New ‘safety plan’ would control what you eat

New ‘safety plan’ would control what you eat

‘It is to our food what the bailout was to our economy, only we can live without money’

---

Posted: May 01, 2010
11:30 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

Critics say a bill pending in the U.S. Senate would do for Americans’ food supply what “Obamacare” is doing to the nation’s supply of health-care resources.

And it’s generating a surge of alarm among small-farm operators and natural food advocates.

“S. 510, the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2010, may be the most dangerous bill in the history of the U.S.,” writes Steve Green on the Food Freedom blog. “It is to our food what the bailout was to our economy, only we can live without money.”

The plan is sponsored by U.S. Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., who explains the legislation “is a critical step toward equipping the FDA with the authorities and funding it needs to regulate what is now a global marketplace for food, drugs, devices, and cosmetics.”

Now it’s statism on our plate! Mark Levin’s manifesto – ‘Liberty and Tyranny’ – provides the antidote to its growing stranglehold

His website explains, “The legislation requires foreign and domestic food facilities to have safety plans in place to prevent food hazards before they occur, increases the frequency of inspections. Additionally, it provides strong, flexible enforcement tools, including mandatory recall. Most importantly, this bill generates the resources to support FDA food safety activities.”

The proposal, which was cleared by the U.S. House last year but has been languishing in the Senate because of a full calendar of projects, creates a long list of new requirements for food-producing entities to meet the demands of the Secretary of Agriculture. It is expected to be the subject of discussion in coming days.

According to a summary of the proposal, it “requires annual registration of food facilities, including food facilities that export foot.” It also sets up a suspension of registration for any “food facility” breaking any Health and Human Services rule, creates an annual fee for registration and gives bureaucratic oversight of many operations.

One such proposal, the summary explains, is to require federal officials “to establish a tracing system for food that is located in the United States or is for import into the United States that enables the Secretary to quickly identify each person who grows, produces, manufactures, processes, packs, transports, holds, or sells such food.”

While it includes an exemption for food “produced on a farm,” the absence of further definition is leaving many wondering whether they will be monitored if they pick strawberries, make jam and sell it at a farmers market.

Green’s analysis quoted Shiv Chopra, a Canada Health whistleblower, who concluded S. 510 “would preclude the public’s right to grow, own, trade, transport, share, feed and eat each and every food that nature makes.”

Does your doctor really know best? Get this straight-forward examination of how to make sure you feel your best every day!

Bill Heid, chief of Solutions from Science, a marketer for survival seeds and information on processes to reduce reliance on a supermarket chain, cited a number of concerns.

First, he said, the new layers of regulations will drive up prices. No producer, he said, can afford to expand massively the expense of meeting government requirements without paying for it, and that would have to be passed on to the customers.

Second, he is concerned about the application of laws designed for corporate entities to the local producer: What about Iowa children who want to sell ears of corn at a farmers market or alongside the road?

Further, he said, the plan probably would raise the danger to consumers, because manylocal suppliers would be forced out of business, and his or her customers would be forced to rely on the corporate supply chains.

“What they’re going to do is end up making it unsafe,” Heid said.

He tells people their best defense against contaminated products is to grow their own or buy it from someone they know.

According to a report at Oregon Rural Action, which urged consumers to contact their members of Congress on the issue, the “one-size-fits-all” concept isn’t workable.

“S. 510 is a well-meaning attempt to address the genuine problems of contamination from food-borne pathogens and complications in prevention and intervention caused by large, industrialized food distribution systems,” the group said.

“All of the well-publicized incidents of contamination in recent years – spinach, peppers, peanuts, hamburger – occurred in industrialized food supply chains that span national and even international boundaries. Food safety is a priority shared by all. It is not compromised by the growing trend toward healthy, fresh, locally sourced vegetables

, meats, fruits, dairy and small processing firms reinvigorating local food systems. Local food systems are inherently safer and traceable,” the group said.

While the group said some definitions that would protect small operations apparently are in the works, the possibility remains of standards even for “small, direct market farmers.”

