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

Too bad we don't listen to our intelligent predecessors

Help Support Ranchers.net:

mj............then SH pointed out that the context of his statement did not fit this situation in any case. The end.

And Scott's word is LAW!!! Didn't you know that Mike?

The context does fit mj whether, in your narrow way of thinking, you believe it or not. If you do not believe the CBB through the checkoff does not propagate "opinions", you are dead wrong.
 
MRJ said:
Mike said:
To MRJ concerning Thomas Jefferson and slavery:

Furthermore, recall that Virginia law did not recognize slave families. Therefore, if a slave was freed, the law made it almost impossible for him to remain near his spouse, children, or his family members who had not been freed, for the law required that a freed slave promptly depart the State or else reenter slavery:

If any slave hereafter emancipated shall remain within this Commonwealth more than twelve months after his or her right to freedom shall have accrued, he or she shall forfeit all such right and may be apprehended and sold. 31

It was under difficult laws like these–under laws even more restrictive than those Washington had faced–that Jefferson was required to operate. Nevertheless, as a slave owner (he, like Washington, had inherited slaves), Jefferson maintained a consistent public opposition to slavery and assiduously labored to end slavery both in his State and in the nation.

{I should have made it more clear in that post that I was not criticizing Jefferson for his actions then, but was pointing out that ideas change as time progresses...... The end.

MRJ}

It was obvious to me that you WERE criticizing Jefferson by pointing out that he was a slaveholder and therefore his wisdom is to be questioned to suit your agenda. His ideas did not change with time. He was trying to end slavery then and would be now.

SH pointed nothing out to me. You either, except your ignorance of history.
 
Tommy said:
mj...Also, it seems to be quite well documented that the man owned slaves, and fathered children by them. Does that mean you believe that practice still is proper today?

MJ are you for real? Slavery was part of our history, not a good part but a part of it none the less. Do you know if any of your family owned slaves back at that time?

{ I should have spelled out exactly what I meant. I thought it obvious. You didn't. The point was, many things were different at that time than they are now.

I don't know absolutely, since I have not read the many Calhoon family history books my uncle had, but most likely there were slave owners among my ancestors. They were some of the first ones to come over here and did heroic things that qualify their descendants for Daughters of the American Revolution, so it is probably safe to assume some branches of the family were also in the slave owning areas of the nation. I do know that some were very early crusaders against slavery and many died in the Civil War, on both sides. Not that it is any big deal. Many families have similar histories in the USA. MRJ}


Of the first five presidents, four owned slaves.All four of these owned slaves while they were president.

Of the next five presidents (#6-10), four owned slaves.Only two of them owned slaves while they were president.

Of the next five presidents (#11-15), two owned slaves. Both of these two owned slaves while they were president.

Of the next three presidents (#16-18) two owned slaves. neither of them owned slaves while serving as president.

The last president to own slaves at all was #18, Ulysses S. Grant (1869-1877). The last president to own slaves while president was #13, Zachary Taylor (1849-1850).

So twelve of our presidents owned slaves and eight of them owned slaves while serving as president


SH...Thomas Jefferson's statement refers to fund raising efforts by political organizations such as R-CULT/OCM/CCMP/LMA that propogate "OPINIONS" which cannot be supported by factual information ("opinions which he disbelieves").

Scott, Thomas Jefferson's statment refers to religous freedom, not to fund raising political organizations. You ought to check it out before you make a statement like you just did.

It was a fundamental understanding among the founders of our Constitution that taxpayers should not be forced to support a church or a religion that they don't believe in. The Virginia Statute for Establishing Religious Freedom (1786), authored by Thomas Jefferson and enacted with the help of James Madison, declared "that no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever..."

The preamble to the Virginia Statute states it more forcefully: "to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical."

{So, Tommy, do you choose to believe that the statement supporting religious freedoms also applies to something so totally dis-similar as the Beef Checkoff VOTED IN by a very large percentage of cattle producers, with a means of ending the thing if a very small minority of such producers sometime decide it no longer serves the purpose for which it was designed? Wouldn't it, if applied across the board, preclude virtually all taxes and laws that do not have 100% support?

MRJ
 
http://www.people.virginia.edu/~rjh9u/tomsally.html

"MRJ, It seems to be quite well documented that the man owned slaves, and fathered children by them"

Response: Click on the link above to find the real truth! At face value, the above quote by MRJ is an outright lie.

