NCBA tells it like it is

[Anonymous]

RM: "I know you and SH can't be against the TRUTH!!!"

The truth is, consumers can buy source verified beef now IF THAT IS WHAT THEY WANT. Country of Origin is not high on the consumer's priority list or they would be scrambling to buy Mike Callicrate's "born, raised, and processed in the U.S." branded beef products now. Are they?

The response has been "CONSUMER APATHY" according to Mike!

If consumers were asking for Country of Origin, retailers would be providing it without a government mandate.



~SH~

 

[RobertMac]

The response has been "CONSUMER APATHY" according to Mike!


~SH~

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Come on SH, where's your integrity!!! You use a quote from Mike C. as the truth when it supports your position, then you call him a liar when what he says doesn't support you. I bet Mike is lying about "CONSUMER APATHY" and his beef is selling like gang busters because of country of origin...that is if YOU are consistent.

This 'toying' is TOO easy. :wink:

 

[Anonymous]

RM: "You use a quote from Mike C. as the truth when it supports your position, then you call him a liar when what he says doesn't support you."

I never pointed out a lie by Mike C. that I could not prove was a lie.

Mike lied under oath in Pickett vs. ibp. The judge instructed the jurors to disregard his testimony for that reason.

Mike lied about the packers and retailers making $400 per head profits.

I am trying to give him the benefit of the doubt that he didn't lie about the success of his company in R-CULT's publication.

Why would he lie in that situation when his bias would be to proclaim the success of his company and it's "born, raised, and processed in the U.S." branded beef products rather than talk about the company's inability to realize a profit?

Perhaps he realized he couldn't get by with lying in this case.

Truthfully, I hope his company does well and he shows enough integrity to admit that he didn't know what he was talking about with those "HUGE" $400 per head packer and retail profit levels.

He won't show that level of integrity! He has traveled down the blaming road too long and too far to admit he was wrong now.

He was caught red-handed in a lie at the Governor's Cattle Conference in Pierre when he stated that "ibp had contractual arrangements with the other major packers" to which he promptly started back peddling.



~SH~

 

[RobertMac]

My post wasn't about Mike C. :???: :wink:

 

[Anonymous]

This post:

RM: "My post wasn't about Mike C."

Last post:

RM: "You use a quote from Mike C. as the truth when it supports your position, then you call him a liar when what he says doesn't support you."

Say no to drugs Robert!


~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

MRJ, "Sandhusker, how loudly would you be squealing if the importers did not have to pay the Beef Checkoff and you did have to pay? "

Wouldn't squeal at all. In fact, I have advocated leaving them out of the checkoff altogether.

 

[RobertMac]

RM: "You use a quote from Mike C. as the truth when it supports your position, then you call him a liar when what he says doesn't support you[r position]."

The post was about you and your method of debate.

 

[mrj]

MRJ: "RobertMac, what are the exemptions you refer to?"

Food service, further processed,...I want the consumer to where all their food comes from...this is not a beef only issue with me. I COOL the beef I sell and I don't see the perceived negative impact because all beef will be labeled. Let the consumer decide, but it needs to be mandated that the consumer has the information to make an informed decision. If I have to have my label approved in Washington to have 'grassfed' on it, then importers should be required to have country of origin on their product. It's truth in labeling...and I know you and SH can't be against the TRUTH!!! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Most definitely we are not against the truth! You should know that by now!

So, RM, you don't mind spending your own money to label your beef, and have the government make the packer spend their money to label beef for all the commodity producers? Ultimately of course, it will be the producers footing the bill (as it should be) for the label vial lower prices paid by the packers for their cattle.

Do you really believe it is the fact that your beef is source verified, or "COOLed" that makes it sell well, or is it the fact that you more or less hand raise and process it and can claim special value for it being grass fed? Do you believe the consumer would care about the origin if other beef were raised exactly the same, and tasted the same as yours, and was as wholesome as what you raise, even if raised somewhere else, say New Zealand?

COOL is an emotional boondoggle, at best, political posturing and manipulation at worst, and will have little to no effect for whatever the cost will be for it, IMO.

redriver, many of us who do not believe government mandated COOL is the way to go, are very proud of the beef we raise, some of us already are labeling our beef, and we also believe the private enterprise system of labeling when consumers demand and are willing to pay the value of that label is when/how labeling should occur. And many who do not support COOL are not calling Canadian beef "junk" as are some who support the government COOL.

MRJ
However,