The bill opponents say it brings the “complex and burdensome” Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point system “to even the smallet local processors.”

“Applying a HACCP system to newly emerging local foods facilities processing for local markets as well as to direct market farmers adding value to their products may undermine and extinguish these emerging small businesses attempting to bring fresh, local foods to the American table,” the analysis said.

The Daily Paul, which dedicates itself to restoring constitutional government, warned the proposal also would undermine the public’s access to dietary supplements.

At Citizens For Health, the bill’s expansion of government authority and bureacracy was condemned.

“If passed, the law would charge facilities an annual $500 registration fee, require redundant record keeping, and expand the FDA’s authority to quarantine geographic areas for alleged food safety problems – all without significantly improving food safety.”

The Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance warned, “As it is currently written, S. 510 will actually make our food less safe. S. 510 will strengthen the forces that have led to the consolidation of our food supply in the hands of a few industrial food producers.”

New Rasmussen Poll Shows J.D. Hayworth Gaining On John McCain : 47% vs 42% Spread Of Only 5%!

New Rasmussen Poll Shows J.D. Hayworth Gaining On John McCain : 47% vs 42% Spread Of Only 5%!Posted on April 30, 2010 by Political Ape

A new Rasmussen poll shows J.D. Hayworth gaining on John McCain:

Incumbent John McCain now earns just 47% support to challenger J.D. Hayworth’s 42% in Arizona’s hotly contested Republican Senate Primary race, according to the latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of likely primary voters.

McCain has been losing ground since January when he picked up 53% of the potential GOP Primary vote and Hayworth had only 31% support. Last month, the longtime senator and 2008 GOP presidential candidate earned 48% of the vote, while 41% of likely primary voters supported his challenger.

Report from Cochise County, Arizona

By T.J. Woodard

Being an avid AT reader, and living on the Arizona border in Cochise County, I thought I would provide those who wish to be informed some insight into the truth about the state of the U.S.-Mexican border — at least in this part of the state.

I moved to Cochise County after retiring from the Army in 2008 to take a position working at Fort Huachuca (pronounced “wa-choo-ka,” an Apache word meaning “place of thunder” and referring to the time after the summer monsoon season). Having lived here in 1991 for eight months while attending an Army school, I soon realized that the place had changed considerably in the eighteen years of my absence.

The first thing I noticed was how many border patrol vehicles were on the roads in the city of Sierra Vista. The Border Patrol has a large station near here in the city of Naco. There are far more Border Patrol vehicles in the area than SV police cars. They come in many forms — trucks for off-road work, trailers carrying all-terrain vehicles, pickups with capacity for carrying large numbers of people once apprehended, and even a staff car for the area chaplain. The Border Patrol presence has grown substantially, so one would think the border area was nice and safe.

Not so. Within a short time after arriving in southern Arizona while on my way to work, I noticed eight illegal immigrants on the side of the road. Fortunately, they were in the custody of capable and attentive Border Patrol agents. Unfortunately, they were less than a hundred feet from my daughter’s bus stop. She gets personal service to school now, as the school district refuses to enter the gated community in which we live. There is a nice wash, a valley into which the rainwater drains during the monsoons, which provides a nice route for the illegals to follow into the city, and therefore into their locations for pickup by the vehicles that will get them farther north. 

Later, after I attended a movie on a Friday night, a car passed by me in the next lane going nearly a hundred miles an hour. It took a few seconds before I saw the police behind — way behind — with lights and sirens, trying to catch up. Surprise, surprise — the next morning’s paper discussed a Mexican drug runner being caught by County Sheriff’s Deputies. On several occasions, the Border Patrol’s helicopter has flown low and slow over the neighborhood, rattling windows and shining its spotlight in our backyard. When this happens, I strap on my pistol, grab a flashlight, and look and listen. Fortunately, I haven’t found anybody within a hundred yards of the house — yet.