1- It is not well documented that he fathered children by "them" because there are still questions on whether he did or not.
2- Children is plural for child and there was only one descendant who could have possibly been a Jefferson child. Albeit not proven to be Thomas'.
3-"Finally, the The Jefferson-Hemings Scholars Commission concluded that Randolph Jefferson, Thomas' brother, was more likely to have fathered Eston Hemings."
 
Mike, your right on the Jefferson thing. Another thing to point out is that in the original draft of the Declaration of Independence Thomas Jefferson condemned slavery but it was taken out by the Continental Congress I believe. About the only people one runs into that try to discredit Jefferson are people that view liberty and soverenty as an obstruction to their agenda.
 
Tom S said:
Mike, your right on the Jefferson thing. Another thing to point out is that in the original draft of the Declaration of Independence Thomas Jefferson condemned slavery but it was taken out by the Continental Congress I believe. About the only people one runs into that try to discredit Jefferson are people that view liberty and soverenty as an obstruction to their agenda.

Tom, Very well said. Thanks for your input about the Declaration of Independence and TJ. I will study on that.
I am in awe everyday of my life as to the intellect of our founding fathers. Someone who questions their judgement or wisdom just to make a point disturbs me greatly. All of our founding documents were masterfully thought out and written with eloquence and precision.
 
:???: Good Grief! What does the fact that Thomas Jefferson, or anybody else back in those days who owned slaves, have to do with anything? It was pretty common then! Times change!!!

The Beef Checkoff has been a "saver" for our industry and MRJ said it rite in her post. It is more than advertising...there is education, research (both to the consumer and for the producer), product development, ecoli prevention, genetics etc.. Adding value to our product, building consumer demand, meeting consumer needs and the list goes on.

The $1.00 per head the producer pays for this activity is CHEAP to provide these services and you, as a producer, could never do it by yourself! Unless, of course, you have more money then GOD, and I have never seen a cattle producer that well off!!!

Further more, you are being "forced" or "compelled" to pay this checkoff!!?? Give me a break!!!! 80% of cattle producers in this country VOTED FOR IT! How can you say you are being forced? Promoting beef is one of the goals here..getting the consumer to buy beef, right? There are lots of ways to promote USA beef with the branded products...utilize that! Price is the factor for the consumer and they won't buy a more expensive product unless it is for a special occasion. Maybe not even then. Imported product adds value to our product and makes it more affordable to the consumer. Without that added product, the consumer mite just stop buying beef! Is that what you want?

Get a grip here people!!! Are we going to lose our industry to a bunch of radicals who associate themselves with anti-beef organizations, kill our packing industry to the point where we have to ship our cattle north because there are no facilities here anymore, promote tainted beef from Canada without considering what will happen if OUR beef gets tainted down the trail. It can happen!

OK, I have vented! I will expect that I will get the same treatment as I usually do from certain posters but that's life!!!

Later...probably much...CW
 
mj...Wouldn't it, if applied across the board, preclude virtually all taxes and laws that do not have 100% support?

Not in my opinion mj, the people who make the laws and tax us are voted on every two, four, and six years. I never have got to vote on who sits on any of the state or national beef council members. I am sure most cattle producers do not get to vote on them either.
But it has been ruled constitutional, so I have to live with it untill it can be changed, and will work toward that end.
 
Tom S said:
Mike, your right on the Jefferson thing. Another thing to point out is that in the original draft of the Declaration of Independence Thomas Jefferson condemned slavery but it was taken out by the Continental Congress I believe. About the only people one runs into that try to discredit Jefferson are people that view liberty and soverenty as an obstruction to their agenda.

{Not sure how many times I've said this, but my point was not to discredit Jefferson, but to point out the extreme difference in the way of life between then and now. I actually strongly admire Jefferson for his part in building our nation among other things. Certainly the national media made much of the claims of documentation of him fathering children or a child.......while it may or may not have been true.

However if it serves your agenda to use the quote in your attempt to discredit the Beef checkoff......enjoy your fun, but please admit that it just might possibly have some bearing on the high prices.

My greatest hope would be that only those who support the checkoff benefit from it, however that isn't possible. Those who complain about the Beef Checkoff remind one of those who complain about farmers when their mouths are full of superior, inexpensive food!

MRJ
 
MRJ said:
Tom S said:
Mike, your right on the Jefferson thing. Another thing to point out is that in the original draft of the Declaration of Independence Thomas Jefferson condemned slavery but it was taken out by the Continental Congress I believe. About the only people one runs into that try to discredit Jefferson are people that view liberty and soverenty as an obstruction to their agenda.

