SH and Sandhusker

[Anonymous]

OCM: "The resolutions that I was commended for addressed some of these very cattle market issues. So did some of the discussion at the meeting that was complimented.'

That's because a true conservative like me wasn't there to tell the truth about these government mandates in opposition to your phony justification.

OCM: "Just a question. If labelling beef is not a conservative position, why do so-called conservatives continue to allow any mandatory labelling of any kind."

What's your point?

One labeling law justifies them all?

OCM, this law is an absolute joke when only 5% of the retail beef would be labeled as imported TO THE ADVANTAGE OF THE RARE NOVELTY PRODUCT and the means to enforce the law, which would have been the only thing to give it value, was prohibited.

OCM: "Why are they not lobbying for the repeal of all mandatory labelling laws. Are the anti-COOL people just a bunch of self interested pragmatic egotistical opportunistic hypocrites."

To anyone with one iota of common sense "M"COOL is a total joke. If you are going to differentiate your product you need to be able to differentiate your product from something. This law is so typical of the ignorance that plagues this industry.

"Ah....let's see do I want the "US BEEF" or the "US BEEF" or the "US BEEF" or the "US BEEF" or the "US BEEF" or the "US BEEF" or the "US BEEF".................... Wait, what's this in the corner. "Source verified Canadian beef". Hey, this is what my brother was talking about and at the same price too".

Real marketing wizards you import blamers!

OCM: "Have you noticed (and you may be the rare exception here) that most who are opposed to mandatory COOL are in favor of mandatory national ID. That would include the NCBA. Does that mean it's not conservative?"

There is sound justification behind "M"ID. The same cannot be said for "M"COOL, AS IT'S WRITTEN, or CSRA.

"M"ID would allow traceback in case of a major disease outbreak. This is being driven by USDA to protect the health of U.S. consumers. Myself, I believe ID is important but I believe the free enterprise can always do a better job than the government. Ask the Canadians about the importance of traceback. They might clue you in.

The ultimate in hypocrisy is the "M"COOL proponents who continued to parrot the lines, "don't consumers have a right to know where their beef comes from" then prohibited "M"ID from "M"COOL because they didn't want to be burdened with traceback and had liability concerns. What could be more hypocritical.

"Don't consumers have a right to know where their beef comes from as long as it doesn't burden me with traceback". Typical R-CULT/OCM hypocrisy!

OCM: "Do you believe the regulators of Wall Street are not pro-business conservatives? They already have the regulations we are asking for in the cattle market. If they are "socialistic" in the cattle market, then why not repeal them on Wall Street?"

Apples and oranges. The regulations at Wall street were justified based on the transactions that were being traded and how they were being traded. They weren't trading fat cattle whose true value is not determined until the hide comes off. HARDLY COMPARABLE!

What's so damn stupid about the CSRA is that every feeder can sell to multiple packers under multiple pricing arrangements. Nobody can claim they are getting screwed unless their too damn ignorant to realize their marketing options.

There is no proof of market manipulation in the cattle industry. You had your day in court TWICE and you lost both times yet the conspiracy theories continue. The CSRA is nothing more than a ploy by the Livestock Marketing Police to route cattle through the sale barns so they can carve another piece of the producer's pie.

The CSRA will be shot down in flames. Write it down.

OCM: "You are very inconsistent in applying your "conservative" principles."

You are just trying to cleanse your liberal conscience to support your anti corporate/more government mandate platform.

You are not a conservative when it comes to beef issues. Not by any means. Any time you think the government can do a better job of running this industry than the free enterprise system and bathe yourself in baseless market manipulation conspiracy theories, you are a liberal through and through. Just like Leo, Mike, Kathleen, etc. etc.



~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

And then there's that conservative pro-business stance SH took on banning private companies from providing foreign customers with BSE tested beef. US Governement, please save the Japanase from themselves! :roll: :lol: :lol: :lol:

What is the difference you so quickly brushed off on Wall St. reporting prices and the livestock industry doing the same? You need to ask someone why the exchanges view transparent transactions as a necessity. The benefits of the same policy to the livestock industry have nothing to do with the hide coming off.

