Read the Fine Print!

[Anonymous]

Sandman: "Ask yourself the following questions, SH; How long has Canada had more cattle than slaughter capacity? How long has R-CALF been in existence?"

Sandman: "Now don't you feel silly for such a foolish post?"

Prior to the border closing many Canadian cattle were killed in the U.S. which did not allow Canadian packers the leverage over Canadian producers. Canada having more cattle than slaughter capacity is not an issue when Canadian producers can send their fat cattle to the U.S. for slaughter you idiot.

BSE closed the border and R-CULT politics kept it closed until the truth was revealed and R-CULT had their collective heads handed to them in another defeat.


Randy,

Did R-CULT's injunction keep the border closed or not?

Yes or no?


~SH~

 

[rkaiser]

Not on it's own SH.

 

[Tommy]

Question Scott....How long was the injunction in effect? Wasn't it just a few months? If so are you saying that in those few months the packers got all the leverage over the Canadian producers than they had before the injunction?

 

[mrj]

MRJ, "Tommy, are you, or are you not familiar with the process where the board of directors of an organization may act for the members they represent?"

Maybe that's the problem, MRJ. You claim it is member-driven, but back up and look at it. Membership passes a clear directive on a huge issue and, was it even 6 months, not only is the directive not followed, it is reversed. Leadership reverses the directive very quickly by deciding "enough" of the directive had been followed, "trumping" membership, and "going thru the proper channels". Now please tell me, how is this member-driven? Where does the member-driven part come in?

Probably a difficult concept for you to understand, Sandhusker, what with seeming "President-for-life-McDonnell" as head of R-CALF, but state affiliates of NCBA do have members who ELECT their directors. Obviously those directors are going to check with their local members before making huge decisions for their state association, which they did on the eleven point directive. I know, I know......you just don't understand the concept. Sorry it is such a problem for you. It's history! Good members of most organizations do not resign and/or start a new, competing organization every time they lose out on the vote on their pet issue to the majority of the members. They just keep on working to make the association the best there is! Surely NCBA is not unique that way????

MRJ

 

[rancher]

Good members of most organizations do not resign and/or start a new, competing organization every time they lose out on the vote on their pet issue to the majority of the members. They just keep on working to make the association the best there is! Surely NCBA is not unique that way????

MRJ

Didn't you belong to the SD Stock Growers Association? Do you still belong?

 

[Tommy]

rancher...Didn't you belong to the SD Stock Growers Association? Do you still belong?

Didn't you know rancher she is just talking about other people who quit organizations, not herself.

 

[Anonymous]

Randy: "Not on it's own SH."

What other factors, THAT YOU CAN PROVE, kept the border closed?

Tommy: "Question Scott....How long was the injunction in effect? Wasn't it just a few months? If so are you saying that in those few months the packers got all the leverage over the Canadian producers than they had before the injunction?"

Tommy, you mean you can't even remember how long the injunction was in place?

Prior to the border closing, Canadian feeders could send fat cattle to U.S. plants. There wasn't a problem of too many cattle and not enough plants.

What's not to understand Tommy?


Be honest with yourself Tommy. You know damn well the objective here was to stop Canadian imports.



~SH~

 

[Econ101]

Randy: "Not on it's own SH."

What other factors, THAT YOU CAN PROVE, kept the border closed?

Tommy: "Question Scott....How long was the injunction in effect? Wasn't it just a few months? If so are you saying that in those few months the packers got all the leverage over the Canadian producers than they had before the injunction?"

Tommy, you mean you can't even remember how long the injunction was in place?

Prior to the border closing, Canadian feeders could send fat cattle to U.S. plants. There wasn't a problem of too many cattle and not enough plants.

What's not to understand Tommy?


Be honest with yourself Tommy. You know damn well the objective here was to stop Canadian imports.



~SH~

SH,

You previously stated that cash cattle prices follow boxed beef prices. RK and other Canadians showed that the price Canadian cattlemen were getting for their cattle did not follow the boxed beef prices. Which is it? Pick one or the other or are you playing both sides of the argument? You can not have it both ways. Bob yourself out of this one with a short and concise answer please. Your credibility is at stake.

