Question about mandatory ID

[Anonymous]

Conman: "Allowing Creekstone to test would have been a better return on investment than the one you suggest, SH."

Considering the phony Conman that you are, it's not surprising that you would support duping the Japanese consumer into believing that "BSE TESTED" means "BSE FREE".

That's just the type of deceptive person you are.

Conman: "You are only interested in ROI for packers you want to support."

Another damn lie! My only bias is the truth which is precisely why you can never contradict anything I have stated with opposing facts.

Conman: "We need to look at the Canadian situation to not repeat it. BSE can not be ignored, or hidden. It must be dealt with, even if a downer can not be sold. Your stance on Creekstone already shows your hindsight problems. Japan will not be forced into anything they don't want to do. You can't make customers buy your wares, you have to sell them. Creekstone sold and USDA said, no, we know better how to do this. Johanns wants to maintain control of the BSE test and results. The Japanese don't really believe him so they start the games again. The USDA deal wasn't sold, it was forced. That is a short term gain for long term problems.

Why not let the Japanese contract with a company in the U.S. they trust instead of packers that they do not trust. Why must we tilt everything towards big packer interests? It has halted the Japanese market again."

Oh, so you think you can speak for Japan now too? Your arrogance is absolutely boundless. You're such an idiot!



~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

SH, "Considering the phony Conman that you are, it's not surprising that you would support duping the Japanese consumer into believing that "BSE TESTED" means "BSE FREE". That's just the type of deceptive person you are. "

Now you think we should save the Japanese from themselves? :lol: :lol: SH, the Japanese people know about BSE. They know what tested means. They don't need you to save them from themselves.

You even brought up a quote from Creekstone's Fielding where he said, "BSE tested does not mean BSE free". Geeeze, what else can they say, SH? Was that not plain English enough? Do you think that anybody would have any problem understanding that comment? :roll: Yet, in the face of facts and common sense, you cling to your USDA defense and call other people names who can see the obvious.

Facts don't disappear if you don't like them and ignore them.

You're a dandy. Pure entertainment.

 

[PORKER]

Checking teeth will tell some tales but not the whole truth. What if they have lost them all. Big Muddy rancher

We still can check for OTM by dentition but a registered birth date trumps it.

SOOO if they have no teeth ,Do you agree that they are over 30 MONTHS.

 

[Tam]

Well Econ the industry took hold of our ID system and told the government that we would run it and make the rules not them. It is evolving from Dangle tags leaving herd of origin to RFID tags that can and will be tracked at auctions and feedlots to packing houses. It probably won't be perfect and their will be growing pains but will still will be years ahead of the US.
We are doing Vouluntary age verification and now that we need age Verifified cattle for Japan the packers are paying for it proof. Market driven ID. Ain't that great. A $3 investment could return $20 in 6 months. That's what will get proucers on side with a few more regulations that imporove our industry.

After your recent history with BSE, I don't think the U.S. industry wants to emulate you, BMR. We already are in reference to Japan.

Quote from the OIE report on Canada's actions taken in response to BSE.

The team is impresses with the comprehensive scope, level of analysis and thoroughness of the investigation to date. In a very short time Canadian experts have collected and assessed a level of information that exceeds the investigations done in most other BSE-affected countries.This serves as a testament to the competence, capacity and dedication of efforts of Canadian officals.

Now a quote from the US report in actions taken in the US.

The investigation continues to be highly resource intensive. The subcommittee firmly believes that there will be diminishing returns if these investigations continue for much longer. Although attempts should be made to identify the "birth cohort", with approximately 50% identified so far. it may not be possible to confirm the death or location of each and every animal. This is a problem faced by all countries which do not have an effective animal traceability system.

Now Canada has a system in place that traces back to birth place and the OIE saw what a beneifit it was to our investigation So just maybe the US would do themselves good to emulate their neighbors to the north if only they could admit they are not the country with the WORLD'S HIGHEST STANDARDS.

We need to look at the Canadian situation to not repeat it. BSE can not be ignored, or hidden.

Another quote from the OIE

The team wishes to clearly acknowledge the openness, full disclosure and access to personal provided by the Canadian authorities to our team, the international community and the public. The approach to sharing information and communication demonstrated by Canada is a model to be emulated.

Who messed up they BSE test and was forced to retest 7 months later only to find out that the animal was POSITIVE. who was hiding the facts Econ.

