Progs Now Turn To Ruining Our Food

[Rotagilla]

What can I tell you?....you believe the government is honest, trustworthy and only does what's best for the people. History disproves that but whatever.

I could never change your mind...

It's hardly about belief. We get the government we deserve. I vote and stay active in monitoring my government so that they have a vested interest in doing what's best for the people.

oh...backpedaling..so now you DON'T believe the government is honest, trustworthy and only does what's best for the people.
Good. Progress.

Serious delusion on your part.

It's NOT ABOUT BELIEF. When the government does, or proposes doing, the right thing, I don't question the motives as something sinister, and dismiss the action out of hand.

But I do keep an eye. We get the government we demand, and if government is held accountable to the people, they have an interest in doing the right thing....FOR the people.

Ok.so now you DO believe the government is honest, trustworthy and only does what's best for the people.

If you spent less time looking for cute doggy cartoons, you might understand my posts.

I don't know how many times I can say it's not about belief. I don't "believe" anything about the government. I am a realist about it.

If you'd stop running in circles we could have a mature discussion...but THAT'S not going to happen, is it?

....so anyway... you know they're dishonest, but you want to give the gvmt more power...this time it's some food scam they're trying to run on us...

it's just one "crisis" after another with this administration...and they can only be "fixed" with more government intervention and laws and regulations... you statists...transparent as glass...

 

[dilloduck]

What can I tell you?....you believe the government is honest, trustworthy and only does what's best for the people. History disproves that but whatever.

I could never change your mind...

It's hardly about belief. We get the government we deserve. I vote and stay active in monitoring my government so that they have a vested interest in doing what's best for the people.

WE already HAVE a ton of government involvement in American food--Why do we need a policy and if so. WHAT IS THE PURPOSE ?

HAVE YOU NOT READ THE THREAD?

ya I read the thread-------Algore says we don't have a national policy for managing American agriculture or the food system as a whole. Well I have news for him----we already have laws up the wazoo that regulate it. If he still thinks we need a "policy" I want to know what will be the desired of such a policy.

Have you ever heard of a mission statement? A policy is similar to a mission statement.

Laws may be introduced piecemeal as issues come up, but a policy provides a big picture, a framework to use to determine how America wants to handle its legislation about food. It helps ensure a general direction, of what is supported and what is discouraged. Like a country's energy policy.

Your getting closer---so what the ultimate goal ? What will having this national policy in place do for us that isn't being done now. Will all local communities have to shelve their own methods and adopt the new policy ?

 

[MrDVS1]

Pretty soon, we'll only be allowed to eat that Obama Gubmint cheese.

That would be wonderful, people like you will get all bound up and automatically stop spewing their shit all over the place!

 

[MrDVS1]

it's not an issue for me.[/QUOTE]

That is exactly what is wrong with the right, if something doesn't pertain directly to them, then it can't possibly be of any importance. No clue on how to be a member of the whole.

 

[ricechickie]

It's hardly about belief. We get the government we deserve. I vote and stay active in monitoring my government so that they have a vested interest in doing what's best for the people.

oh...backpedaling..so now you DON'T believe the government is honest, trustworthy and only does what's best for the people.
Good. Progress.

Serious delusion on your part.

It's NOT ABOUT BELIEF. When the government does, or proposes doing, the right thing, I don't question the motives as something sinister, and dismiss the action out of hand.

But I do keep an eye. We get the government we demand, and if government is held accountable to the people, they have an interest in doing the right thing....FOR the people.

Ok.so now you DO believe the government is honest, trustworthy and only does what's best for the people.

If you spent less time looking for cute doggy cartoons, you might understand my posts.

I don't know how many times I can say it's not about belief. I don't "believe" anything about the government. I am a realist about it.

If you'd stop running in circles we could have a mature discussion...but THAT'S not going to happen, is it?

....so anyway... you know they're dishonest, but you want to give the gvmt more power...this time it's some food scam they're trying to run on us...

it's just one "crisis" after another with this administration...and they can only be "fixed" with more government intervention and laws and regulations... you statists...transparent as glass...

Go find more little doggies.

You clearly don't wish to have a mature discussion.

I clearly know, and you don't, that "government" isn't a naughty 7-year-old boy named "Dennis."

Of course there's room for corruption and dishonesty. Duh. And with an involved electorate, the government has more incentive to do the right thing.

 

[dilloduck]

Problem----a "National Policy" means ONE policy. Classic liberal thinking. One food solution for every American.
Epic fail.

 

[ClosedCaption]

It's hardly about belief. We get the government we deserve. I vote and stay active in monitoring my government so that they have a vested interest in doing what's best for the people.

WE already HAVE a ton of government involvement in American food--Why do we need a policy and if so. WHAT IS THE PURPOSE ?

HAVE YOU NOT READ THE THREAD?

ya I read the thread-------Algore says we don't have a national policy for managing American agriculture or the food system as a whole. Well I have news for him----we already have laws up the wazoo that regulate it. If he still thinks we need a "policy" I want to know what will be the desired of such a policy.