 

[Tommy]

SH...Prior to the border closing, Canadian feeders could send fat cattle to U.S. plants. There wasn't a problem of too many cattle and not enough plants.
What's not to understand Tommy?


I understand that the border was closed in May 2003 to all beef and cattle from Canada. Then a few months later we started getting boneless boxed beef UTM from them. Then the border was supposed to open to live cattle UTM Mar. 7 2005. R-CALF's injunction stopped that untill July 2005.
R-CALF did not have anything to do with the border being closed in 2003, so if there was a problem with Canada having more cattle than packers were able to slaughter it is not R-CALF's fault.

 

[Anonymous]

Econ. 101: "You previously stated that cash cattle prices follow boxed beef prices. RK and other Canadians showed that the price Canadian cattlemen were getting for their cattle did not follow the boxed beef prices. Which is it? Pick one or the other or are you playing both sides of the argument? You can not have it both ways. Bob yourself out of this one with a short and concise answer please. Your credibility is at stake."

I was talking about U.S. boxed beef prices not Canadian boxed beef prices you idiot. I don't live in Canada.

Is that short and concise enough for you?

Canada's situation is completely different because the lying R-CULT kept the Canadian producer in a situation of having more cattle than slaughter capacity.



~SH~

 

[Econ101]

Econ. 101: "You previously stated that cash cattle prices follow boxed beef prices. RK and other Canadians showed that the price Canadian cattlemen were getting for their cattle did not follow the boxed beef prices. Which is it? Pick one or the other or are you playing both sides of the argument? You can not have it both ways. Bob yourself out of this one with a short and concise answer please. Your credibility is at stake."

I was talking about U.S. boxed beef prices not Canadian boxed beef prices you idiot. I don't live in Canada.

Is that short and concise enough for you?

Canada's situation is completely different because the lying R-CULT kept the Canadian producer in a situation of having more cattle than slaughter capacity.



~SH~

So you say that cash prices follow boxed beef prices unless there is international trade and packers can have an excuse not to do it?

You know that all that boxed beef from Canada was coming to the U.S. The facts of the Canadian situation turn your arguments upside down. You stated that cash prices follow boxed beef prices and you got caught in a lie. Either cash cattle prices are dependent on supply/demand or they are dependent on boxed beef. What is it? Tell the truth!!!

 

[rancher]

I just got up from my nap, had a brain moment or maybe it was a dream. Anyways have a few ? to ask SH? You all said that the other countires would not take our beef until we opened our border to Canada? How many opened up to us since we did to them? Is Mexico taking live utc from us or did they before?

 

[Anonymous]

Econ.: "So you say that cash prices follow boxed beef prices unless there is international trade and packers can have an excuse not to do it?

You know that all that boxed beef from Canada was coming to the U.S. The facts of the Canadian situation turn your arguments upside down. You stated that cash prices follow boxed beef prices and you got caught in a lie. Either cash cattle prices are dependent on supply/demand or they are dependent on boxed beef. What is it? Tell the truth!!!"

BOXED BEEF IS PART OF THE DEMAND EQUATION YOU IDIOT!

Canada used to ship a large percentage of their live cattle to the U.S. for slaughter. Once the Canadian border was closed, Canada no longer had that option. Canadian cattle had to be killed in Canada. This clearly put the ball in the Canadian packer's court because a closed Canadian border meant that Canada now had more cattle than slaughter capacity.

In Canada's case, boxed beef prices did not SOLELY drive live cattle prices because the cattle supply was greater than the slaughter capacity thanks in large part to your beloved lying R-CULT.

That is not a normal supply and demand equation. That is an excessive supply in relation to the slaughter capacity.

We don't have a lack of slaughter capacity in the U.S. so there is no comparison.

My references to boxed beef prices being a primary driver in the fat cattle market was in regards to the U.S. market, not Canada.


In contrast, the packing companies in the NW that used to rely on Canadian cattle, found themselves short of cattle. Southern U.S. cattle were not going to be shipped north for slaughter. Some of those plants closed down.