Creekstone sold and USDA said, no,

Creekstone sold it to a hungry Japanese business group. NOT TO THE JAPANESE GOVERNMENT. The Japanese Government also SAID NO

Why not let the Japanese contract with a company in the U.S. they trust instead of packers that they do not trust.

What a stupid comment. What makes you think under the rules that the USDA and the Japanese government came up with that a company is making contracts with packers they don't trust. Wouldn't it we safe to say that if they care at all about the safety of the beef they are importing to sell to their customers they would be contracting with a packer big or small that they TRUST. And what is to say a small packer would be any more honest about what they are sending than a big packer. The Big packer has more to lose than a small packer.
Sure Cheekstone agreed to test but openning admitted that just because they test doesn't mean that the meat is BSE free, only that they tested it. How is that honest Econ? If that meat is labeled BSE tested consumers are going to assume it is BSE free just as fast as they are going to assume that USDA inspected means US born and raised. One is good marketing on behalf of Cheekstone the other is a fraud being prepetrated by the evil USDA. Some are willing to back Cheekstone's tested label including you, as they see it as a advantage to regain lost markets I guess you forgot about this little statement

Cheating someone else for personal advantage is not something I want to be involved in.

By telling the Japanese consumer the beef is tested and letting them assume that it is BSE free a little like cheating the truth isn't it Econ?

Sandhusker

Now you think we should save the Japanese from themselves? SH, the Japanese people know about BSE. They know what tested means. They don't need you to save them from themselves.

Could the US consumers not know just as much about the US beef imports and the fact that USDA inspected label doesn't mean US born and raised. If the USDA inspected label is a fraud the BSE tested label is a FRAUD the only difference is you back one and not the other.

 

[PORKER]

Well Tam ,Canada and the EU. sure don't have a corner on databases as ScoringAg supplies the leading technology for the world and many large and smaller countries use ScoringAg for all of their traceback and traceability needs.It covers fish through cattle and wine.

http://www.ab.gov.ag/gov_v1/bureau/WeeklyArticles/weeklyarticlesmain.htm

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

Have you check their Teeth?,Ha Ha Ha

Checking teeth will tell some tales but not the whole truth. What if they have lost them all.

We still can check for OTM by dentition but a registered birth date trumps it.

How old are those contraband cattle you have - that you don't even have an idea where they came from- except you know they were and /or found out they were (?) ILLEGALLY brought in to the Canadian herd from the US herd? :???:

Canadas supposed miracle ID system is a Joke--We have had the same or better ID system in parts of the US with hot iron brands and tagging for years!! Montanas brand registration goes back to the 1800's....

How about you Big Muddy? Apparently you can't tell me where anything came from :wink: :lol: Do you even remember when those cows were illegally brought into your herd?

Maxine- Like I told Soapweed- anyone that can actively support a situation where someone/anyone can import a cheap product (beef), purposely and knowingly remove and/or change the labeling and pass it off to unwitting consumers as something other than it is, and purport it to be from a country other than it is from, is not someone I want to do business with--Definitely glad I'm not tied into your banking ownership...
Took 55 years, but I owe nothing to the banking system anymore- so I don't have to suck up to anyone anymore like you .........

Oldtimer those cows were bought before the CCIA system was implemented. They are carrying Brands and MT state tags. A requirement of importation.Why do you think they are illegeal. Could they not be purebreds? Heck I bought bulls from Dale Fellman for 4 or 5 years.
I'm selling a bull bought in 2000 still wearing his CCIA tag from when he was bought.

Oldtimer is it the law to brand in Montana?

 

[Econ101]

Conman: "Allowing Creekstone to test would have been a better return on investment than the one you suggest, SH."

1. Considering the phony Conman that you are, it's not surprising that you would support duping the Japanese consumer into believing that "BSE TESTED" means "BSE FREE".

That's just the type of deceptive person you are.

Conman: "You are only interested in ROI for packers you want to support."

2. Another damn lie! My only bias is the truth which is precisely why you can never contradict anything I have stated with opposing facts.