 

[Tommy]

SH...That's because a true conservative like me wasn't there to tell the truth about these government mandates in opposition to your phony justification.

Scott this is one of the most hypocritical statements you have ever made.
You have had numerous occasions and ample opportunity to be at meetings to tell your "truth" about government mandates and other things. Yet you never show up. All you can do is belittle people on here. Why don't you try calling people names in public like you do here?

 

[Anonymous]

Sandbag: "And then there's that conservative pro-business stance SH took on banning private companies from providing foreign customers with BSE tested beef. US Governement, please save the Japanase from themselves!"

Supporting consumer fraud is your platform, not mine.

Sandbag: "What is the difference you so quickly brushed off on Wall St. reporting prices and the livestock industry doing the same? You need to ask someone why the exchanges view transparent transactions as a necessity. The benefits of the same policy to the livestock industry have nothing to do with the hide coming off."

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the way fat cattle are sold now. The CSRA is not being driven by feeders who are actually affected by these decisions. It's driven by a bunch of packer blamers who think they know more about marketing fat cattle than those who market fat cattle and the Livestock Marketing Police so they can carve another piece of the pie.

T: "You have had numerous occasions and ample opportunity to be at meetings to tell your "truth" about government mandates and other things. Yet you never show up. All you can do is belittle people on here. Why don't you try calling people names in public like you do here?"

How the hell would you know where I show up Tommy? You don't know sh*t abouty me.

I have attended many blamers meetings but they are not point/counterpoint debates, they are listening sessions and question and statement sessions. I haven't been to a true debate yet. R-CULT would avoid a true debate like the plague because their phony views would be exposed just like they are in court. What some call a debate is a "QUESTION AND STATEMENT" session. You ask a question, they divert the question and make a statement. I asked Bill Bullard at the Rapid City Stockshow at a public meeting how the packer ban would affect USPB. He never even came close to answering the question. I literally started laughing.

Why would I continue to waste my time like that? I can correct that bullsh*t right here.

I'm not going to burn up my gas running around the country disrupting blamers conventions where the headnodders in attendence don't want to know the truth anyway.. Blamers don't want to hear the truth, they want to blame.

If a true point/counterpoint debate was set up close by with both sides in attendence, I would be more than interested to actually participate.

Tommy, if you think I'm afraid to say to people in peson what I say to people on here, give me a call the next time you come through and we'll meet.

I treat people the way I am treated. I call blamers what they are, blamers. I call perceived victims what they are, perceived victims. If you don't like that, I don't care and I'd be glad to tell you the next time you come through.


~SH~

 

[Tommy]

SH...How the hell would you know where I show up Tommy? You don't know sh*t abouty me.

I know you have had numerous chances to be meetings near you and you didn't show. And I never said one word about a debate. Does the NCBA have debates?


SH...Tommy, if you think I'm afraid to say to people in peson what I say to people on here, give me a call the next time you come through and we'll meet.

Scott if I ever get to S.D. I will take you up on your invite, never been there yet, but I do have a couple friends there I would like to visit.

SH...I treat people the way I am treated.

You are the first to call someone a name or belittle them if they do not agree with you or have made a statement that you do not support.

 

[Sandhusker]

SH, "Supporting consumer fraud is your platform, not mine."

You say there is fraud in BSE tested beef even though it was the law in Japan and Creekstone's officials have said publicly "BSE tested does not mean BSE free". Yet you see no fraud in a USDA stamp on foreign beef when it is obvious US cosumers think the USDA stamp means product of USA and retailers advertise it as such. You continually wail "Government save us from ourselves" when you belittle others, but you want the government to save the Japanese from themselves. A model of inconsistancy you are. If you made up your positions based on what you actually felt instead of deciding to back the USDA and AMI regardless, you wouldn't have so many inconsistancies.


Quote:
Sandbag: "What is the difference you so quickly brushed off on Wall St. reporting prices and the livestock industry doing the same? You need to ask someone why the exchanges view transparent transactions as a necessity. The benefits of the same policy to the livestock industry have nothing to do with the hide coming off."