Have you ever heard of a mission statement? A policy is similar to a mission statement.

Laws may be introduced piecemeal as issues come up, but a policy provides a big picture, a framework to use to determine how America wants to handle its legislation about food. It helps ensure a general direction, of what is supported and what is discouraged. Like a country's energy policy.

Your getting closer---so what the ultimate goal ? What will having this national policy in place do for us that isn't being done now. Will all local communities have to shelve their own methods and adopt the new policy ?

Its funny because the goal is set up NOT by Gore but by a Op Ed in the Washington Post.

But now since Gore said its a good idea I see why you are against it.

How a national food policy could save millions of American lives - The Washington Post

Again this did not come from Al Gore this was written by 4 guys on the WashPo Op Ed.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Problem----a "National Policy" means ONE policy. Classic liberal thinking. One food solution for every American.
Epic fail.

No we should have 300 billion policies one for each American

 

[Bush92]

Eat more red meat and drink more beer. In fact, some good ol' dead Bambi is lean meat. Also, I hear baby seal is good as well. Progressives eat their corn on the cob long ways.

 

[dilloduck]

Problem----a "National Policy" means ONE policy. Classic liberal thinking. One food solution for every American.
Epic fail.

No we should have 300 billion policies one for each American

You mean each American be responsible for their own food ? Sounds good to me.

 

[Rotagilla]

oh...backpedaling..so now you DON'T believe the government is honest, trustworthy and only does what's best for the people.
Good. Progress.

Serious delusion on your part.

It's NOT ABOUT BELIEF. When the government does, or proposes doing, the right thing, I don't question the motives as something sinister, and dismiss the action out of hand.

But I do keep an eye. We get the government we demand, and if government is held accountable to the people, they have an interest in doing the right thing....FOR the people.

Ok.so now you DO believe the government is honest, trustworthy and only does what's best for the people.

If you spent less time looking for cute doggy cartoons, you might understand my posts.

I don't know how many times I can say it's not about belief. I don't "believe" anything about the government. I am a realist about it.

If you'd stop running in circles we could have a mature discussion...but THAT'S not going to happen, is it?

....so anyway... you know they're dishonest, but you want to give the gvmt more power...this time it's some food scam they're trying to run on us...

it's just one "crisis" after another with this administration...and they can only be "fixed" with more government intervention and laws and regulations... you statists...transparent as glass...

Go find more little doggies.

evasion

You clearly don't wish to have a mature discussion.

I made many good, solid points. You run in circles.

I clearly know, and you don't, that "government" isn't a naughty 7-year-old boy named "Dennis."

diversion

Of course there's room for corruption and dishonesty.

So we agree that government shouldn't be trusted because it's corrupt and dishonest.

Duh. And with an involved electorate, the government has more incentive to do the right thing.

people that begin sentences with "duh" forfeit the right to complain about "mature discussion".

 

[ricechickie]

Problem----a "National Policy" means ONE policy. Classic liberal thinking. One food solution for every American.
Epic fail.

America should have no common interests or common goals?

 

[MrDVS1]

Ask yourself this. If farmers and ranchers are loading up your food with chemicals,how long before the FDA comes down on them and closes the doors on em?


Not to mention once word gets out the public will shut them down by not purchasing their goods.[/QUOTE]

You do know that the FDA has allowances for

Yep, time to go back to the Caveat Emptor style of food shopping.

Sniff your meat before you buy it, it's your own fault if you get something rotten.

Guess the ingredients in what you're purchasing.

Allergies? Go fuck yourself!

Btw, heavy sarcasm ^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Another profoundly stupid Nanny/Police Stater analogy. We have enough Government in our lives. And that's an understatement. So you Nanny/Police Staters can go fuck yourselves.

Yes, because food industries have always done what is best for the consumer and environment.

Why not trust them?

yes, because government has always been honest and done what is best for the citizens. why not trust them?

So your trying to say big business is more caring about my interests than government ???? That would make you a serious idiot!

 

[ricechickie]

Serious delusion on your part.

It's NOT ABOUT BELIEF. When the government does, or proposes doing, the right thing, I don't question the motives as something sinister, and dismiss the action out of hand.

But I do keep an eye. We get the government we demand, and if government is held accountable to the people, they have an interest in doing the right thing....FOR the people.

Ok.so now you DO believe the government is honest, trustworthy and only does what's best for the people.

If you spent less time looking for cute doggy cartoons, you might understand my posts.

I don't know how many times I can say it's not about belief. I don't "believe" anything about the government. I am a realist about it.

If you'd stop running in circles we could have a mature discussion...but THAT'S not going to happen, is it?

....so anyway... you know they're dishonest, but you want to give the gvmt more power...this time it's some food scam they're trying to run on us...

it's just one "crisis" after another with this administration...and they can only be "fixed" with more government intervention and laws and regulations... you statists...transparent as glass...