Conman: "We need to look at the Canadian situation to not repeat it. BSE can not be ignored, or hidden. It must be dealt with, even if a downer can not be sold. Your stance on Creekstone already shows your hindsight problems. Japan will not be forced into anything they don't want to do. You can't make customers buy your wares, you have to sell them. Creekstone sold and USDA said, no, we know better how to do this. Johanns wants to maintain control of the BSE test and results. The Japanese don't really believe him so they start the games again. The USDA deal wasn't sold, it was forced. That is a short term gain for long term problems.

Why not let the Japanese contract with a company in the U.S. they trust instead of packers that they do not trust. Why must we tilt everything towards big packer interests? It has halted the Japanese market again."

3. Oh, so you think you can speak for Japan now too? Your arrogance is absolutely boundless. You're such an idiot!



~SH~

1. I am sure they are smart enough to know what they need to know. Why do they need a gopher trapper to tell them what they need?

2. Oh, is this a lie?

3. No, I don't think I even want to speak for Japan. I know beyond a doubt that they don't need you or want you to speak for them.

 

[Jinglebob]

Heck, here in SD, the Stockgrowers benefit very nicely from their profits on running the system. Nothing in the law to require them to be held to a cost recovery only basis for brand inspection.

You owe us ranchers.net readers documention of your claims against NCBA.

MRJ

I'll say the same to you MRJ as you say to Oldtimer, prove that the SD Stockgrower make any money off from the brand inspection program.

It works just like the post office. If they make money they have to lower the price of inspections. If they lose money the have to raise the price of inspections.

Shame, shame MRJ. I thought you were above this kind of lying!

 

[mrj]

Canadas supposed miracle ID system is a Joke--We have had the same or better ID system in parts of the US with hot iron brands and tagging for years!! Montanas brand registration goes back to the 1800's....

Just out of curiosity, how are certain states versions of traceback better than the Canadian version?

By the way, not all US cattle are branded. As far as I know, branding is not required by law in all states (please correct me if I'm wrong), but I just looked at 2 US Shorthorn bulls who were imported from the US years ago, and they don't have a solitary brand on them.

We've also got brand registrations. Thankfully our brand books contain all the the brands from all the provinces, not just a single province.

As far as the tagging system goes, as a producer, I was told by the Canadian Cattleman's Association (which is not a gov't formed institution) that we were going to be in need of a traceback system that was as good as the best in the world to ensure our export markets remained safe. We had an opportunity to build our own, without interference from the government, so we, as producers, did it. We presented the government with what we did, and the government made it law. Thats the way gov't is supposed to work, and it finally did something right. As a plain old grassroots producer, I believe that the cattle ID program was a good thing for all of Canada, despite the belly aching of a few old timers who didn't want to tag their animals.

Rod

Must be better than yours- Tam can't even tell where her illegal US cows came from- probably don't even know how old they are :wink: :lol: .....

Rod- I'm not against an ID system- in fact I like the idea--Mine have been individually and herd identified since the 60's- with records going back well into the 40's, along with a hot iron brand, to identify them when the eartag drops out...The fact that I'm against is that the government has mandated it- written up all the rules and implementation dates- then told NCBA, a political action group which is not representative of even close to a 1/4 of the cattle industry to implement it--which is now trying to sell it off to people as a "producer driven" system- just so they can sit back and profit off it again the same as they are doing with the Beef checkoff which they got legislated so they "only" can control, contract with, or operate...

And NCBA and the USDA have left hundreds of questions unanswered.......

Poor Dick, you can't keep things straight! NCBA is a professional organization for cattle producers, NOT a "political action group". You have the membership organization confused with the SEPARATE group of people, definitely not the entire membership of NCBA Policy/Dues division, who DONATE to a Political Action Committee, the NCBA PAC.

And, the FACT is that a group of representatives of various groups, including NCBA, worked together on a pilot project modeling an ID system.

A further FACT is that ONE member of NCBA is a leader in the non-profit Consortium for ID and he represents CATTLE, not NCBA. Other members represent species other than cattle. I recall that one is a Buffalo producer.

The fact that you repeat the lies about NCBA will never make them come true!

The Federation Division of NCBA, and the CBB both have representatives from virtually EVERY cattle organization in the USA, including R-CALF!

The Policy/Dues (membership) Division of NCBA has NO control of the Beef Checkoff.

The Beef Checkoff law PREVENTS contractors from profiting, allowing contracts a cost recovery basis ONLY. Look it up!

 

[mrj]

Heck, here in SD, the Stockgrowers benefit very nicely from their profits on running the system. Nothing in the law to require them to be held to a cost recovery only basis for brand inspection.