What Tyson and Cargill gained in Canada, they lost in the NW.

That is one more fact you cannot and will not refute.

Are you going to be so stupid as to suggest that boxed beef prices are not the primary driver of U.S. fat cattle prices?

Have you ever listened to a credible market report? Obviously not!

You are such a complete waste of time.

Rancher: "You all said that the other countires would not take our beef until we opened our border to Canada? How many opened up to us since we did to them? Is Mexico taking live utc from us or did they before?"

Why would they jump up and take our beef when R-CULT is saying that having BSE in your native herd means your beef is "high risk".

If they had planned on taking our beef again, R-CULT has certainly worked to change their minds with their lies about the safety of Canadian beef.


~SH~

 

[RobertMac]

SH: "Canada's situation is completely different because the lying R-CULT kept the Canadian producer in a situation of having more cattle than slaughter capacity."

The Canadian border was closed BY THE USDA in May 2003 following established BSE protocol when a native animal was found with BSE. R-CALF injunction was in March 2005 to July 2005(4 months). USDA created the back log of cattle in Canadian, not R-CALF's 4 month injunction.

Your statement is TOTALLY false...it go to show the hole blind hatred will dig you into!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[rkaiser]

Thank you Robert Mac!

 

[Tommy]

RobertMac...The Canadian border was closed BY THE USDA in May 2003 following established BSE protocol when a native animal was found with BSE. R-CALF injunction was in March 2005 to July 2005(4 months). USDA created the back log of cattle in Canadian, not R-CALF's 4 month injunction.


Thanks Robert for re-enforcing what I stated a few posts up. R-CALF did not have anything to do with the back log of cattle in Canada.

 

[rancher]

SH: "Canada's situation is completely different because the lying R-CULT kept the Canadian producer in a situation of having more cattle than slaughter capacity."

The Canadian border was closed BY THE USDA in May 2003 following established BSE protocol when a native animal was found with BSE. R-CALF injunction was in March 2005 to July 2005(4 months). USDA created the back log of cattle in Canadian, not R-CALF's 4 month injunction.

Your statement is TOTALLY false...it go to show the hole blind hatred will dig you into!!!!!!!!!!!!

SH, that is a spin and a lie in the same post. Before you said R-calf is going to ruin the cattle industry with their (your words) lies, and then you say no one listens to them and know you say they listen to them.

You lied about R-calf causing the back log of slaughter ready cattle in Canada.

 

[Anonymous]

RK: "Thank you Robert Mac!"

Randy Kaiser aligning himself with the R-CULTers who say his Canadian beef is "high risk" and "contaminated". Talk about the blind leading the blind. That's funny!


The statement in question.....

SH (previous): "Canada's situation is completely different because the lying R-CULT kept the Canadian producer in a situation of having more cattle than slaughter capacity."

RM: "Your statement is TOTALLY false...it go to show the hole blind hatred will dig you into!!!!!!!!!!!!"

My statement is not false. I said R-CULT "KEPT" the Canadian producers in a situation of having more cattle than slaughter capacity. I did not say R-CULT "PLACED" them in that situation. BSE "PLACED" them in that situation and R-CULT "KEPT" them in that situation as long as they could find someone to believe their BSE "fear mongering" lies.

Now let's talk about the hypocrisy of R-CULT and see who's lying shall we?

On one hand your leaders take credit for keeping the border closed and higher cattle prices. Would you like to DENY that?

On the other hand, R-CULT doesn't want to accept responsibility for stabbing Canadian producers in the back so they blame the closed border on BSE and USDA.

Funny, I don't remember R-CULT blaming BSE or USDA when they were filing their dumping case against Canada.

OH, ALMOST FORGOT ABOUT THAT ONE DID YA?????

WHICH WAY IS IT GUYS????

DID R-CULT KEEP THE BORDER CLOSED OR NOT?

Watch the diversion dance now!

Tommy: "R-CALF did not have anything to do with the back log of cattle in Canada."

If R-CULT did not have anything to do with the back log of cattle in Canada, why does R-CULT take credit for higher cattle prices and keeping the border closed to Canadian cattle?

