Monsanto

[chemfx 0]

i never come into speakers corner, but was checking to see what if any thing was been discussed about the monsanto protection act.

nothing...

no praise &/or bashing of the president or monsanto?

why is he protecting them?

or is he just protecting his recently appointed FDA guy?

WTF!

[NewGuy2005 53]

Fill us in, please.

[lawrocket 3]

There is language in the Agricultural Appropriations Bill which was passed last week and signed into on Monday that strips federal courts of jurisdiction to hear cases regarding GMO heslth risks. So if there is a tomato with a peanut gene in it, and people with peanut allergies start keeling over from eating those tomatoes, federal courts are powerless to order an injunction preventing further sale, etc.

See, federal courts can't be lobbied. By leaving it up to the FDA to do anything, and having someone like Michael Taylor as head of the FDA, there is a heavy tilt towards Monsanto with everything.

Part of the issue was that the rider that does this was anonymously inserted. Nobody knows how it got into the bill. It never went through subcommittee or committee.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[chemfx 0]

sneaky fuker$

FDA

monsanto

[NewGuy2005 53]

Thanks guys. Government in action again.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Thanks guys. Government in action again.

Bingo.

This isn't "corporations in action." It's GOVERNMENT in action.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[OHCHUTE 0]

Quote

Quote

Thanks guys. Government in action again.

Bingo.

This isn't "corporations in action." It's GOVERNMENT in action.

And who owns the gov't. Corps and Wall Street.

[DanG 1]

Quote

This isn't "corporations in action." It's GOVERNMENT in action.

Sounds to me like it's a team effort.

- Dan G

[aphid 0]

Quote

There is language (snip) that strips federal courts of jurisdiction to hear cases (snip).

Can you explain how this works? I was under the impression that your US Courts have jurisdiction to adjudicate anything that comes before them, if they choose. Doesn't removing that fail some kind of constitutional sniff-test?

NB: I'm no lawyer so please keep any response simple for me.

Thanks

John

[BillyVance 35]

There was also something about the diary industry wanting an exemption from having to show "Aspartame" in the list of ingredients, and be allowed to "hide" it as "and other assorted items" or something like that.

They know people are speaking out against Aspartame being a poison not meant for human consumption, and its in most, if not all, diet sodas.

I didn't know they had it in milk, cream, etc...

"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Quote

There is language (snip) that strips federal courts of jurisdiction to hear cases (snip).

Can you explain how this works? I was under the impression that your US Courts have jurisdiction to adjudicate anything that comes before them, if they choose. Doesn't removing that fail some kind of constitutional sniff-test?

NB: I'm no lawyer so please keep any response simple for me. Thanks John

Your issue-spotting instincts are good. What you're referring to is known as "jurisdiction stripping", and it is permitted under a provision of the Constitution that gives Congress a certain amount of power to limit the jurisdiction of the federal courts from hearing certain kinds of cases. This power is not absolute; it has limits. Here's a handy synopsis:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurisdiction_stripping

(Print it up and keep it in your pocket; you never know when you'll need it.)

[aphid 0]

Thank you for the link. I appreciate the information, more than you likely know. :)

John

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Quote

This isn't "corporations in action." It's GOVERNMENT in action.

Sounds to me like it's a team effort.

To some extent, yes. However, corporations do not vote in the exemptions or put them in. Think of it as parent/child. The parent may let the kid have access to the liquor cabinet and give him keys to the Porsche. Or the parent can say "no."

Lawmakers can take requests. And lawmakers can so no. It's a little known fact that lawmakers and government are authorized to say "no" to corporations and big money donors. They may actually decide against lobbyists!

Corporate influence is huge in government because government let's it be. I have no problem with corporations trying to grease the wheel. It's the acceptance of the grease by my fiduciaries that I have a big problem with.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Quote

Quote

This isn't "corporations in action." It's GOVERNMENT in action.

Sounds to me like it's a team effort.

To some extent, yes. However, corporations do not vote in the exemptions or put them in. Think of it as parent/child. The parent may let the kid have access to the liquor cabinet and give him keys to the Porsche. Or the parent can say "no."

Lawmakers can take requests. And lawmakers can so no. It's a little known fact that lawmakers and government are authorized to say "no" to corporations and big money donors. They may actually decide against lobbyists!

Corporate influence is huge in government because government let's it be. I have no problem with corporations trying to grease the wheel. It's the acceptance of the grease by my fiduciaries that I have a big problem with.

Many people have no idea just how much legislative language is actually (but quietly) ghost-written by corporations' lobbyists, or even their in-house staffs, and then submitted to friendly legislators, including members of Congress, who then adopt it in the language of bills and amendments they propose. I can't say a lot more for reasons of confidentiality, but I have direct personal/professional knowledge that it's a hell of a lot.

[DanG 1]

Quote

Corporate influence is huge in government because government let's it be.

This from a guy who wholeheartedly supports the Citizens United decision? When Congress tried to put limits on corporate influence you cheered when they got bitch slapped by the SC. You can't have unlimited, secret spending on campaigns, and simultaneously have limited corporate influence on elections. The two are mutually exclusive.

- Dan G

[Bertt 0]

Quote

Many people have no idea just how much legislative language is actually (but quietly) ghost-written by corporations' lobbyists

And this helps to explain why. ( emphasis added by me)

Quote

What Americans fail to appreciate is that controlling the text of legislation is the key to controlling Washington. When lobbyists can write the bills, they can control the government. Here, lobbyists are assisted by the American media. The media is so lazy that they rarely actually read bills. A lobbyist can count on the media's research ending at a congressman's claims in a press release. If a bill does something else, the media will never notice.

