" to the point that there is no give or take to him. Back when ~SH~ (Scott) went by the moniker of Lone Wolf, he was a good poster. Since he has been found out to be Scott, he has changed for the worse. Now he has that perpetual chip on his shoulder.

He is still a good guy in real life, and I consider him a friend. When he puts on his poster-boy attire, he changes. He is no longer that same good guy, and I, for one, am darned tired of it.

 

[Anonymous]

Katrina,

You'd swear that someone has Soapweed at gunpoint forcing him to read my posts that he claims he seldom reads?? Hahaha! The guy cracks me up.

One would also have to wonder why he always singles me out when Fedup blew a gasket last night and went postal thowing out obsenities that would make most sailers blush. I'm still laughing about that. Soap never said a word to him. OT claims the organization that Soap belongs to is in "bed with the packer". Soap never said a word to the old whiskey drinker. Soap's banker calls me all kinds of names. Soap never says a word.

Doesn't that seem somewhat inconsistant and dare I say hypocritical?

I'm obnoxious, unflexible, stubborn, narrow-minded, and obsessively "focused" to the point that there is no give or take to me but he seldom reads my post. LOL! How could he form that opinion if he seldom reads my posts?

Also nothing is mentioned on whether or not I have the ability to back these positions. Why be flexible, giving, broad minded, and not focused if you have the facts to back your position? What kind of a wimp would do that? Hahaha!

Gotta love the guy for the inconsistancies in his stories though right?

You know what I really think Katrina, I think what really gets to him the most is that way down deep inside he really does kinda like me a little and he just can't accept the fact that I could care less what he thinks about the manner in which I post and he can't change it.

Maybe Soap is a "control freak"???? Hmmmm???? I bet he don't like me anymore now. LOL!

You know what the best part is? I can write about him and he won't even be reading it and if he responds, he'll blow his cover. Hahaha! I'd say he's kinda hobbled wouldn't you?


~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

SH, "Also nothing is mentioned on whether or not I have the ability to back these positions. Why be flexible, giving, broad minded, and not focused if you have the facts to back your position? What kind of a wimp would do that? Hahaha!"

Geeeeeeeeeze. The dilusional egotistical mega self-promotion has no limits. A true legend in your own mind, Lone Wolf. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[mrj]

MRJ, "When are you going to present factual evidence that there is beef coming into the USA with residues of any illegal drugs?"

Would you care, MRJ? I mean, really? If the NCBA hasn't said anything about it, do you really care?

Here's one example; Ditrim is an antibiotic that is forbidden to use in food animals here in the US - yet it is routinely used in CAFTA countries. Now please don't ask me to prove any residues from antibiotics.

Sandhusker, your attempt to denigrate me personally by implying that I probably do not care if there are illegal substances in beef is a cheap shot, at best.

There have been many times when I have written about and promoted beef safety on this very site. There were also years when I served on the SD Beef Council, and on one or more committees of SD Cattlemen and/or NCBA involving working to improve beef safety in various ways.

What, specifically, have you done to advance beef safety?

Why is Ditrim illegal in the USA, and do you have evidence that it actually is used on cattle which would be sent to the USA?

Then, there is the question of illegal uses of legal or illegal drugs in the USA, including ignoring withdrawal times. You have no facts to back your allegations that imported beef is less safe than beef produced in the USA.

Never have I said that I want imported beef to be less rigorously monitored for food safety than US beef is. I want ALL food to be as safe as it can be and still be affordable to the majority of our population.

Wouldn't it be counterproductive to regulate food safety to the point it becomes priced so high many people would go hungry?

MRJ



This issue is more complex than simple sound bites for promotion of your anti-NCBA agenda.

After reading your post, I think I was right on wondering if you really cared. Your post was just downplaying the facts. You've been taught well.

Sandhusker, you do give me much to be thankful for: you are not my banker, you are not my neighbor, and especially that you do not control food safety enforcement.

I've demonstrated my concern about, and have worked to promote increased food safety. You didn't tell us what you have actually done to advance food safety.

You fail to admit there are people in the USA who cheat on safety rules, or do not properly administer medications.

You falsely imply that imported beef is not safe, with no validation. You hold up differences in accepted pharmaceuticals between nations as validation of your premise, giving no example or reason for the differences.

Are people in "CAFTA countries" being harmed by the use of Ditrim in animals there? Why don't you tell us why that drug is legal there, and not here? Or how much of it is used, and why? What animals is it used for? Which diseases? Has it been used on animals exported to the USA?

MRJ

 

[mrj]

Private Sector Livestock ID System Pushed

Tulsa World, Okla., August 06, 2005


by Angel Riggs


Aug. 6--OKLAHOMA CITY -- The national program aimed at identifying and tracking livestock could be better run by the private sector than by the government, a spokesman for the National Cattlemen's Beef Association said Friday.



"We thought Animal ID and the creation of the Animal ID system by the USDA was something the USDA could not do as well as we could do," said Jay Truitt, vice president of government affairs for the association, whose state branch is the Oklahoma Cattlemen's Association.