You owe us ranchers.net readers documention of your claims against NCBA.

MRJ

I'll say the same to you MRJ as you say to Oldtimer, prove that the SD Stockgrower make any money off from the brand inspection program.

It works just like the post office. If they make money they have to lower the price of inspections. If they lose money the have to raise the price of inspections.

Shame, shame MRJ. I thought you were above this kind of lying!

Jinglebob, It is no lie. Were they losing money the last time they raised the inspection fee?

What are the checks and balances or regulation of how much "office expense" they can charge off to the brand inspection activities? Who audits to see what percentage of SDSGA costs are paid by dues and what are paid by brand inspection money? What is the "firewall" to separate the money? Which costs or expenses are allowed to by paid with Brand money?

Where are the public audits available?

BTW, when was the last time the fee was dropped?

MRJ

 

[mrj]

Have you check their Teeth?,Ha Ha Ha

Checking teeth will tell some tales but not the whole truth. What if they have lost them all.

We still can check for OTM by dentition but a registered birth date trumps it.

How old are those contraband cattle you have - that you don't even have an idea where they came from- except you know they were and /or found out they were (?) ILLEGALLY brought in to the Canadian herd from the US herd? :???:

Canadas supposed miracle ID system is a Joke--We have had the same or better ID system in parts of the US with hot iron brands and tagging for years!! Montanas brand registration goes back to the 1800's....

How about you Big Muddy? Apparently you can't tell me where anything came from :wink: :lol: Do you even remember when those cows were illegally brought into your herd?

Maxine- Like I told Soapweed- anyone that can actively support a situation where someone/anyone can import a cheap product (beef), purposely and knowingly remove and/or change the labeling and pass it off to unwitting consumers as something other than it is, and purport it to be from a country other than it is from, is not someone I want to do business with--Definitely glad I'm not tied into your banking ownership...
Took 55 years, but I owe nothing to the banking system anymore- so I don't have to suck up to anyone anymore like you .........

Dick, I have seen no proof of what you claim Packers do. We have only your word on that, and your factuality record is pretty weak, IMO.

I believe the USDA labels in question here are for SAFETY and the QUALITY GRADE inspections ONLY. At this point in time, I do support the idea of NOT using those labels on imported meats and making the safety and quality grades a responsibility of the processing location and attached to the country of origin label currently in use on the carcass or box.

NO ONE ever has or ever will have to "suck up" to me.......as you so politely put it..........for any reason........least of all due to my so called "banking ownership". I will say that IF that mythical power you ascribe to me were true, you would not be the type of person I would welcome as a customer, or see as a good risk, based on your comments on this site.

MRJ

 

[Anonymous]

Checking teeth will tell some tales but not the whole truth. What if they have lost them all.

We still can check for OTM by dentition but a registered birth date trumps it.

How old are those contraband cattle you have - that you don't even have an idea where they came from- except you know they were and /or found out they were (?) ILLEGALLY brought in to the Canadian herd from the US herd? :???:

Canadas supposed miracle ID system is a Joke--We have had the same or better ID system in parts of the US with hot iron brands and tagging for years!! Montanas brand registration goes back to the 1800's....

How about you Big Muddy? Apparently you can't tell me where anything came from :wink: :lol: Do you even remember when those cows were illegally brought into your herd?

Maxine- Like I told Soapweed- anyone that can actively support a situation where someone/anyone can import a cheap product (beef), purposely and knowingly remove and/or change the labeling and pass it off to unwitting consumers as something other than it is, and purport it to be from a country other than it is from, is not someone I want to do business with--Definitely glad I'm not tied into your banking ownership...
Took 55 years, but I owe nothing to the banking system anymore- so I don't have to suck up to anyone anymore like you .........

Dick, I have seen no proof of what you claim Packers do. We have only your word on that, and your factuality record is pretty weak, IMO.

I believe the USDA labels in question here are for SAFETY and the QUALITY GRADE inspections ONLY. At this point in time, I do support the idea of NOT using those labels on imported meats and making the safety and quality grades a responsibility of the processing location and attached to the country of origin label currently in use on the carcass or box.

NO ONE ever has or ever will have to "suck up" to me.......as you so politely put it..........for any reason........least of all due to my so called "banking ownership". I will say that IF that mythical power you ascribe to me were true, you would not be the type of person I would welcome as a customer, or see as a good risk, based on your comments on this site.

