Oldtimer admits MCOOL is a crock

[Tommy]

mj...NCBA members stand strongly for consumer directed labeling right back to the ranch of origin under our private enterprise system. That is vastly superior to the government mandated, no producer responsibility for trace-back version under your COOL law.


Quote from Cattle Buyers Weekly...Even NCBA, which supports only voluntary COOL, made no mention of the required traceback for a voluntary system.

 

[mrj]

mj...NCBA members stand strongly for consumer directed labeling right back to the ranch of origin under our private enterprise system. That is vastly superior to the government mandated, no producer responsibility for trace-back version under your COOL law.


Quote from Cattle Buyers Weekly...Even NCBA, which supports only voluntary COOL, made no mention of the required traceback for a voluntary system.

There are branded beef businesses where the label does include that information. NCBA does not ask that ranchers be exempt from the requirement to provide information for trace-back of their product as did R-CALF in the COOL law. Can you see the difference?

MRJ

 

[Mike]

MRJ wrote:

NCBA members stand strongly for consumer directed labeling right back to the ranch of origin under our private enterprise system. That is vastly superior to the government mandated, no producer responsibility for trace-back version under your COOL law.

MRJ, could you show me the part in the "Government Mandated COOL" that says there is "no producer responsibility" for trace-back?

I seemed to have missed that part. :???:

 

[Anonymous]

Reader: "I gather that you (1) have never been a parent and (2) have a low quotient of empathy."

Well, you "gathered" wrong again. I am a parent and as a parent I feel it is my responsibility to correct the wrong information that kids are subjected to every day with factual information.

Your "theories" on vCJD must be pretty weak when you admit to still eating beef.

If "actions" truly speak louder than "words", I'd say you pretty well lost any credibility you might have had trying to convince anyone that there is a health risk to eating beef after admitting to still eating beef.



~SH~

 

[RobertMac]

Reader: "I gather that you (1) have never been a parent and (2) have a low quotient of empathy."

Your "theories" on vCJD must be pretty weak when you admit to still eating {range-fed GROUND} beef.

If "actions" truly speak louder than "words", I'd say you pretty well lost any credibility you might have had trying to convince anyone that there is a health risk to eating beef after admitting to still eating {range-fed GROUND} beef.

~SH~

reader (the Second): "I can only get range-fed GROUND beef in a nearby grocerty and that has cut our family's overall consumption of a broader spectrum of beef products down dramatically."

SH, when your comments are put in prespective, the meaning is changed...credibility????? :lol: :wink:

 

[mrj]

MRJ wrote:

NCBA members stand strongly for consumer directed labeling right back to the ranch of origin under our private enterprise system. That is vastly superior to the government mandated, no producer responsibility for trace-back version under your COOL law.

MRJ, could you show me the part in the "Government Mandated COOL" that says there is "no producer responsibility" for trace-back?

I seemed to have missed that part. :???:

{Did I say I was quoting the law directly? I believe R-CALF people have stated that producers should not be burdened with trace-back, and that language to accomplish that end is in the law, is it not? I'm not into parsing words to change the meaning, but will paraphrase, and state the essence of what was said in my own words on occasion. That is adequate for most people, possibly excepting those with an agenda, as we all cannot have 100% recall at all times.

MRJ}
MRJ}

 

[Anonymous]

RM: "SH, when your comments are put in prespective, the meaning is changed...credibility?????"

Reader has stated numerous times that she still eats beef. This is the first time I read anything about "RANGE FED" beef.

Who defines "RANGE FED" Robert?

What is the relevance of "RANGE FED" to BSE or vCJD?

Assuming "RANGE FED" means "GRASS FED", stating that a person can only get "RANGE FED" beef is not stating that said person will only eat "RANGE FED" beef.

Nor does it address the fact that Reader's kids still do not eat ANY BEEF.

The skunk is still in the woodpile.

Nice try though Robert.

Some day you'll pull a rabbit out of a hat that actually resembles a rabbit.



~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

MRJ, "{Did I say I was quoting the law directly? I believe R-CALF people have stated that producers should not be burdened with trace-back, and that language to accomplish that end is in the law, is it not? I'm not into parsing words to change the meaning, but will paraphrase, and state the essence of what was said in my own words on occasion. That is adequate for most people, possibly excepting those with an agenda, as we all cannot have 100% recall at all times. "

You've been reading (and believing) too much of SH's hyper-slanted rhetoric. R-CALF said they didn't want a "burdensome traceback". Big difference.