SH, "There is absolutely nothing wrong with the way fat cattle are sold now. The CSRA is not being driven by feeders who are actually affected by these decisions. It's driven by a bunch of packer blamers who think they know more about marketing fat cattle than those who market fat cattle and the Livestock Marketing Police so they can carve another piece of the pie."

It's not the way cattle are sold, it's how those sales are reported. It is imperative for a functional fair marketplace that everybody know how things have been trading. What possible benefit is there to only one side knowing the true market? That is so rediculous I can't believe it needs to be explained to you. You've used market information to help yourself many times. Ever look to see how much bulls are selling for before deciding on a purchase? Have you ever consulted the blue book before buying or selling a used car? Have you ever went to the courthouse to check on prior sales before buying land? You were using market information to your advantage - the very information you back the AMI in not wanting to report. Rediculous. See how foolish and hypocritical you end up when your positions are not really yours?

SH, " R-CULT would avoid a true debate like the plague because their phony views would be exposed just like they are in court"

Do you think before you type? NCBA officials and Bullard or Leo have never had a debate? You're lying, SH.

 

[Tommy]

Sandhusker...Do you think before you type? NCBA officials and Bullard or Leo have never had a debate? You're lying, SH.


In his definition of a debate he will say they have not. But that is what his posts are all about, his definition of things, not the way everybody else defines things.

 

[Anonymous]

T: "I know you have had numerous chances to be meetings near you and you didn't show."

Like I said, I have better things to do with my time than disrupt blamer's conventions around the country by challenging statements and correcting lies.

Here I can dispell the myths of R-CULT at my convenience.

T: "And I never said one word about a debate. Does the NCBA have debates?"

I never said you mentioned debates. I mentioned that there needs to be more TRUE DEBATES, not question and statement forums where the R-CULTers are never challenged for the facts that support their statements.

T: "Scott if I ever get to S.D. I will take you up on your invite, never been there yet, but I do have a couple friends there I would like to visit."

When the time comes, PM me and I'll give you my number and meet you if I can. You know where I stand on the issues and you know how I'll respond. I'll buy you dinner.

T: "You are the first to call someone a name or belittle them if they do not agree with you or have made a statement that you do not support."

I resent lies and deception and have a real low tolerance for those who spread those lies and those who deceive. It's not about an opion that differs from mine, it's about an opinion that cannot be supported by factual proof. If you don't lie to me, you won't have to be worried about being called a liar. If you deceive me by trying to pretend that R-CULT had nothing to do with prolonging the ban on Canadian cattle from when it would have opened, I'll call bullsh*t.

Sandbag: "You say there is fraud in BSE tested beef even though it was the law in Japan and Creekstone's officials have said publicly "BSE tested does not mean BSE free". Yet you see no fraud in a USDA stamp on foreign beef when it is obvious US cosumers think the USDA stamp means product of USA and retailers advertise it as such. You continually wail "Government save us from ourselves" when you belittle others, but you want the government to save the Japanese from themselves. A model of inconsistancy you are. If you made up your positions based on what you actually felt instead of deciding to back the USDA and AMI regardless, you wouldn't have so many inconsistancies."

1. You have no proof that the Japanese government would have ever allowed BSE tested beef.

2. Creekstone did not agree to a disclaimer on their label stating "BSE TESTED BUT NOT GUARANTEED BSE FREE". They simply admitted their intentions to U.S. critics who questioned their antics.

3. The "USDA INSPECTED" stamp says just what it says. Inspected by USDA. To suggest fraud in this situation shows how desperate you really are to draw parallels.

4. 95% of the beef at the retail counter that is "USDA INSPECTED" is U.S. BEEF making your point irrelevant.

5. Most consumers don't care where their beef comes from as long as it's safe and offers value to them.

6. If USDA allowed fraudulent testing for the Japanese market, they would have to explain why they didn't also test beef for the U.S. market.

7. The entire point is moot because Japan is now taking cattle under 20 month without testing. The science persuaded Japan to our way.

The arguments do not change sandbag, let's move on to a different topic ok? You and I will never agree on this. You support consumer fraud if that's what Japan wants and I don't. We're shipping beef to Japan without testing. Move on!