Working on a U.S. Army fort, one would think we were fairly secure from these threats. Just not true. Reading the Fort Huachuca newspaper one morning, I noticed an interesting part of the “community” page. It asked for volunteers to assist in cleaning up “dumps” on posts where the illegals would drop their supplies used to cross the border and change clothing. They do this in order to blend in and not look like they just spent a day or two crossing the border in the dust and heat of southern Arizona. The most frightening part of this is that Fort Huachuca is the U.S. Army Intelligence Center, where the Army trains its intelligence soldiers — analysts, interrogators, radio intercept specialists, and counterintelligence agents — for operations overseas. If we can’t secure the fort we use to train our intelligence soldiers, how can we secure anything else?

Much has been discussed about the new law in Arizona making it unlawful to be in Arizona in violation of federal immigration statutes. However, much less has been discussed about the shooting of rancher Robert Krentz. Robert was killed on his ranch on March 28, 2010. His ranch, on which the family began grazing cattle in 1907 (Arizona became a state in 1912), is a large, 35,000-acre area in remote Cochise County. It is so remote that the original Cochise, an Apache leader, used the mountainous terrain near it to hide from the U.S. Cavalry in the early 1870s. But much less is being said about the eight illegal immigrants and their load of 280 pounds of marijuana seized the day before Krentz was killed. 

So Arizona should be boycotted because its people would like to keep it safe? Somebody please explain the logic of that for me. It doesn’t take a bullet from a drug runner’s gun to make those of us down here near the border understand that this is drug-related violence — and Rob’s death proves it.

It also doesn’t take much more reading to see that the drug dealers are a huge problem with far-reaching capabilities. On April 27, 2010, a large drug bust took place here in Cochise County. Among those arrested was Angelica Marie Borquez, the secretary for the Drug Enforcement Division of the Cochise County Attorney office. Allegedly, Ms. Borquez was tipping off the drug runners to counter drug operations conducted by the county. She was so bold that she used the phone in the County Attorney’s office to make some of her calls. 

This isn’t a blatant effort by drug cartels to obtain control here in America?

Many have already called Arizona residents racists. They are concerned that police will profile Hispanics and disproportionally harass them. But we understand something others in Washington, D.C. and San Francisco don’t seem to remember — we border Mexico. The fact is that most illegal immigrants coming across the border here are, well, Mexicans. Those of us down here facing the danger every day really don’t care what some Hollywood actor has to say about the issue. Nor do we care about what the Colombian government or the Latino music community thinks of it. We just want to stay safe.

This is not about race; it’s about facts. Use a few of these facts the next time somebody wants to engage you in discussion about the border. Tell him you learned these things from somebody who can see Mexico from his front porch.

T.J. Woodard is a retired Army officer who lives less than ten miles from the Mexican border. He carries a pistol even in his own house in order to be prepared to defend his family whenever necessary.

Boehner: ‘At least 100 seats’ are in play…

Boehner: GOP Will Repeal Health Care Law

by NPR Staff

April 30, 2010

Listen to the Story

Morning Edition

[5 min 4 sec]

• Add to Playlist
• Download
• Transcript

 

Enlarge Haraz N. Ghanbari/APHouse Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) says his party will enact common-sense steps to lower the cost of health care if his party wins the majority in November’s midterm election.

Haraz N. Ghanbari/APHouse Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) says his party will enact common-sense steps to lower the cost of health care if his party wins the majority in November’s midterm election.

text size A A A

April 30, 2010

House Republican Leader John Boehner has said that his party will repeal the new health care law if the GOP gains a congressional majority in November.

“I think that we need to repeal the health care law and replace it with common-sense steps that will lower the cost of health insurance in America,” Boehner (R-OH) tells NPR’s Steve Inskeep.

Boehner and the Republicans are hoping for a repeat of 1994, when the GOP swept the midterm elections. He says the party is engaging with the public to develop the agenda it will enact if it secures a majority in November.

The party that controls the White House typically loses House seats during midterm elections, and Democrats are bracing for losses: 37 governorships, 36 Senate seats and the entire 435-member House are at stake.

Boehner says he’s optimistic about his party’s prospects, citing public anger over spending and debt. He says he believes “at least 100 seats” are in play.