{Not sure how many times I've said this, but my point was not to discredit Jefferson, but to point out the extreme difference in the way of life between then and now. I actually strongly admire Jefferson for his part in building our nation among other things. Certainly the national media made much of the claims of documentation of him fathering children or a child.......while it may or may not have been true.

However if it serves your agenda to use the quote in your attempt to discredit the Beef checkoff......enjoy your fun, but please admit that it just might possibly have some bearing on the high prices.

My greatest hope would be that only those who support the checkoff benefit from it, however that isn't possible. Those who complain about the Beef Checkoff remind one of those who complain about farmers when their mouths are full of superior, inexpensive food!

MRJ

MRJ, Nowhere in this thread have I discredited the checkoff. Not once!
I pay my $1.50 per head and even send a check for private treaty sales.

Show me with a "direct quote" where my agenda was an attempt to discredit the checkoff. Show me where I complained about the checkoff!

MRJ, are you wrong again? My, my, how many times in one day?
 
Tommy: "If you do not believe the CBB through the checkoff does not propagate "opinions", you are dead wrong."

Name the "OPINIONS" you are referring to Tommy that the beef checkoff propogates to support your contention that the Jefferson quote applies to the beef checkoff.

Show us what ya got Tom T.!

Observe as Tommy dances around the question..............



~SH~
 
Had a fun day yesterday. Took in the 66th annual Sandhills Cattle Convention at Valentine. There was a good-sized crowd of people on hand, and the speakers were excellent.

At the tail end of the deal, I had opportunity to visit with Chris Abbott, Chris Harvey and Al Davis. They are all longtime friends of mine, but they are good R-Calf supporters and I am not. We had a lively discussion, and I am proud to say I held my own better than I usually do. (Maybe SH's water torture method paid off after all, because I used many of his points to counteract what they had to say.) Another possible advantage was that I was drinking straight Dr. Pepper, on the rocks.

They told me that if my sons were still running the family ranch a generation from now, chances are they would be working for Tyson. I told them, this is America where the free enterprise system is alive and well. The cream rises to the top. Heck, if my sons work hard and put their hearts into whatever they do, they could BE another John Tyson.

They were unhappy with mandatory ID, as am I. I pointed out that if R-CALF wasn't so adamant about having COOL, which is worthless without ID, we could have at least postponed mandatory identification for twenty or thirty more years. We attacked several other topics, including the Check-off, and agreed on practically nothing, but it was fun. We all shook hands and went our separate ways.

During the night, I thought of a new wrinkle to an old phrase. How about, "You can p*** in one hand and moan in the other, and see which one fills up first."?? :? :roll: :wink:

Another highlight of the convention was when a reputable Angus breeder came up to me and congratulated me for donating a calf last fall to the NCBA. I thanked him and said it was good to know someone else saw things the way I did.

We had a booth and promoted our little branding gizmo "Calf Traps". Didn't make any sales, but sure had a lot of interest and people seemed to enjoy the video. A couple days ago, a neighbor ordered three of them. Guess that is a pretty good vote of confidence.

Well, off to saddle up the horses. Have a full day of riding and cattle work ahead.
 
Soap: " Heck, if my sons work hard and put their hearts into whatever they do, they could BE another John Tyson."

DAMN STRAIGHT THEY CAN!

Best statement I have read in a long time.


Soap: "They told me that if my sons were still running the family ranch a generation from now, chances are they would be working for Tyson."

Meanwhile, the vertical integration that they fear is happening in the opposite direction right before their eyes and they can't see it.

USPB is a perfect example of producers controlling their destiny instead of producers "working for Tyson". Producers now own 100% of the 5th largest packer in the nation while the blamers continue to say that "it cant be done". Well it can be done and it was done and USPB has a successful track record and it has rewarded it's producers nicely.

Every one of the producers you debated could buy a packing plant, raise their cattle, feed their cattle, and sell their own beef. There is nothing to stop them but fear and blame.

I would like to ask Chris Abott if fellow Pickett plaintiff Mike Callicrate's Ranch Foods Direct is Tyson controlling Mike Callicrate or Mike controlling his own destiny?