Sandbag: "It's not the way cattle are sold, it's how those sales are reported. It is imperative for a functional fair marketplace that everybody know how things have been trading. What possible benefit is there to only one side knowing the true market? That is so rediculous I can't believe it needs to be explained to you. You've used market information to help yourself many times. Ever look to see how much bulls are selling for before deciding on a purchase? Have you ever consulted the blue book before buying or selling a used car? Have you ever went to the courthouse to check on prior sales before buying land? You were using market information to your advantage - the very information you back the AMI in not wanting to report. Rediculous. See how foolish and hypocritical you end up when your positions are not really yours?"

What does CSRA have to do with price reporting? Price reporting is a seperate issue you moron. The communist CSRA deals with how those cattle are marketed, not how the prices are reported.

If you want to switch to Mandatory Price Reporting, fine. I have no problem with VOLUNTARY REPORTING OF PRICES as long as the value is also reported that determined that price. Knowing a price without knowing the value the price was based on tells you nothing. The voluntary market reporting was working better than the MPR law on the books now. Remember the big fiasco of false reporting that cost producers money? That was a result of this dumbassed mandate that you support. Nebraska Cattlemens have this figured out. You create a service where you get market information in exchange for reporting your price IN REAL TIME delivered to your cell phone WITH VALUE INFORMATION. That is a hell of a lot better system then this backwards communist law that you packer blamers put into place.

If you want to remain consistant in your price reporting, why don't the sale barns have to report ALL OF THEIR SALES for the off colors and odds and ends and WHO BOUGHT THEM. Then we can see whose scalping all the cheap cattle.

Perhaps we should propose a law banning sale barn operators from owning cattle since that is just as much a conflict of interest as packers owning cattle.

If you are going to allow the government to pick and chose who can and who cannot own cattle in "PERCEIVED" situations of a conflict of interest, why not remain consistant throughout the industry?

Sandbag: " Do you think before you type? NCBA officials and Bullard or Leo have never had a debate? You're lying, SH.'

A question and statement forum is not a true debate. A true debate forces each side to back their positions with supporting facts or exposes them if they can't. A true debate has a point/counterpoint format allowing each side to grill the other. NCBA and R-CULT have never had a "TRUE DEBATE" to my knowledge. They have had what R-CULT prefers and that is where they just make statements like Conman without ever having to provide the facts to back them.


~SH~

 

[Tommy]

SH...If you deceive me by trying to pretend that R-CULT had nothing to do with prolonging the ban on Canadian cattle from when it would have opened, I'll call bullsh*t.

I have never said that R-CALF had nothing to do with prolonging the border opening. You were the one who said it would have been simutaniously with boxed beef, I and others have proved you wrong on that. All I have said is that R-CALF kept the border closed from Mar. 2005 untill July 2005 by the injunction they filed. Mar. 7 2005 is the date that the USDA planned to open the border to live cattle under thirty months.

 

[Anonymous]

T: "I have never said that R-CALF had nothing to do with prolonging the border opening. You were the one who said it would have been simutaniously with boxed beef, I and others have proved you wrong on that. All I have said is that R-CALF kept the border closed from Mar. 2005 untill July 2005 by the injunction they filed. Mar. 7 2005 is the date that the USDA planned to open the border to live cattle under thirty months."

Between the time that USDA opened the border to boxed beef to when they proposed to open the border to live cattle was 3 months. That's close enough to simultaneously to me. If you want to split that hair, be my guest. R-CULT's legal actions to stop the importation of live cattle from Canada started immediately following USDA's announcement. A threat of a court injunction was more than enough to stop the process of importing live cattle.



~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

SH, "...blah,blah, blaah....It's not about an opion that differs from mine, it's about an opinion that cannot be supported by factual proof, blah, balh..."

Are you referring to your opinion on Tyson plant profits you state as truth, but can't seem to fill in the blanks?

SH, "1. You have no proof that the Japanese government would have ever allowed BSE tested beef."

Do you have any proof they wouldn't?

SH, "2. Creekstone did not agree to a disclaimer on their label stating "BSE TESTED BUT NOT GUARANTEED BSE FREE". They simply admitted their intentions to U.S. critics who questioned their antics."

Nobody asked them to put out a disclaimer. "Antics"?