“If [Republican Sen.] Scott Brown can win in Massachusetts, there isn’t a seat in America the Republicans can’t win,” Boehner says. “What we’re seeing every day is the playing field widen, widen beyond anything we’ve seen around here during my 20 years.”

But Republicans face criticism that much of their time in the minority has been spent opposing Democratic proposals. Boehner rejects that charge, saying his party offered ideas on the stimulus bill, the budget and health care.

“If you look over the course of the last 16 months, every time we’ve had to oppose our Democrat colleagues, we’ve offered what we thought was a better solution,” he says.

GIs guard S. Korea border but not ours

GIs guard S. Korea border but
not ours

May. 1, 2010 12:00 AM
I wish someone could explain to me how we
can afford to keep troops in Japan to protect
it from China, keep troops in South Korea to
protect it from North Korea, keep troops in
Germany to protect it from Russia, keep
troops in Kosovo to protect it from Serbia,
etc.

But we can’t afford to station even one squad
of Army troops to protect our own border
from the criminal element, drug merchants
and possible terrorists that freely “invade”
us daily.

I venture that if we were an independent
nation instead of just one of 50 states,  
Arizona could probably enter into a treaty
with the United States that would provide us
with border protection similar to that so
many other nations enjoy at our expense. –  
Carl Olsen,

“I want to explain why SB 1070 is needed.” by Arizona State Senator Sylvia Allen

“I want to explain why SB 1070 is needed.”

by Arizona State Senator Sylvia Allen
 
           I’m Arizona State Senator Sylvia Allen. I want to explain SB 1070 which I voted for and was just signed by Governor Jan Brewer.
           Rancher Rob Krentz was murdered by the drug cartel on his ranch a month ago. I participated in a senate hearing two weeks ago on the border violence, here is just some of the highlights from those who testified.
 
           The people who live within 60 to 80 miles of the Arizona/Mexico Border have for years been terrorized and have pleaded for help to stop the daily invasion of humans who cross their property . One Rancher testified that 300 to 1200 people a DAY come across his ranch vandalizing his property, stealing his vehicles and property, cutting down his fences, and leaving trash. In the last two years he has found 17 dead bodies and two Koran bibles.
 
           Another rancher testified that daily drugs are brought across his ranch in a military operation. A point man with a machine gun goes in front, 1/2 mile behind are the guards fully armed, 1/2 mile behind them are the drugs, behind the drugs 1/2 mile are more guards. These people are violent and they will kill anyone who gets in the way. This was not the only rancher we heard that day that talked about the drug trains.
 
           One man told of two illegal’s who came upon his property one shot in the back and the other in the arm by the drug runners who had forced them to carry the drugs and then shot them. Daily they listen to gun fire during the night it is not safe to leave his family alone on the ranch and they can’t leave the ranch for fear of nothing being left when they come back.
 
           The border patrol is not on the border. They have set up 60 miles away with check points that do nothing to stop the invasion. They are not allowed to use force in stopping anyone who is entering. They run around chasing them, if they get their hands on them then they can take them back across the border.
 
           Federal prisons have over 35% illegal’s and 20% of Arizona prisons are filled with illegal’s. In the last few years 80% of our law enforcement that have been killed or wounded have been by an illegal.
 
           The majority of people coming now are people we need to be worried about. The ranchers told us that they have seen a change in the people coming they are not just those who are looking for work and a better life.
 
           The Federal Government has refused for years to do anything to help the border states. We have been over run and once they are here we have the burden of funding state services that they use. Education cost have been over a billion dollars. The healthcare cost billions of dollars. Our State is broke, $3.5 billion deficit and we have many serious decisions to make. One is that we do not have the money to care for any who are not here legally. It has to stop.
           The border can be secured. We have the technology we have the ability to stop this invasion. We must know who is coming and they must come in an organized manner legally so that we can assimilate them into our population and protect the sovereignty of our country. We are a nation of laws. We have a responsibility to protect our citizens and to protect the integrity of our country and the government which we live under.
 