MRJ

MRJ- What did I see the the other day-- Your "supposed Non "Political Action Group" NCBA had again donated to Bonillas campaign fund- To the tune of $5000 this year...
If that wasn't a Political Donation- What was it? A little thank you gift :???:
NCBA has become a Political Action Group-actively donating to candidates- mostly candidates chosen by the Packers...

Smells shades of Abramoff.....

 

[mrj]

Canadas supposed miracle ID system is a Joke--We have had the same or better ID system in parts of the US with hot iron brands and tagging for years!! Montanas brand registration goes back to the 1800's....

Just out of curiosity, how are certain states versions of traceback better than the Canadian version?

By the way, not all US cattle are branded. As far as I know, branding is not required by law in all states (please correct me if I'm wrong), but I just looked at 2 US Shorthorn bulls who were imported from the US years ago, and they don't have a solitary brand on them.

We've also got brand registrations. Thankfully our brand books contain all the the brands from all the provinces, not just a single province.

As far as the tagging system goes, as a producer, I was told by the Canadian Cattleman's Association (which is not a gov't formed institution) that we were going to be in need of a traceback system that was as good as the best in the world to ensure our export markets remained safe. We had an opportunity to build our own, without interference from the government, so we, as producers, did it. We presented the government with what we did, and the government made it law. Thats the way gov't is supposed to work, and it finally did something right. As a plain old grassroots producer, I believe that the cattle ID program was a good thing for all of Canada, despite the belly aching of a few old timers who didn't want to tag their animals.

Rod

Excellent post, Rod. My GUESS is that NCBA members decided to do what you Canadian cattle producers did, and for about the same reasons. NCBA (also not a government formed institution) has often been ahead of our government on such issues and we see ID as a means to PROTECT the US cattle herd in event of outbreaks of disease.

Is anyone posting here concerned in the least about Foot and Mouth disease? Or any other serious cattle disease that could devastate our industry? Whether intentionally introduced, or accidentally, something of that nature would be damaging at the least, if not devastating to ranchers.I believe that BSE is the least of our worries and that of "Homeland Security" people promoting this idea, and rightly so. It isn't just about food safety, but also about protecting our cattle from disease and our ranchers from the resulting financial devastation, which would in turn (cattle being one of the more profitable ag sectors right now) be harmful to our nation. THAT scenario seems to me far more believeable than the "wanting to control ranchers" or "wanting to give packers info to use against us" scenarios some of the conspiracy buffs have thrown up as the reasons for M-ID.

I wouldn't care in the least whether those who do not want to be proactive in their own cattle business chose not to ID, if it were not for the fact that they then would be a part of the un-identifiable chain of infection that could bring disease to my cattle when it could have been prevented if there had been adequate means to trace movement of the infected cattle.

BTW, there sure are lots of cattle in the USA that are not branded. In SD, brand inspection is only west of the Missouri River. Some ranchers east of the river do brand. Some register their brands, and some do not. There have been occasional problems due to this. Doubtless, branding could be used in an ID system, but I surely would not want to be the person who has to settle the arguments over whose brand is the legal one when there are disputes between people using the very same brand.

My personal preference is for an internal chip of some kind, readable from a reasonable distance, with hand-held instruments. It should be located so that it cannot be removed until processing. That should settle arguments over ownership and help locate missing cattle more surely and conveniently than current systems.

MRJ

 

[mrj]

How old are those contraband cattle you have - that you don't even have an idea where they came from- except you know they were and /or found out they were (?) ILLEGALLY brought in to the Canadian herd from the US herd? :???:

Canadas supposed miracle ID system is a Joke--We have had the same or better ID system in parts of the US with hot iron brands and tagging for years!! Montanas brand registration goes back to the 1800's....

How about you Big Muddy? Apparently you can't tell me where anything came from :wink: :lol: Do you even remember when those cows were illegally brought into your herd?

Maxine- Like I told Soapweed- anyone that can actively support a situation where someone/anyone can import a cheap product (beef), purposely and knowingly remove and/or change the labeling and pass it off to unwitting consumers as something other than it is, and purport it to be from a country other than it is from, is not someone I want to do business with--Definitely glad I'm not tied into your banking ownership...
Took 55 years, but I owe nothing to the banking system anymore- so I don't have to suck up to anyone anymore like you .........