SH, "3. The "USDA INSPECTED" stamp says just what it says. Inspected by USDA. To suggest fraud in this situation shows how desperate you really are to draw parallels."

Since USDA inspected beef is all retailers can sell, why would they advertise their beef as such if the public wasn't being fooled on the origin of their meat?

SH, "4. 95% of the beef at the retail counter that is "USDA INSPECTED" is U.S. BEEF making your point irrelevant."

And what is going to happen to that 95% figure as trade barriers are dropped at the US multi nationals are allowed to bring in more and more foreign beef?

SH, "5. Most consumers don't care where their beef comes from as long as it's safe and offers value to them."

WRONG. Every poll in the subject shows overwhelming support for COOL

SH, "6. If USDA allowed fraudulent testing for the Japanese market, they would have to explain why they didn't also test beef for the U.S. market."

HORSEBUNK. Are they going to have to explain why Japan will get only 21 month cattle and they don't get the same treatment? Have they had to explain why some countries won't take poultry originating from certain states while US consumers have to take it? Ever consider looking at a real life example instead of pulling a wild idea out of the air?

SH, "7. The entire point is moot because Japan is now taking cattle under 20 month without testing. The science persuaded Japan to our way."

Science persuaded them or was it US bullying? We'll see how many non-tested carcasses get sold.

SH, "If you want to switch to Mandatory Price Reporting, fine. I have no problem with VOLUNTARY REPORTING OF PRICES as long as the value is also reported that determined that price. Knowing a price without knowing the value the price was based on tells you nothing. The voluntary market reporting was working better than the MPR law on the books now. Remember the big fiasco of false reporting that cost producers money? That was a result of this dumbassed mandate that you support. Nebraska Cattlemens have this figured out. You create a service where you get market information in exchange for reporting your price IN REAL TIME delivered to your cell phone WITH VALUE INFORMATION. That is a hell of a lot better system then this backwards communist law that you packer blamers put into place."

Voluntary anything hardly ever works. That pricing fiasco you referred to was an intentional attempt at misinformation - it could of done exactly the same under a voluntary system.

SH, "Perhaps we should propose a law banning sale barn operators from owning cattle since that is just as much a conflict of interest as packers owning cattle."

How many sale barn operators can buy 1/3 of the herd?

SH, "NCBA and R-CULT have never had a "TRUE DEBATE" to my knowledge."

NCBA and R-CALF have had three debates that I know of.

~SH~

 

[Anonymous]

Sandbag: "Do you have any proof they wouldn't?"

Hahaha!

I'll take that as a "no"!

Sandbag: "Nobody asked them to put out a disclaimer. "Antics"?"

Exactly! Consumer fraud!

Sandbag: "Since USDA inspected beef is all retailers can sell, why would they advertise their beef as such if the public wasn't being fooled on the origin of their meat?"

If it is stamped as "inspected" consumers know it was inspected. If it's not inspected, they don't know whether it was inspected or not.

To suggest that USDA is intentionally trying to deceive consumers into think foreign beef is "U.S. beef" with the USDA inspection stamp WHEN 95% OF IT IS U.S. BEEF is the epitomy of grasping for straws.

Sandbag: "And what is going to happen to that 95% figure as trade barriers are dropped at the US multi nationals are allowed to bring in more and more foreign beef?"

You don't know what the future holds and you can't justify your stupidity with hypotheticals. This industry needs to deal in the here and now.

Sandbag: "WRONG. Every poll in the subject shows overwhelming support for COOL"

Actual consumer purchases show consumers base their shopping decisions on price, not country of origin. New Zealand lamb proved it. There is particularly no value in Country of Origin Labeling when 95% of the labeled product is domestic. All you do in that situation is isolate the foreign beef to the benefit of foreign beef AT THE EXPENSE OF LABELING ALL BEEF. Typical of the blind leading the blind.

Sandbag: "HORSEBUNK. Are they going to have to explain why Japan will get only 21 month cattle and they don't get the same treatment? Have they had to explain why some countries won't take poultry originating from certain states while US consumers have to take it?"

The U.S. is responsible and accountable for their actions, not the actions of other nations.