Concerns facing the industry were addressed during the OCA's 53rd annual convention by Truitt along with U.S. Rep. Frank Lucas, R-Okla., and Chuck Lambert, deputy under secretary for marketing and regulatory programs at the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

The National Animal Identification Program is aimed at making it possible to track an animal's history within 48 hours by keeping tabs on its travels. Each time an animal goes to a new ranch or sale barn, for example, that property's identification number and the animal's own number would be entered into a national database.

The government is already issuing the property numbers, called premises ID.

The program is voluntary now, but the USDA plans to make it mandatory in 2009.

Truitt said that by privatizing the system, the entire process could be implemented more quickly and for less money.

Congress and the USDA are considering the proposal.

Lucas said he's looking at both sides.

He said private industry may be able to contain costs and respond more quickly to changing circumstances.

In addition, he said, the industry has a track record of compiling information for the government. The OCA maintains the state's brand records, for example.

However, Lucas questioned whether one private group can address all the needs of the various industry groups that will be involved in Animal ID. While cattle are first in line to receive ID numbers, the program will eventually be extended to all livestock, including horses, pigs and sheep.

"The case is out there," Lucas said. "The ball is in the USDA's court."

The national cattle association says it will test its system in October, and that it can have an Animal ID program up and running by January.

"The USDA is open to discussion of those alternative systems," said Lambert, the USDA official.

Private industry has expressed concerns that information about ranchers' livestock contained in a government database could be made public.

While it's true that a mandatory system would be susceptible to Freedom of Information Act requests, information contained in a voluntary system is not, Lambert said. Exempting data on a mandatory list from FOIA requests would take an act of Congress, he said.

Other issues the group discussed included the status of reopening Japan to meat from the United States. The door to the $1.5 billion beef market has been shut since the United States' first discovery, in late 2003, of a cow with bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or mad cow disease. Currently, Australia is filling the void in Japan, Lambert said.

The United States and Japan have agreed to the resumption of U.S. beef shipments from cattle younger than 20 months and are negotiating how to determine the age of cattle. Leaders from both countries are set to meet in September and will discuss BSE, Lambert said.

Also, the country's heightened surveillance for BSE cases will continue for the "foreseeable future, not indefinitely," Lambert said. The country has tested more than 426,000 high-risk cattle since June 2004. he said.

In his remarks, Lucas complimented American consumers for calmly handling this summer's BSE news reports.

-----

Mike, if you think this is "proof" of NCBA's intent to 'own' NAIS, you are mistaken!

When a cattleman talks about "we", referencing a proposed national law affecting all cattle producers, he usually means 'all cattle producers', not just NCBA.

Yes, NCBA did spend our own money to work up a prototype program, knowing it would never be recovered, but worthwhile to learn what would be doable and how we would be affected by NAIS.

However, there was/is a coalition of people producing not only cattle, but the other animals affected by M-ID who are working on the system which would NOT be owned by NCBA. I'm not sure what the current status of any of this is, but you could find out by emailing [email protected]. and asking a simple question.

MRJ

 

[Econ101]

Sandhusker, your attempt to denigrate me personally by implying that I probably do not care if there are illegal substances in beef is a cheap shot, at best.

There have been many times when I have written about and promoted beef safety on this very site. There were also years when I served on the SD Beef Council, and on one or more committees of SD Cattlemen and/or NCBA involving working to improve beef safety in various ways.

What, specifically, have you done to advance beef safety?

Why is Ditrim illegal in the USA, and do you have evidence that it actually is used on cattle which would be sent to the USA?

Then, there is the question of illegal uses of legal or illegal drugs in the USA, including ignoring withdrawal times. You have no facts to back your allegations that imported beef is less safe than beef produced in the USA.

Never have I said that I want imported beef to be less rigorously monitored for food safety than US beef is. I want ALL food to be as safe as it can be and still be affordable to the majority of our population.

Wouldn't it be counterproductive to regulate food safety to the point it becomes priced so high many people would go hungry?

MRJ



This issue is more complex than simple sound bites for promotion of your anti-NCBA agenda.

After reading your post, I think I was right on wondering if you really cared. Your post was just downplaying the facts. You've been taught well.

Sandhusker, you do give me much to be thankful for: you are not my banker, you are not my neighbor, and especially that you do not control food safety enforcement.

I've demonstrated my concern about, and have worked to promote increased food safety. You didn't tell us what you have actually done to advance food safety.

You fail to admit there are people in the USA who cheat on safety rules, or do not properly administer medications.

You falsely imply that imported beef is not safe, with no validation. You hold up differences in accepted pharmaceuticals between nations as validation of your premise, giving no example or reason for the differences.

Are people in "CAFTA countries" being harmed by the use of Ditrim in animals there? Why don't you tell us why that drug is legal there, and not here? Or how much of it is used, and why? What animals is it used for? Which diseases? Has it been used on animals exported to the USA?

MRJ

MRJ, you do give me much to be thankful for. You are not my neighbor. You also have no ability to make sure our food supply is safe. Sometimes I wonder what you have been eating or smoking.


MRJ, do you know if imported beef is safe? What measures have you employed to make sure they are?