 

[Mike]

Did I say I was quoting the law directly? I believe R-CALF people have stated that producers should not be burdened with trace-back, and that language to accomplish that end is in the law, is it not? I'm not into parsing words to change the meaning, but will paraphrase, and state the essence of what was said in my own words on occasion. That is adequate for most people, possibly excepting those with an agenda, as we all cannot have 100% recall at all times.
MRJ}

In the COOL law that I read there was a section that prohibited the USDA from mandating any particular "SYSTEM" for ID. But not ID itself.

Reasonable thinking people should surmise that in order to prove where something "AIN'T" from, they would have to prove where it "IS" from.

The USDA clearly provided several different types of ID's that might be used for the "Audit Trail", i.e. ear tags, birth records, weaning records, brands, and many others that may be used in conjunction with each other to provide the information to the retailer for origin proof.

I saw no mention of "no producer responsibility" in M'COOL. The ones who didn't provide enough info to the packers would simply not have been able to sell their cattle. Making it basically an "M'ID", without setting the criteria.

 

[Tam]

MRJ, "{Did I say I was quoting the law directly? I believe R-CALF people have stated that producers should not be burdened with trace-back, and that language to accomplish that end is in the law, is it not? I'm not into parsing words to change the meaning, but will paraphrase, and state the essence of what was said in my own words on occasion. That is adequate for most people, possibly excepting those with an agenda, as we all cannot have 100% recall at all times. "

You've been reading (and believing) too much of SH's hyper-slanted rhetoric. R-CALF said they didn't want a "burdensome traceback". Big difference.

Leo sat on RFDTV and said we don't have to have the expence of tagging for trace back if we label the imported beef the rest will be US beef by default. No expence to the US producer and M"COOL" according to Leo would still do what it was intended to do Identify US beef by DEFAULT.

 

[Sandhusker]

MRJ, "{Did I say I was quoting the law directly? I believe R-CALF people have stated that producers should not be burdened with trace-back, and that language to accomplish that end is in the law, is it not? I'm not into parsing words to change the meaning, but will paraphrase, and state the essence of what was said in my own words on occasion. That is adequate for most people, possibly excepting those with an agenda, as we all cannot have 100% recall at all times. "

You've been reading (and believing) too much of SH's hyper-slanted rhetoric. R-CALF said they didn't want a "burdensome traceback". Big difference.

Leo sat on RFDTV and said we don't have to have the expence of tagging for trace back if we label the imported beef the rest will be US beef by default. No expence to the US producer and M"COOL" according to Leo would still do what it was intended to do Identify US beef by DEFAULT.

Is he wrong?

 

[Anonymous]

MRJ, "{Did I say I was quoting the law directly? I believe R-CALF people have stated that producers should not be burdened with trace-back, and that language to accomplish that end is in the law, is it not? I'm not into parsing words to change the meaning, but will paraphrase, and state the essence of what was said in my own words on occasion. That is adequate for most people, possibly excepting those with an agenda, as we all cannot have 100% recall at all times. "

You've been reading (and believing) too much of SH's hyper-slanted rhetoric. R-CALF said they didn't want a "burdensome traceback". Big difference.

Leo sat on RFDTV and said we don't have to have the expence of tagging for trace back if we label the imported beef the rest will be US beef by default. No expence to the US producer and M"COOL" according to Leo would still do what it was intended to do Identify US beef by DEFAULT.

Is he wrong?

That is the comon sense method-- too simple for government work tho :wink:

 

[Anonymous]

One minute Sandman is creating the illusion that R-CULT supports "M"ID and the next minute he's defending Leo's statements to "just mark the imports".

Sandman: "You've been reading (and believing) too much of SH's hyper-slanted rhetoric. R-CALF said they didn't want a "burdensome traceback". Big difference."

What further proof do you need than the fact that "M"ID was prohibited from "M"COOL?

Once again, the obvious is simply too obvious.

"Dont burden me with traceback"
"We want country of origin, not farm of origin"
"Just mark the imports, just mark the imports"
"M" ID prohibited from "M"COOL!

R-CULT's position on traceback is well documented in the "M"COOL listening session testimonials.