Dick, I have seen no proof of what you claim Packers do. We have only your word on that, and your factuality record is pretty weak, IMO.

I believe the USDA labels in question here are for SAFETY and the QUALITY GRADE inspections ONLY. At this point in time, I do support the idea of NOT using those labels on imported meats and making the safety and quality grades a responsibility of the processing location and attached to the country of origin label currently in use on the carcass or box.

NO ONE ever has or ever will have to "suck up" to me.......as you so politely put it..........for any reason........least of all due to my so called "banking ownership". I will say that IF that mythical power you ascribe to me were true, you would not be the type of person I would welcome as a customer, or see as a good risk, based on your comments on this site.

MRJ

MRJ- What did I see the the other day-- Your "supposed Non "Political Action Group" NCBA had again donated to Bonillas campaign fund- To the tune of $5000 this year...
If that wasn't a Political Donation- What was it? A little thank you gift :???:
NCBA has become a Political Action Group-actively donating to candidates- mostly candidates chosen by the Packers...

Smells shades of Abramoff.....

Dick, sorry I can't put in one syllable for you, but NCBA Policy/Dues/Membership organization and the NCBA PAC are two SEPARATE organizations. Not all members of the NCBA Policy div. are members of the PAC. It is ONLY the PAC members who make those contributions and decide to whom to contribute. I happen to be a member of both organizations.

I am not always happy with the decisions on who gets contributions. Tom Daschle was one recipient I did not agree upon. I still believe it is a good outfit.

The goal is to support candidates who are friendly to agriculture at least part of the time. You may not realize it, but agricultural producers are a very small part of our population, and we need all the help we can get in Congress.

I do understand your problem here is that NCBA has more political clout than your buddies in R-CALF. That is as it should be. NCBA has over a hundred years of experience which has built credibility and respect for NCBA.

Congressmen still care about who gives them accurate information about issues and livestock production.

Realistically, the amount of money the NCBA PAC is able to raise from our members is a pittance among todays' world of political action committees.

MRJ

 

[Sandhusker]

MRJ, "Realistically, the amount of money the NCBA PAC is able to raise from our members is a pittance among todays' world of political action committees."

Then why bother?

 

[mrj]

MRJ, "Realistically, the amount of money the NCBA PAC is able to raise from our members is a pittance among todays' world of political action committees."

Then why bother?

Speaking for myself, but others have expressed similar thoughts to me; the little amount that I can afford for politics will be magnified when placed with like minded peoples' donations. The few times we have disagreed with a recipient has not changed out minds on the value of NCBA PAC for getting good ag info to candidates, as well as contributing money to their campaigns.

Also, I will continue this practice as long as it is legal. I do not like the push to "publicly funded" campaigns which will diminish chances of non-incumbents to run successful campaigns. I see more efforts to take rights away from individuals to contribute to candidates of our choice, either through our PAC's or individually, while people with extreme wealth like Soros and others can wield election changing power with their money, and I do not believe it is good for the nation, and certainly not for ag producers!

MRJ

 

[Sandhusker]

MRJ, "Realistically, the amount of money the NCBA PAC is able to raise from our members is a pittance among todays' world of political action committees."

Then why bother?

Speaking for myself, but others have expressed similar thoughts to me; the little amount that I can afford for politics will be magnified when placed with like minded peoples' donations. The few times we have disagreed with a recipient has not changed out minds on the value of NCBA PAC for getting good ag info to candidates, as well as contributing money to their campaigns.

Also, I will continue this practice as long as it is legal. I do not like the push to "publicly funded" campaigns which will diminish chances of non-incumbents to run successful campaigns. I see more efforts to take rights away from individuals to contribute to candidates of our choice, either through our PAC's or individually, while people with extreme wealth like Soros and others can wield election changing power with their money, and I do not believe it is good for the nation, and certainly not for ag producers!

MRJ

Dress it up a you like, but you're buying influence and the person accepting the check is selling it.

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

Sandhusker have you ever contributed to a political candidate or party?

 

[Sandhusker]

Sandhusker have you ever contributed to a political candidate or party?

Never

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

Sandhusker have you ever contributed to a political candidate or party?

Never

Some good people could have used your help. It not wrong to support the people you believe in.