WHICH WAY IS IT TOMMY?

Go ahead Tommy, spit and sputter defending that one.

Rancher: "SH, that is a spin and a lie in the same post. Before you said R-calf is going to ruin the cattle industry with their (your words) lies, and then you say no one listens to them and know you say they listen to them."

I'll try to take this slow for you Rancher so you can understand it.

I said R-CALF's injunction "KEPT" the border closed. You guys cannot change what has been stated here. In other circles you can get away with that deception but not here.

Anyone can read my quote above and see that I said "KEPT" Canada in that situation.

R-CALF takes credit for keeping the border closed and higher cattle prices.

Do you want to deny that R-CULT takes credit for keeping the border closed and for higher cattle prices?

I didn't think so!


R-CALF's position in court is that having BSE in your native herd means your beef is "HIGH RISK".

Are you really so blind that you cannot see the potential consequences with that position? R-CULT gambled on the integrity of 80% of our U.S. beef consumption (domestic production) to stop the importation of 5% of our normal U.S. beef consumption (Canadian live cattle imports) with their BSE "fear mongering" lies. Their gamble paid off until the 9th circuit saw through their lies.

R-CULT apparently gambled on USDA and NCBA being there to tell the truth about BSE to the media while R-CULT used "BSE fear mongering" to stop Canadian imports.

Judge Cebull listened to R-CULT's lies but the 9th circuit didn't. Another defeat for R-CULT. The media obviously believed USDA over R-CULT or beef prices would have plumetted after we had BSE in our native herd. Had the media picked up the "high risk" and "contaminated" lies of R-CULT and perpetuated them, beef demand would have taken a nose dive. Obviously the media saw through R-CULT.

What part of that do you not understand Rancher? R-CULT said having BSE in your native herd means your beef is "contaminated" and "high risk". WE HAD BSE IN OUR NATIVE HERD SO OBVIOUSLY USDA AND NCBA HELD MORE CREDIBILITY WITH THE MEDIA THAN R-CULT.

Rancher: "You lied about R-calf causing the back log of slaughter ready cattle in Canada."

You are the one who is lying about my statements.

I didn't say R-CULT "CAUSED" the situation in Canada, I said R-CULT "KEPT THEM IN THAT SITUATION".

QUIT LYING RANCHER!

Now if R-CULT is taking credit for keeping the border closed and higher cattle prices, WHO IS LYING RANCHER?????

WHICH WAY IS IT?????

DID R-CULT KEEP THE BORDER CLOSED OR DIDN'T THEY????

YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS!

That's the problem with you R-CULT clones, you can't accept the responsibility for your actions. That's why your lying leader spends his time "red faced" defending DeBruyckers for buying "supposedly" unsafe Canadian cattle and defending R-CULT for aligning themselves with anti beef groups.

Rancher you disappoint me. I always thought if any R-CULT supporter had the ability to think for himself it might be you. You have proved otherwise. Must be peer pressure huh? LOL!

Give me a sheep blat Rancher!




~SH~

 

[rancher]

Rancher you disappoint me. I always thought if any R-CULT supporter had the ability to think for himself it might be you. You have proved otherwise. Must be peer pressure huh? LOL!

SH, I am soooo disappointed that you are disappointed in me.

So, you are saying the price of cattle follow the boxed beef IF there is not an over supply of cattle?

SH (previous): "Canada's situation is completely different because the lying R-CULT kept the Canadian producer in a situation of having more cattle than slaughter capacity."

You must have spun the other post as you didn't get upset when I said you did. I am soooo disappointed in you for missing that.

 

[rkaiser]

Randy Kaiser aligning himself with the R-CULTers who say his Canadian beef is "high risk" and "contaminated". Talk about the blind leading the blind. That's funny!

Call it blind if you like SH, the fact is I would rather be blind than have a nose ring implanted by the Mutinational Packer led USDA like yourself.

Can a person not have his own opinion which may cross many lines.

NO says GWB, you're either with us or part of the axis of evil.

No says SH, you're either with us or part of the axis of evil.

Grow up SH.