           I would give amnesty today to many, but here is the problem, we dare not do this until the Border is secure. It will do no good to forgive them because thousands will come behind them and we will be over run to the point that there will no longer be the United States of America but a North American Union of open borders. I ask you what form of government will we live under? How long will it be before we will be just like Mexico, Canada or any of the other Central American or South American countries? We have already lost our language, everything must be printed in Spanish also. We have already lost our history it is no longer taught in our schools. And we have lost our borders.
 
           The leftist media has distorted what SB 1070 will do. It is not going to set up a Nazi Germany. Are you kidding. The ACLU and the leftist courts will do everything to protect those who are here illegally, but it was an effort to try and stop illegal’s from setting up businesses, and employment, and receiving state services and give the ability to local law enforcement when there is probable cause like a traffic stop to determine if they are here legally. Federal law is very clear if you are here on a visa you must have your papers on you at all times. That is the law. In Arizona all you need to show you are a legal citizen is a driver license, MVD identification card, Native American Card, or a Military ID. This is what you need to vote, get a hunting license, etc.. So nothing new has been added to this law. No one is going to be stopped walking down the street etc… The Socialist who are in power in DC are angry because we dare try and do something and that something the Socialist wants us to do is just let them come. They want the “Transformation” to continue.
 
           Maybe it is too late to save America. Maybe we are not worthy of freedom anymore. But as an elected official I must try to do what I can to protect our Constitutional Republic. Living in America is not a right just because you can walk across the border. Being an American is a responsibility and it comes by respecting and upholding the Constitution the law of our land which says what you must do to be a citizen of this country. Freedom is not free.

Respectfully,

Sylvia Allen

Arizona State Senator

Enough Already — Just Move the UN to Iran

The UN’s Economic and Social Council has just elected Iran to a seat on the UN’s women’s rights commission. Wouldn’t it be easier to just ship the entire UN, lock, stock and seating arrangements, to Iran?

Smearing Arizona

Posted By Joseph Klein On April 30, 2010 @ 12:03 am In FrontPage | 13 Comments

^[1]

Visit NewsRealBlog ^[1]

The New York Times has hit a new low today in its lead editorial, entitled “Stopping Arizona.”  The Times maliciously misrepresented Arizona’s new law ^[2], intended to combat the ravages within its borders caused by illegal immigration.  The Times‘ lies are typical of the race-baiting tactics employed by the progressive left ^[3].

For example, the Times falsely claimed:

The statute requires police officers to stop and question anyone who looks like an illegal immigrant.

The truth is precisely the opposite.  The new law does not empower local law enforcement officers to pick up anyone they wish who looks like he or she doesn’t belong in this country.  It requires first that the officer have a separate legal basis for coming into “lawful contact” with the individual, such as a speeding violation.  Then – and only if the officer has “reasonable suspicion” that this individual may be in the country illegally –  can the officer ask to see the individual’s documents which federal law requires aliens residing in this country to carry with them at all times.

“Reasonable suspicion” is a court-defined standard, not a broad mandate for police harassment based on a person’s appearance.  The Arizona statute provides specific guidelines to govern law enforcement officers, including a list of documents such as an Arizona driver’s license which an officer must presume is sufficient proof that someone producing such a document is legally in the country.

Maybe the Times and other critics of the “reasonable suspicion” standard – including President Obama for that matter – should read the federal law stating that if an alien is encountered and they are not carrying ID they are in fact in violation of the law (8 USC 1304 (e)) ^[4]and subject to fine or imprisonment.  The Arizona law is designed to aid in enforcement of this federal requirement, including requiring police officers to contact the federal government as soon as practicable when they suspect a person is an illegal alien.

To make sure that the new law will not be used as a justification for racial profiling, it provides that a law enforcement official, in making any stops and subsequent inquiries into immigration status:

may not solely consider race, color or national origin

The Arizona law also requires that it

be implemented in a manner consistent with federal laws regulating immigration, protecting the civil rights of all persons and respecting the privileges and immunities of United States citizens.