Sandbag: "Science persuaded them or was it US bullying? We'll see how many non-tested carcasses get sold."

You're just mad because Japan didn't buy into your bullsh*t BSE testing fraud. Poor Randy! Hey, there's two Randys who think they are victims.

Sandbag: "Voluntary anything hardly ever works."

Spoken like a true government mandate lover!

Sandbag: "That pricing fiasco you referred to was an intentional attempt at misinformation - it could of done exactly the same under a voluntary system."

Of course you have all kinds of proof of that too don't you???? LOL! Conspiring minds always conspiring!

Sandbag: "How many sale barn operators can buy 1/3 of the herd?"

I see, we only discriminate against SIZE, not the action itself. Typical of your liberal mindset.

Sandbag: "NCBA and R-CALF have had three debates that I know of."

Not one of them has been a true debate. They are all R-CULT's preferred "question and statement" forums where they are never held accountable. Typical of their slithering ways.


~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

Sandbag: "Do you have any proof they wouldn't?"

SH, "Hahaha! I'll take that as a "no"!"

I'll take your statement likewise.

Sandbag: "Nobody asked them to put out a disclaimer. "Antics"?"

SH,"Exactly! Consumer fraud!"

Look up "fraud" in the dictionary. You're using it incorrectly.

Sandbag: "Since USDA inspected beef is all retailers can sell, why would they advertise their beef as such if the public wasn't being fooled on the origin of their meat?"

SH, "If it is stamped as "inspected" consumers know it was inspected. If it's not inspected, they don't know whether it was inspected or not. "

????????? :lol: :lol: :lol:

SH, "To suggest that USDA is intentionally trying to deceive consumers into think foreign beef is "U.S. beef" with the USDA inspection stamp WHEN 95% OF IT IS U.S. BEEF is the epitomy of grasping for straws."

I don't think there is any intentional decetion by the USDA - by their handlers, yes.

Sandbag: "And what is going to happen to that 95% figure as trade barriers are dropped at the US multi nationals are allowed to bring in more and more foreign beef?"

SH, "You don't know what the future holds and you can't justify your stupidity with hypotheticals. This industry needs to deal in the here and now."

I can see US multi-nationals establishing presences around the globe in beef producing countries - I see these same countries and the same packers lobbying for "free" trade and lobbying against COOL. Figure it out, it's not hard. This industry, like ANY industry or ANY business need to envision the future and prepare accordingly.

Sandbag: "WRONG. Every poll in the subject shows overwhelming support for COOL"

SH, "Actual consumer purchases show consumers base their shopping decisions on price, not country of origin. New Zealand lamb proved it. There is particularly no value in Country of Origin Labeling when 95% of the labeled product is domestic. All you do in that situation is isolate the foreign beef to the benefit of foreign beef AT THE EXPENSE OF LABELING ALL BEEF. Typical of the blind leading the blind."

You can bet that 95% is going down - if you had the brains to notice what is happening today. Keep the labels on the foreign stuff and the rest us US - it's not rocket science.

Sandbag: "HORSEBUNK. Are they going to have to explain why Japan will get only 21 month cattle and they don't get the same treatment? Have they had to explain why some countries won't take poultry originating from certain states while US consumers have to take it?"

SH, "The U.S. is responsible and accountable for their actions, not the actions of other nations."

So then why would we have to explain about testing for other nations?

Sandbag: "Science persuaded them or was it US bullying? We'll see how many non-tested carcasses get sold."

SH, "You're just mad because Japan didn't buy into your bullsh*t BSE testing fraud. Poor Randy! Hey, there's two Randys who think they are victims."

Like I said, we'll see how sales go. Any bets?

Sandbag: "Voluntary anything hardly ever works."

SH, "Spoken like a true government mandate lover!"

No, spoken like someone who has witnessed many voluntary programs.

Sandbag: "That pricing fiasco you referred to was an intentional attempt at misinformation - it could of done exactly the same under a voluntary system."

SH, "Of course you have all kinds of proof of that too don't you???? LOL! Conspiring minds always conspiring!"

Don't be an idiot intentionally - the program being mandatory or voluntary had nothing to do with an effort to misinform.