I give Mike Callicrate credit for entering the retail beef business and putting his money where his mouth is. Unfortunately, he doesn't have the integrity to admit that his own real life experiences contradict what he has been telling producers for years about profits in the packing and retail beef business. His real life experiences also contradict what he has been telling producers regarding consumer's willingness to pay more for U.S. raised beef.

The obvious is simply too obvious for those who are driven by blame.

Good job Soap! It's easy to hold your own when you can back your position while the opposition bases their positions on misleading information and out and out falsehoods.

I would have loved to ask Chris Abott how a jury can be instructed to agree that ibp "LACKED" a legitimate business reason for using forward contracts (75% of captive supplies) to reach a guilty verdict and reach a guilty verdict when the plaintiffs themselves testified that ibp "HAD" a legitimate business reason for entering into forward contracts and even testified to having entered into forward contracts themselves. You could have had him dancing all night with that.

When it comes to "riding the fence" on your positions in the cattle/beef industry, that catch phrase does not apply to that situation because you put your money where your mouth is by donating a calf to NCBA. That took guts in a blame driven environment. That is a case of "actions" over "words". You have my respect from taking that stand.

Where you "ride the fence" is in your inability to accept someone who is a little too "matter of fact".

When I was younger, I thought about growing my hair down to my butt just to sort out who my real friends were. LOL!



~SH~
 
Tommy said:
mj............then SH pointed out that the context of his statement did not fit this situation in any case. The end.

And Scott's word is LAW!!! Didn't you know that Mike?

The context does fit mj whether, in your narrow way of thinking, you believe it or not. If you do not believe the CBB through the checkoff does not propagate "opinions", you are dead wrong.

{Tommy, specifically, what "opinions" are the CBB "propagating", in your OPINION.

MRJ}
 
Mike said:
http://www.people.virginia.edu/~rjh9u/tomsally.html

"MRJ, It seems to be quite well documented that the man owned slaves, and fathered children by them"

Response: Click on the link above to find the real truth! At face value, the above quote by MRJ is an outright lie.

1- It is not well documented that he fathered children by "them" because there are still questions on whether he did or not.
2- Children is plural for child and there was only one descendant who could have possibly been a Jefferson child. Albeit not proven to be Thomas'.
3-"Finally, the The Jefferson-Hemings Scholars Commission concluded that Randolph Jefferson, Thomas' brother, was more likely to have fathered Eston Hemings."

{Please forgive me, Mike, I took what was reported in the newspapers, TV, etc. at face value and forgot to do in-depth research like you do on all statements you make.

Hopefully, you understand by now, if you read my many posts stating that I was using that to illustrate that such practices were common at that time and that times have changed.

Probably a person of your impeccable honesty can't forgive such a cruel "lie" on my part.

Maybe, since on another thread, you stated that you allowed your beef animal to go through the CAB program even though it carried no angus blood, you may be able to accept that it isn't so easy to be absolutely immune to telling a "lie" by ommission if not commission.

Or maybe you did verbally make it very clear to the people buying your non-Angus animal, yet you did sell it to them for their premiums for Angus breeding, so you are morally in the clear?

Yet, knowing the beef could possibly be sold to some unsuspecting consumer as Angus, are you really?

Life is complicated when insisting on absolute honesty in thought, word, deed, and implications and including minute parsing of the words "honest" and "lie".

Most of us can only TRY our best to achieve that in ourselves. Is it really wise or morally proper to INSIST upon it at all times in others?

My sympathies to all those who must have daily interchanges with you, if you do insist on such perfection in your family, friends, and business associates!

MRJ}
 
MRJ:"Probably a person of your impeccable honesty can't forgive such a cruel "lie" on my part.

Maybe, since on another thread, you stated that you allowed your beef animal to go through the CAB program even though it carried no angus blood, you may be able to accept that it isn't so easy to be absolutely immune to telling a "lie" by ommission if not commission.

Or maybe you did verbally make it very clear to the people buying your non-Angus animal, yet you did sell it to them for their premiums for Angus breeding, so you are morally in the clear?

Yet, knowing the beef could possibly be sold to some unsuspecting consumer as Angus, are you really?"

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

My calf went through the system unbeknownst to me until well after the fact. I am absolutely in the "morally clear" on this. As I said, I sent the breeding records along with b/dates, etc. along with the calves. The calves sold on the rail and I got my check about a month later along with carcass data.

Your silly statements only amplify the trickery in the CAB program, not mine.