Go find more little doggies.

evasion

You clearly don't wish to have a mature discussion.

I made many good, solid points. You run in circles.

I clearly know, and you don't, that "government" isn't a naughty 7-year-old boy named "Dennis."

diversion

Of course there's room for corruption and dishonesty.

So we agree that government shouldn't be trusted because it's corrupt and dishonest.

Duh. And with an involved electorate, the government has more incentive to do the right thing.

people that begin sentences with "duh" forfeit the right to complain about "mature discussion".

But cartoon dogs make you the epitome of maturity?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Problem----a "National Policy" means ONE policy. Classic liberal thinking. One food solution for every American.
Epic fail.

No we should have 300 billion policies one for each American

You mean each American be responsible for their own food ? Sounds good to me.

No just what you just alluded too. There cant be a national policy it has to be many many small policies to fit each American. Thats how you run a country

 

[Rotagilla]

Ask yourself this. If farmers and ranchers are loading up your food with chemicals,how long before the FDA comes down on them and closes the doors on em?


Not to mention once word gets out the public will shut them down by not purchasing their goods.

You do know that the FDA has allowances for

Yep, time to go back to the Caveat Emptor style of food shopping.

Sniff your meat before you buy it, it's your own fault if you get something rotten.

Guess the ingredients in what you're purchasing.

Allergies? Go fuck yourself!

Btw, heavy sarcasm ^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Another profoundly stupid Nanny/Police Stater analogy. We have enough Government in our lives. And that's an understatement. So you Nanny/Police Staters can go fuck yourselves.

Yes, because food industries have always done what is best for the consumer and environment.

Why not trust them?

yes, because government has always been honest and done what is best for the citizens. why not trust them?

So your trying to say big business is more caring about my interests than government ????[/quote]
No. You made that up.

That would make you a serious idiot!

Oh that stings... great rebuttal!

 

[ClosedCaption]

Nevermind I'm out this "discussion" is silly

 

[dilloduck]

WE already HAVE a ton of government involvement in American food--Why do we need a policy and if so. WHAT IS THE PURPOSE ?

HAVE YOU NOT READ THE THREAD?

ya I read the thread-------Algore says we don't have a national policy for managing American agriculture or the food system as a whole. Well I have news for him----we already have laws up the wazoo that regulate it. If he still thinks we need a "policy" I want to know what will be the desired of such a policy.

Have you ever heard of a mission statement? A policy is similar to a mission statement.

Laws may be introduced piecemeal as issues come up, but a policy provides a big picture, a framework to use to determine how America wants to handle its legislation about food. It helps ensure a general direction, of what is supported and what is discouraged. Like a country's energy policy.

Your getting closer---so what the ultimate goal ? What will having this national policy in place do for us that isn't being done now. Will all local communities have to shelve their own methods and adopt the new policy ?

Its funny because the goal is set up NOT by Gore but by a Op Ed in the Washington Post.

But now since Gore said its a good idea I see why you are against it.

How a national food policy could save millions of American lives - The Washington Post

Again this did not come from Al Gore this was written by 4 guys on the WashPo Op Ed.

I'm against it no matter who the hell came up with it. It's classic nanny bullshit. They don't really care about having healthy people. They are worried about money. We have Obama care now anyway. That will cure whatever ails us.

 

[Rotagilla]

Ok.so now you DO believe the government is honest, trustworthy and only does what's best for the people.

If you spent less time looking for cute doggy cartoons, you might understand my posts.

I don't know how many times I can say it's not about belief. I don't "believe" anything about the government. I am a realist about it.

If you'd stop running in circles we could have a mature discussion...but THAT'S not going to happen, is it?

....so anyway... you know they're dishonest, but you want to give the gvmt more power...this time it's some food scam they're trying to run on us...

it's just one "crisis" after another with this administration...and they can only be "fixed" with more government intervention and laws and regulations... you statists...transparent as glass...

Go find more little doggies.

evasion

You clearly don't wish to have a mature discussion.

I made many good, solid points. You run in circles.

I clearly know, and you don't, that "government" isn't a naughty 7-year-old boy named "Dennis."

diversion

Of course there's room for corruption and dishonesty.

So we agree that government shouldn't be trusted because it's corrupt and dishonest.

Duh. And with an involved electorate, the government has more incentive to do the right thing.

people that begin sentences with "duh" forfeit the right to complain about "mature discussion".

But cartoon dogs make you the epitome of maturity?

you keep evading the topic to deflect and talk about emoticons.
go chase your tail some more.

 

[peach174]

Problem----a "National Policy" means ONE policy. Classic liberal thinking. One food solution for every American.
Epic fail.

Yep
That is the way the left always sell it.
Government is not doing a good job because it is old and outdated, so we need more government to correct it rather than correcting the old outdated laws.
It is the same tired old snake oil sale of government isn't doing their job so government needs to clean it up.
It's insane.