Sandbag: "How many sale barn operators can buy 1/3 of the herd?"

SH, "I see, we only discriminate against SIZE, not the action itself. Typical of your liberal mindset."

That's the way the conservatives set up the rules on Wall St. However, not being a businessman or true conservative, you can't recognize it.

Sandbag: "NCBA and R-CALF have had three debates that I know of."

SH, "Not one of them has been a true debate. They are all R-CULT's preferred "question and statement" forums where they are never held accountable. Typical of their slithering ways."

Horse crap. The ones I know of were not set up by either participant. Both sides were treated equally and were allowed to point and counterpoint. If you were correct on the format, do you think NCBA would of shown up? Typical of your "it's not true if I dont' want it to be true" ways.

 

[RobertMac]

RM: "Gunslinger, haven't you figured out SH...all you have to do is disagree with him on something and the name calling, belittling comments start. It's not his opinions or 'facts' that are objectionable...it's his obstinate, classless method of debating."

Robert Mac is another guy whose bias screams. It's not the namecalling that bothers him, it's the fact that I am the one who calls him on his bullsh*t occasionally and that angers him as it does most R-CULT supporters. There is more than enough namecalling to go around on both sides of the debate but Robert Mac singles me out revealing his bias towards the packer blamers. I treat others the way they treat me and that will not change. I find blatant lies a lot more insulting than name calling.

But hey, it gives them something to discuss when they can't back their positions. Those who bring nothing to the table can always talk about the shape and color of the table.


~SH~

Gunslinger, next lesson...the first thing that should be taken note of is that SH has to tell you(the reader) what to think about what his opposition has stated. If his opposition's position is so factually void and phony, this should be unnecessary and amounts to an insult to the reader's intelligence(or, as SH perceives it to be, their lack of intelligence). Also before he brings his "facts" to the table, he builds a straw man by belittling his opponent and, presenting as fact, things he has no way of knowing(reference his response to ocm). This is bordering on a practice he claims to cause him great distress, but uses his claim of lying by his opposition as justification of his classless responses. (Sandhusker, help me out here, what's that H-word???) As an example, he claims that I get angry...this is a discussion forum for God's sake, what is there to get angry over!!!!! And, in reality, he has no way of knowing my state of mind which is an untrue statement made with intent to deceive.

One other question...who does more name-calling...SH or me?

 

[RobertMac]

SH is mild in tone compared to what passes for debate in Political Bull, which most of you intelligently avoid :wink:

R2, you think if some of us when over to the Political Bull, we could convince SH were are really conservatives? Nah...what was I thinking??? :? :???:

SH, "If it is stamped as "inspected" consumers know it was inspected. If it's not inspected, they don't know whether it was inspected or not. "

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: If I could stop laughing... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
SH, don't ever tell anyone they don't understand the cattle industry! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Tommy]

SH...SH, "If it is stamped as "inspected" consumers know it was inspected. If it's not inspected, they don't know whether it was inspected or not. "

Robert I got a good laugh out of that too, and he has the gall to put down Econ101.

 

[Mike]

I'll have to admit, I fell out of my chair on that one too!

Spit coffee halfway across the room. Sorry Scott! You have outdone yourself on this one.

This is a perfect example of why they call this the "BULL SESSION"!

 

[mrj]

Boys, boys, boys! It must be tough for you that it is so seldom you truly catch SH in even a typo error that you MUST make a big deal of it!

It is easy to understand that he meant to say "if it is stamped as "inspected" consumers know it is inspected. It it's not STAMPED "inspected", they don't know whether it is inspected or not.

So.....have your moment of fun, but please do admit what he stated is reasonable, and that there is absolutely NO PROOF that packers or anyone else has any ill-intentioned reason for selling beef with that stamp on it. Conspiracy theories with NO validation are ridiculous!

MRJ

 

[Mike]

Boys, boys, boys! It must be tough for you

No, in fact it's NOT tough for me to have a big laugh. Matter of fact, I'm laughing at your attempt to be a "CHEERLEADER" now!!!!!!!!!

You got your "Short Skirt" on MRJ? :shock:

P.S. I have a very good sense of humor.

 

[Jason]

Doesn't change the fact she is right.