I do forgive you for your statements about Jefferson. Just don't let it happen again. :wink:
 
Soapweed said:
At the tail end of the deal, I had opportunity to visit with Chris Abbott, Chris Harvey and Al Davis. They are all longtime friends of mine, but they are good R-Calf supporters and I am not. We had a lively discussion, and I am proud to say I held my own better than I usually do. (Maybe SH's water torture method paid off after all, because I used many of his points to counteract what they had to say.) Another possible advantage was that I was drinking straight Dr. Pepper, on the rocks.

They told me that if my sons were still running the family ranch a generation from now, chances are they would be working for Tyson. I told them, this is America where the free enterprise system is alive and well. The cream rises to the top. Heck, if my sons work hard and put their hearts into whatever they do, they could BE another John Tyson.

Congratulations Soap for standing up to the Soap Opera of "blame". The encouragement you give to your children will prove to be a vital ingredient to their success. How they view the world as a "boogie man" or one of endless "opportunity" is a reflection of you-congrats. How some parents instill such a defeatist attitude in their children constantly puzzles me. I simply was not brought up to concentrate on the negative, rather to engulf the positives in this world full of opportunity. We are absolutely the most blessed people and nation on earth and all some can do is constantly find fault. Fortunately most of that mistrust and disenchantment is the direct result of misinformation and perception as opposed to fact. Have a good one and say hello to your dad.
 
Thank you, Agman. I'll tell my dad "hi" from you. At the convention yesterday, he donated ten of his books (available at the local gas station for $5 each :) ) to be auctioned off for the Sandhills Cattle Association fund raiser. They fairly well "sold like hotcakes". The bid was $110 for one book, and then two other parties each took a book for $110. The bidding started over, and the next high bid was $70 for a book. Two others sold for $70 each. The bidding started over again, and the remaining four books brought $50 each. He did throw in a free autograph with each book. The SCA made $740 off of his donation, so he felt pretty good.
 
Mike said:
MRJ said:
Mike said:
To MRJ concerning Thomas Jefferson and slavery:

Furthermore, recall that Virginia law did not recognize slave families. Therefore, if a slave was freed, the law made it almost impossible for him to remain near his spouse, children, or his family members who had not been freed, for the law required that a freed slave promptly depart the State or else reenter slavery:

If any slave hereafter emancipated shall remain within this Commonwealth more than twelve months after his or her right to freedom shall have accrued, he or she shall forfeit all such right and may be apprehended and sold. 31

It was under difficult laws like these–under laws even more restrictive than those Washington had faced–that Jefferson was required to operate. Nevertheless, as a slave owner (he, like Washington, had inherited slaves), Jefferson maintained a consistent public opposition to slavery and assiduously labored to end slavery both in his State and in the nation.

{I should have made it more clear in that post that I was not criticizing Jefferson for his actions then, but was pointing out that ideas change as time progresses...... The end.

MRJ}

It was obvious to me that you WERE criticizing Jefferson by pointing out that he was a slaveholder and therefore his wisdom is to be questioned to suit your agenda. His ideas did not change with time. He was trying to end slavery then and would be now.

{Again, you move the words about to attempting to make it appear I'm saying something other than what I was! I did NOT say that Jeffersons ideas changed with times. I said that IDEAS change with times, clear to most people as meaning that the IDEAS of SOCIETY as a whole change over time, especially the long term such as discussed here. Of course, that fact doesn't suit YOUR agenda!

Further, I'm certain you understand my point was that Jefferson was doing nothing believed immoral or wrong by many of his peers IF he did father children with slave. Maybe, being a southerner, you are a little more touchy about this subject than the population in general. Slavery was bad, the USA took the lead in ending it in this nation. It ended here. Too bad those who still want to fight the "slave wars" don' tput as much energy into ending the current slave trade alive and active in the world today, as they do into castigating, and seeking to profit from, the USA over our long ended historic involvement in slavery, BTW. MRJ}

SH pointed nothing out to me. You either, except your ignorance of history.
{I never claimed to be an expert, and told you I was quoting the media, not history books. But have fun with your fantasies that you know what others are thinking so you can turn their words about to serve your agenda here. YOu cannot get away with it.

MRJ
 
Did you ever groww your hair down to your butt or are you still thinking S.H?Can you tell me the total number of people on the payrolls of THE PACKERS?I'ts gotta be large.Thank you.Iwas wondering what would happen if tomarrow all the packers just gave up 'laid off all the workers and closwd thier doors.
 

Latest posts

Top