_ap_ufes{"success":true,"siteUrl":"freetheanimal.com","urls":{"Home":"http://freetheanimal.com","Category":"http://freetheanimal.com/blog-admin","Archive":"http://freetheanimal.com/2014/07","Post":"http://freetheanimal.com/2014/07/revisiting-resistant-nutritional.html","Page":"http://freetheanimal.com/advertising-product-service","Nav_menu_item":"http://freetheanimal.com/2014/07/subscribe.html","Content_ad_widget":"http://freetheanimal.com/?content_ad_widget=widget-2-5x118"}}_ap_ufee

Laf: 100% of Senate Democrats Vote Against Farmers and For the FDA

I'm not a huge fan of Natural News—not that I know a ton about it, either—because so often, to me, it's tainted by the Appeal to Nature logical fallacy and has a conspiratorial bent. I could be wrong. Just my general impression as I never explicitly follow it.

Anyhoo, Mike Adams pretty much nails it here: Freedom watch: Not a single Democrat voted in favor of ending FDA raids on raw milk farmers.

Here's some news for those who still somehow believe the political left in Washington cares about the People. After U.S. Senator Rand Paul introduced an amendment that would have ended armed FDA raids on raw milk farmers and legalized free speech about the curative properties of medicinal herbs, nutritional supplements and superfoods, are you curious how many Democrats voted in favor of this?

Zero.

Big fat zero, to be exact.

Not a single Democrat in the United States Senate believes in fundamental food freedom, farm freedom or the principles of liberty. Every single Democrat in the Senate is a Big Brother sellout who supports the FDA having more guns pointed in the faces of raw milk farmers, arresting them and throwing them in prison, criminalizing real food and destroying America's small family farms.

Every single Democrat in the U.S. Senate believes that telling the truth about the beneficial effects of Chinese Medicine, or medicinal herbs, or nutritional supplements should be a crime that can also get you raided, shut down and imprisoned by the FDA. There is not a single Democrat who sees anything wrong with the government sending herbal product formulators to prison. There is not a single Democrat who believes that an Amish farmer has the right to milk a cow and sell that milk to their neighbor without being threatened by the government.

This is an astonishing milestone in U.S. history. When those in Washington who pretend to represent the People openly and publicly vote to crush the very liberties and freedoms they claim to protect, you no longer have a real Democracy. You have a police state.

Well, you've had a police state for a long time. They're just more open about it, now, with Democrats leading the way and Republicans not far behind—they being more like the Mafia Don who knows what's "bad for business." ...One might say that Democrats are more concerned with what's bad for the State, Republicans, what's bad for business. Only thing is, the State doesn't actually produce anything, just steals and redistributes.

I do find it gratifying, though. From almost total Democrat Party opposition to the 13th Amendment to end slavery (with all or nearly 100% Republican support), to its opposition to the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s, I'm reminded of what I heard P. J. O'Rourke say at a CATO luncheon I attended way back on the difference between the two parties:

Democrats: Smart politicians, dumb voters

Republicans: Dumb politicians, smart voters

The relevant juxtaposition, to me, is that of the patsy moron Democrat voters, combined with the appallingly stupid Republican Party elite. I suppose it's a balance of power, of sorts.

How many run-of-the-mill Democrat voters do you suppose are not wholly ignorant of the Democrat Party's 100 year history of staunch opposition to every single of dozens of federal and state initiatives sponsored by Republicans, that sought greater freedom and economic parity for blacks? Here, this guy runs them all down for you.

It is to laf. In the end, though, "smart politicians" rings true for Democrats. Once they were defeated in keeping blacks enslaved and dependent upon private party slaveholders, they adapted, and over the last 50 years have successfully re-enslaved and made them dependent on the State.

Share 28 Google +1 12 Retweet 10 Like 79

Comments

  1. Barry Goldwater voted against the Civil Rights Act as it abridged a fundamental ‘Right of Englishmen’ i.e. freedom of association. He would’ve voted for it if it just outlawed government treating people differently but it forced associations on private concerns thereby pushing the commerce clause rape of the free market into a higher gear.

    • Yes, but context. I get all of that.

      He had a principled reason for voting against it, just as Ron Paul voted against most stuff. The Democrats opposed it because they had racist Democrat constituencies who elected them and they were beholden to.

      • I’m not contradicting you, just pointing out that there was nothing wrong in voting against the CRA for Goldwater’s reasons. I think you’ll agree

      • Of course. For the same reasons I’m opposed to “affirmative action,” which is merely euphemism for: “you got screwed by some people so we’re we’re going to screw people back for you, not necessarily the same ones.”

        Ha, you made me think of an old Steve Martin bit about “The Fart Zone.” (1:46 bit, but he doesn’t get going until about a minute in).

        http://youtu.be/epm4Q8qJfkg

  2. Of course, none of of the recipients “got screwed” either. Meanwhile, a group of people who had members put in death camps on the basis of their religion or ethnicity 70 years ago, some of whom are still alive, don’t bother asking for any comparable benefits. Not only that, but they are systematically over-represented in all institutions of power.

    I wonder what the difference is.

    • Dan, yea, I know. What can you say about the Jews, though?

      I suppose you can say generally that they were treated far worse not because of the color of their skin, but for the general outlier stringency of their minds, their high character, their strong and rather anarchistic culture and above all, their enthusiasm to use all of it to make the best of a real life on earth and as a result, prosper way above the norm.

      That said, the Jews qua religion rest as perhaps one of my greatest enigmas. Hugely mystical in some respects. Hugely rational in others.

      Can you explain it? Anyone else?

      • My bet’s on a fairly high proportion of neanderthal genes combined with a culture that reinforces professional success and helping out people who are like you (which might itself be the result of the genes).

      • They were also way overrepresented among Bolsheviks and other Marxist scum, especially the execution squads of the Cheka in USSR. For the pussies, no I’m not ‘blaming the victim.’ Truth is important. The Jews have mythologized themselves in the latter half of the 20th century as paragons of virtue maliciously attacked without any rationale whatsoever. Yes homicidal maniacs attacked them for spurious reasons, but that doesn’t mean they were spotless (as no group is).

      • To prevent Godwin’s law being broken, let me refer you to this book by the Jewish historian Yuri Slezkine.
        http://www.amazon.com/Jewish-Century-Yuri-Slezkine/dp/0691127603
        Its time to dump the Jews as Perpetual Victims mythology. