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

R-CALF in D.C.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Anonymous
  • Start date Start date
MRJ said:
ocm, you forgot to tell us what you have seen stated by NCBA about R-CALF that was totally false.



MRJ
Click to expand...

The second post on this thread provided a decent example.
 
MRJ said:
ocm, you forgot to tell us what you have seen stated by NCBA about R-CALF that was totally false.

Econ, do you believe that EVERY Congressman who accepts ANY campaign has "sold out his ethics"? Or is it just Republicans who qualify for your comment?

Sandhusker, it is one thing to "get media attention" to inform or attempt to promote benefits of beef in their diets. It is entirely a different deal from the cattle producers standpoint to use that "media attention" to tell them that eating beef from " a country with BSE" (meaning Canada) very well can come back to haunt us when the USA found our native BSE case. That was a collossal blunder for the illigitmate purpose of attacking Canadian beef and it could have had even worse consequences for US beef if NCBA did not have the facts about BSE and it's known consequences available to those consumers prior to that ill fated news release.

Again, Econ. Beef Checkoff advertising is for CONSUMERS, not packers, you jester, you! That beef was raised by cattle producers, believe it or not! WE benefit when MORE beef is sold, and WE suffer if LESS beef is sold to CONSUMERS.

MRJ
Click to expand...

MRJ, not every politician is sold out. I have a letter with a bunch of signatures of some who are not sold out. Have you asked why Congress has not held hearings on the agriculture problems? Maybe you could find a few that have sold out stopping that process of fact finding.
Then why hasn't it resulted in higher sales of beef than chicken?

If the checkoff is so successful, why are we eating more chicken than beef? I this case the trend is not your friend.
 
Sandhusker said:
MRJ, eating beef from a BSE positive country without proper precautions can come back and haunt us.
Click to expand...
Are you forgetting the US has BSE?
 
Econ, You can make claims of conspiracies of Congressmen "selling out to stop the process of fact finding" till the cows come home. Accusations are not considered proof. I'm not saying no one is guilty of anything in the USDA problems and shortcomings. I'm saying I don't believe we should use the "guilty until proven innocent" means test for proof.

You do expect miracles of the Beef Checkoff, don't you? When poultry products can be produced for a fraction of the cost of beef, when government erroneously told consumers for many years that white meat was more healthful than beef, and when many consumers have low incomes and/or choose to spend money on luxuries instead of better quality food, you still expect the Checkoff to overcome the biases favoring chicken and make beef king of proteins in a flash? That would be great, but we have had to do the research to PROVE the nutrients in beef superior to poultry, among other challenges. I think we have done remarkably well. What have you done to help?

ocm, if the second post you mention is the Troy Marshall column, what is it innacurate there? First, the story is by Troy Marshall of the Seedstock Digest and he only quotes a few things from NCBA statements after that ad and press conference where R-CALF told the world beef safety was compromised when, in fact, Canada has virtually the same BSE preventive strategies in place as has the USA. There are more than NCBA members who believe that was irresponsible at best. If I missed something that is not factual in that story, please specify what it is.

Sandhusker, if you miss where I stated it above, Canadian and USA beef have like preventive strategies against BSE and have from very early on.

MRJ

You
 
MRJ, "Sandhusker, if you miss where I stated it above, Canadian and USA beef have like preventive strategies against BSE and have from very early on."

The strategy is only as good as it's effectiveness.
 
MRJ, I haven't heard you call out for fact finding investigations by congress. Why not? If you don't look under the rug, you are not going to see the dirt hidden there. You want to hide behind the assumption of innocense, I just want to look under the rug. The OIG report has enough incompetence in it to warrant a look under the rug and you have only towed the packer line.

Packer backer, packer backer, packer backer.
 
Have you ever noticed how the hypocritical packer blamers claim that the beef checkoff advertises beef for the packer WHILE THEY PROMOTE COUNTRY OF ORIGIN LABELING????

DOESN'T COUNTRY OF ORIGIN ADVERTISE FOR THE PACKER?????

Typical of the shallow conflicting arguments of the typical packer blamer.



~SH~
 
Econ101 said:
MRJ, I haven't heard you call out for fact finding investigations by congress. Why not? If you don't look under the rug, you are not going to see the dirt hidden there. You want to hide behind the assumption of innocense, I just want to look under the rug. The OIG report has enough incompetence in it to warrant a look under the rug and you have only towed the packer line.

Packer backer, packer backer, packer backer.
Click to expand...


Who is really acting like a preschooler here Econ I thought you said named calling happens when you haven't enough logic to make a point. Why don't you grow up. By the way while you are looking under the rug see if you can find your credibility because it looks like you lost yours. :wink: :P
 
Tam said:
Econ101 said:
MRJ, I haven't heard you call out for fact finding investigations by congress. Why not? If you don't look under the rug, you are not going to see the dirt hidden there. You want to hide behind the assumption of innocense, I just want to look under the rug. The OIG report has enough incompetence in it to warrant a look under the rug and you have only towed the packer line.

Packer backer, packer backer, packer backer.
Click to expand...


Who is really acting like a preschooler here Econ I thought you said named calling happens when you haven't enough logic to make a point. Why don't you grow up. By the way while you are looking under the rug see if you can find your credibility because it looks like you lost yours. :wink: :P
Click to expand...

So, you enjoyed the name calling and didn't read any of the other part of the post nor did you comment on it. Here is some more for you, Tam:

Packer backer, packer backer, packer backer
Packer backer, packer backer, packer backer
Packer backer, packer backer, packer backer
 
Econ101 said:
MRJ, I haven't heard you call out for fact finding investigations by congress. Why not? If you don't look under the rug, you are not going to see the dirt hidden there. You want to hide behind the assumption of innocense, I just want to look under the rug. The OIG report has enough incompetence in it to warrant a look under the rug and you have only towed the packer line.

Packer backer, packer backer, packer backer.
Click to expand...

Poor little clueless conman, you have ONLY your name calling and allegations and accusations with NO proof, NO fact, and post NO useful information.

My goodness! You must not even have my phone tapped, nor my postmaster under your control if you do not know whether or not I have "called our for fact finding investigations by congress".

MRJ
 
MRJ, "Poor little clueless conman, you have ONLY your name calling and allegations and accusations with NO proof, NO fact, and post NO useful information."

That's SH's modus operandi and you coddle him! :lol: :lol: Why don't you love Econ the same?
 
MRJ said:
Econ101 said:
MRJ, I haven't heard you call out for fact finding investigations by congress. Why not? If you don't look under the rug, you are not going to see the dirt hidden there. You want to hide behind the assumption of innocense, I just want to look under the rug. The OIG report has enough incompetence in it to warrant a look under the rug and you have only towed the packer line.

Packer backer, packer backer, packer backer.
Click to expand...

Poor little clueless conman, you have ONLY your name calling and allegations and accusations with NO proof, NO fact, and post NO useful information.

My goodness! You must not even have my phone tapped, nor my postmaster under your control if you do not know whether or not I have "called our for fact finding investigations by congress".

MRJ
Click to expand...

MRJ, you wouldn't know proof if it hit you in the head. You can't think for yourself, you have to have the NCBA do it for you. Have you asked why or how so many NCBA people in the USDA couldn't bring the regulatory functions at GIPSA and the AMS into a modicum of credibilty instead of failing grades?

So now are you saying that I have tapped your phone? Talk about black helicopters. :shock:
 

Latest posts

Back
Top