You fail to admit, MRJ, that the USDA is catching the people who are cheating at food safety in the U.S. or what measures you support to catch them. You can't even read a govt. report analytically. Heck, you can't even read a govt. report (have you read the OIG report yet, MRJ?).

MRJ, do you support crossing a border so you can get away with applying chemicals that do not have U.S. approval? Why do you do this? How does that help food safety?

MRJ: Are people in "CAFTA countries" being harmed by the use of Ditrim in animals there? Why don't you tell us why that drug is legal there, and not here? Or how much of it is used, and why? What animals is it used for? Which diseases? Has it been used on animals exported to the USA?

Econ: Why don't you read a few reports and report back to us on these questions, MRJ. You might get good enough to actually read a real govt. report if you can prove your comprehension skills.

 

[Sandhusker]

MRJ, "I've demonstrated my concern about, and have worked to promote increased food safety. You didn't tell us what you have actually done to advance food safety."

I'm providing a specific example that should concern anybody who claims to be interested in food safety! You've demonstrated you would rather poo-poo my information.

MRJ, "You fail to admit there are people in the USA who cheat on safety rules, or do not properly administer medications."

That is another topic, MRJ. You appear to be trying to justify foreign use of banned substances. It's like you're saying, "So what if those apples were sprayed with DDT before they crossed the border, we have people breaking the rules here, too." You're not a promoter of food safety, you're an excuse maker.

MRJ, "You falsely imply that imported beef is not safe, with no validation. You hold up differences in accepted pharmaceuticals between nations as validation of your premise, giving no example or reason for the differences."

I gave a specific example, MRJ. I told you what the substance was, what it could not be used on here, and who was using it.

MRJ, "Are people in "CAFTA countries" being harmed by the use of Ditrim in animals there? Why don't you tell us why that drug is legal there, and not here? Or how much of it is used, and why? What animals is it used for? Which diseases? Has it been used on animals exported to the USA?"

IT DOESN'T MATTER WHY THEY USE IT, HOW MUCH THEY USE, WHAT BECOMES OF THE USE, ETC.... - IT IS BANNED HERE AND BANNED FOR A REASON. Geeeeze, MRJ! The FDA banned it's use on food animals, just what the heck else do you need? That doesn't tell you something? Don't you think the FDA did any homework before banning it?

I would think somebody who is interested in food safety would say, "The FDA doesn't want that in our food, but it looks like exactly that is happening. We need to make sure that is not the case and stop it if it is". Instead you say, "Well, they probably have a good reason and heck, people break rules here, too."

 

[katrina]

Sorry, guess I misunderstood. Still do....... oh well, onward.......

 

[Soapweed]

Sorry, guess I misunderstood. Still do....... oh well, onward.......

OK, Katrina, here's the deal. Lone Wolf was one of the very first posters on Ranchers.Net. I didn't come along until a few months later. He was knowlegeable and did a great job. He made a person think, and best of all, he was a nice guy. Being a complete novice to computers, and scared to death of such modern contraptions, I was just like a lost little kid way out of my element in cyber-space. Lone Wolf was sophisticated and knew the ropes. In fact, blush , I have to admit he was my hero. And besides, he had the ultimately cool name of Lone Wolf. The name "Soapweed" could never be as noteworthy as "Lone Wolf", but it was the best I could do. I was trying to walk the walk and be as cool as Lone Wolf.

Being the nice guy that he was, Lone Wolf kind of took the little soapweed pod under his wing, and made me feel good. He always advocated "bringing something new to the table." I tried my best, and if he gave me any notice at all or encouragement of any kind, I was in seventh heaven. Lone Wolf was completely incognito, and wouldn't devulge any hints as to his true identity. I challenged him one time, and offered to buy him a steak supper if he'd come to the Valentine sale and introduce himself to me. He was vaguely interested but chose to remain anonymous. Needless to say, this presented a challenge to all posters to try to guess who he was. Finally someone blew his cover, and his identity was revealed.

When it became known that Lone Wolf was a coyote trapper, I decided to go to the National Fur Harvestors convention, which was held that year in Valentine. I knew his name by then, and asked around enough that he was pointed out to me. I wasted no time in introducing myself, and believe it or not, it was quite a thrill for me to finally meet the legendary Lone Wolf. We hit it off, and became friends. He was still a very nice guy, both in real life and on the Ranchers.Net boards.

Then possibly a mid-life hormonal imbalance came along or something equally as upsetting. The ultimately cool Lone Wolf changed both his name and his attitude. He became ~SH~, and the nice Doctor Jekyll became the vicious, brutal creature Mr. Hyde.

If ~SH~ thinks I hold him to a higher standard than I do for others, it is because I held him in such high esteem for so long. He was for sure my hero, and it causes me great consternation to watch my hero fall so low. He is a great guy, capable of so much more. If he would untilize the intelligence and talents that God gave him, he could accomplish so much.

Watching him fall from grace is comparable to seeing John Wayne ride off into the sunset on a rat-tailed appaloosa, with a dowdy damsel in Dis' dress on the front of his saddle. It hurts.