Maybe if we could just put each piece of legislation on Kim Kardashian's butt so journalists would bring it to the attention of the public we would have better informed voters.

You don't have to outrun the bear.

[NewGuy2005 53]

Quote

Maybe if we could just put each piece of legislation on Kim Kardashian's butt so journalists would bring it to the attention of the public we would have better informed voters.

Man, that's funny!!!

But true.

[ayevee8toryear 0]

The sheeple are too busy being all 'up in arms' about gun rights and gay rights to notice.

This is not by accident.

The 'corporate' media have blacked it out and hyped up other controversial issues as I stated above. This issue is ignored because even many of the most astute online 'government opposition' do not know about this, too much time looking up links on their favourite subjects.

The only ones that were talking about it before it was passed are those 'crazy conspiracy theorists' that have no idea about anything...

[ManagingPrime 0]

Quote

i never come into speakers corner, but was checking to see what if any thing was been discussed about the monsanto protection act.

nothing...

no praise &/or bashing of the president or monsanto?

why is he protecting them?

or is he just protecting his recently appointed FDA guy?

WTF!

It's not an issue where people are informed well enough to be comfortable calling the other side stupid. Nevermind the fact we are dealing with potential unintended consequences that could result in the extinction of our species.

Welcome to the sc.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

This from a guy who wholeheartedly supports the Citizens United decision?

Absolutely. May seem odd but I don’t want speech curtailed. Note that Congress sought to place limits not on THEMSELVES but on others. Here’s an example of the way it works:

Congressperson/Bureaucrat: “I’ve got an opening for three days on my schedule. I have no idea what to do with my time.”
Lobbyist 1: “How about Disneyland? You can take your family and I’ve got a nice conference room so you can get some work done.”
C/B: “Naw. I need to get some real work done. Looking at perhaps something outside of the US. Subcommittee work, you know.”
Lobbyist 2: “How about a trip to Mexico City? We can meet with some foreign government officials.”
C/B: “No. They don’t have much to contribute to me, er, the discussion right now.”
Lobbyist 3: “It just so happens that I’ve got a private jet and three days at the Puntacana. I’ve got some folks from Pharma and some scientists who will offer an opinion. They’re wondering who to contribute to for a campaign and just need some assurances that the FDA won’t be after them.”
C/B: “Last time I was there, I wasn’t as impressed with the activities as I could have been.”
Lobbyist 3: “This is a working trip. There won’t be space or time for your family to interfere. That jet has three stewardesses who will have to be at the resort, too. Here’s their picture. Their room, unfortunately, will be right net door.”
C/B: “Okay. But I have a campaign coming up.

I know. What’s the
When Congress tried to put limits on corporate influence you cheered when they got bitch slapped by the SC.

Quote

You can't have unlimited, secret spending on campaigns, and simultaneously have limited corporate influence on elections.

I don’t give a shit about corporate influence on elections. I give a shit about the culture of quid pro quo in the Capitol.

What you are saying is the equivalent of blaming the drug dealer for selling coke to the addict and merely stating, “The drugs must be removed from society so that people will not be tempted to use them.” Indeed, that’s what the drug war has been about, hasn’t it? And we see how that has worked.

Me? I put the blame on the person who snorted it. Here’s an idea – when offered a line of coke don’t sniff it.

I understand that money is like crack to an addict. I’m merely suggesting that instead of the addicts passing laws making it illegal for people to deal them drugs (when, of course, we all know that they will end up getting scores under the table, anyway) and instead look at putting people into office who can actually say “no.”

So when I say I object to laws precluding people or groups thereof from funding or making political speech, I mean it. I put the onus on the legislator/bureaucrat to insulate himself or herself.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[mistercwood 287]

Everything I've read about Monsanto horrifies me. Keep that shit. The fuck. Away. From me.

You are playing chicken with a planet - you can't dodge and planets don't blink. Act accordingly.

[ManagingPrime 0]

Quote

Everything I've read about Monsanto horrifies me. Keep that shit. The fuck. Away. From me.

Good luck with that when we're talking genetics.

[mistercwood 287]

Quote

Quote

Everything I've read about Monsanto horrifies me. Keep that shit. The fuck. Away. From me.

Good luck with that when we're talking genetics.

*sigh* I know... I just find the entire approach to be the absolute worst version of capitalism gone wrong - their entire approach is to make as much cash as possible with zero thought or accountability for what could become an incredibly dangerous outcome.

Oh yay. My quick google search tells me they're already over here. Well. Fuck.

You are playing chicken with a planet - you can't dodge and planets don't blink. Act accordingly.

[winsor 236]

Quote

Quote

Everything I've read about Monsanto horrifies me. Keep that shit. The fuck. Away. From me.

Good luck with that when we're talking genetics.

"We're all Devo!"

[ManagingPrime 0]

This thread inspired me to re-watch a documentary on Monsanto that I have not watched in some time. If you don't know what complete pieces of shit these guys are it's worth the watch.

http://www.veoh.com/watch/v8968165kYRdfmYC?h1=The+World+According+to+Monsanto

Our government has their fingerprints all over this company. The kinds of things that make one go "hmmmmmm".....