The New York Times shares an underlying progressive agenda of open borders ^[5]with a coalition of radical groups spearheaded by such entities as the National Lawyers Guild, the Center for Constitutional Rights, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund ^[6], and the American Civil Liberties Union.

For example, the Times goes so far as to criticize another Arizona law, now before the Supreme Court, that revokes the business licenses of employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants.  The Times evidently does not care about the near slave labor conditions that some illegal aliens are trapped in by exploitative employers.  Anything that might get in the way of the open borders philosophy is a no-no to the progressive crowd.

At the end of its editorial, the Times asks rhetorically:

Is our core belief still the welcome and assimimilation of newcomers?

The answer can still be yes while maintaining the rule of law.  It has never been the core belief of this country that anyone from anywhere in the world is entitled as a matter of right to enter this country whenever and however they want without following the rules for lawful entry and residence.

Obama’s fatal flinch on immigration reform

May 1st, 2010

By Dana Milbank, Washington Post

Air Force One was about seven miles over Appalachia this week when President Obama dropped a bomb on his party.

Senate Democrats had that very day circulated an immigration reform proposal, and the Associated Press, receiving a leaked copy, reported on the “draft legislation.”

But as Obama returned to Washington from Illinois Wednesday night, he walked back to the press cabin on the presidential aircraft and, in an impromptu Q&A, essentially declared immigration reform dead. He said “there may not be an appetite” for it.

Obama’s retreat — after encouraging senators only weeks ago to take up immigration reform — clotheslined Senate Democrats. Since their proposal had already been leaked, they had no choice but to go ahead with the rollout of the plan Obama had just doomed. “I don’t know in what context the statement was made last night,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told reporters at Thursday night’s rollout.

Well, Mr. Leader, the context is fear. As the Arizona abomination makes clear, there is a desperate need for federal immigration action to stop the country from turning into a nation of vigilantes suspicious of anybody with dark skin. But leaders on both sides have instead run for the hills, called there by the yodels from their respective extremes.

Read More:

Border disorder: Arizona deputy shot in desert

By Michelle Malkin  •  April 30, 2010 10:46 PM

Just doing the cop-shooting ordinary Americans won’t do, it seems. Via the Arizona Republic:

A Pinal County Sheriff’s deputy was shot in the stomach Friday by a suspected drug smuggler off Interstate 8, according sheriff’s officials.

Lt. Tami Villar told 12 News that the search and rescue deputy was investigating a load of marijuana in the desert and was confronted by five suspects.

Deputies believe at least two people were armed with long guns and at least one handgun. The deputy, whose name was not released, was patrolling alone in what is considered a high-traffic drug and human-smuggling corridor.

Villar said the deputy radioed dispatch about 4:30 p.m. to say he had been shot off Interstate 8 and Arizona 84, but he could not be found when authorities arrived at the scene.

The deputy was located more than an hour later and taken to the Casa Grande Regional Medical Center for treatment. He is expected to survive.

Authorities are still on the hunt for all five suspects.

Allahpundit has a complete rundown at Hot Air and ties the incident to the new Arizona immigration enforcement law:

Critics of the new law have been demanding a fact pattern by which “reasonable suspicion” might lawfully arise. Well, this one seems promising: A desert search along a route known to be used by coyotes turns up illegal drugs, with further investigation revealing a group of people nearby. Under the circumstances, suspicion of a crime committed by illegals doesn’t seem so wingnutty. And, I emphasize, it’s just suspicion: Could be that these would-be cop-killers are bona fide U.S. citizens. But then, that’s what the law is for — to let cops ascertain status in dubious circumstances. Assuming they were all in a car on a suspected coyote route, were pulled over for speeding, and no one in the car could offer any address of U.S. residence, names of U.S. relatives, etc., shouldn’t “reasonable suspicion” obtain?

***

Flashback: Houston PD officer Rodney Johnson gunned down by previously deported illegal alien.

Flashback: Denver police officer Donnie Young murdered by illegal alien protected by reckless sanctuary policy.

Flashback: Chapter 5, Invasion — In Cold Blood: Foreign Cop-Killers on the Loose.

Flashback: MS-13 targets cops.