Leo's "just mark the imports" statement is proof of the depth of R-CULT's ignorance in tracing 300 packages of beef from a single carcass shipped to different destinations without proof of where the animal was "BORN, RAISED, AND SLAUGHTERED".

"Just marking the imports" does not follow that animal through the processing system to the packages of beef it becomes in an enforceable manner. You would have to understand beef fabrication to understand that.

The sad part of this is that R-CULT's pied pipers sit in their critical thrones of judgement without having to enforce their stupid law and measure it's total lack of affectiveness on selling more U.S. beef.


~SH~

 

[Tam]

Leo sat on RFDTV and said we don't have to have the expence of tagging for trace back if we label the imported beef the rest will be US beef by default. No expence to the US producer and M"COOL" according to Leo would still do what it was intended to do Identify US beef by DEFAULT.

Is he wrong?

That is the comon sense method-- too simple for government work tho :wink:

Yes it is simple isn't it. It simply doesn't tell the packers or consumers where it was raised in the US. Isn't that why you don't want M"ID" as if they knew who raised the beef they could hold you accountable for the quality and safety of the meat. But if they don't you as a producer will not have to take responsibility.

 

[Sandhusker]

I'd correct your post, but I've done it several times already and you still spew the same babble regardless. :roll:

 

[agman]

MRJ, "{Did I say I was quoting the law directly? I believe R-CALF people have stated that producers should not be burdened with trace-back, and that language to accomplish that end is in the law, is it not? I'm not into parsing words to change the meaning, but will paraphrase, and state the essence of what was said in my own words on occasion. That is adequate for most people, possibly excepting those with an agenda, as we all cannot have 100% recall at all times. "

You've been reading (and believing) too much of SH's hyper-slanted rhetoric. R-CALF said they didn't want a "burdensome traceback". Big difference.

Leo sat on RFDTV and said we don't have to have the expence of tagging for trace back if we label the imported beef the rest will be US beef by default. No expence to the US producer and M"COOL" according to Leo would still do what it was intended to do Identify US beef by DEFAULT.

Is he wrong?

Yes, he is wrong. Traceback goes beyond country-of-origin. It goes right to the individual and its premise locations. It is only you R-laughers that insist the consumer wants to know only the country of origin. They want full traceback right to your doorstep.

 

[Anonymous]

Is he wrong?

That is the comon sense method-- too simple for government work tho :wink:

Yes it is simple isn't it. It simply doesn't tell the packers or consumers where it was raised in the US. Isn't that why you don't want M"ID" as if they knew who raised the beef they could hold you accountable for the quality and safety of the meat. But if they don't you as a producer will not have to take responsibility.

Tam- I been ID'ing mine for-ever---so don't give me that Canadian holier than thou speech-- Used brands and have recorded info far back into the 30's and 40's-- Used ear tags to correspond with the recorded info starting in the 60's- along with brands for true permanent ID's......
At least I don't have illegal contraband cattle that I don't know where they came from like some, Canadian Tam....[b][/b]

 

[Sandhusker]

Agman, "Yes, he is wrong. Traceback goes beyond country-of-origin. It goes right to the individual and its premise locations. It is only you R-laughers that insist the consumer wants to know only the country of origin. They want full traceback right to your doorstep."

Haven't you been telling us all along that consumers don't even care about COOL, but now you claim they want full traceback? I think you've been hanging around SH too much. R :lol: R :lol:

 

[agman]

Agman, "Yes, he is wrong. Traceback goes beyond country-of-origin. It goes right to the individual and its premise locations. It is only you R-laughers that insist the consumer wants to know only the country of origin. They want full traceback right to your doorstep."

Haven't you been telling us all along that consumers don't even care about COOL, but now you claim they want full traceback? I think you've been hanging around SH too much. R :lol: R :lol:

There is a difference between COOL and full traceback. You can have one without the other. One will have a useful purpose while the other provides no useful purpose, just added cost. Your pick.....

 

[Mike]

Agman say:

Yes, he is wrong. Traceback goes beyond country-of-origin. It goes right to the individual and its premise locations. It is only you R-laughers that insist the consumer wants to know only the country of origin. They want full traceback right to your doorstep.

This an amazing revelation coming from you agman. I have never seen you and SH differ on any subject, like you're joined at the hip.

Let the sparks fly.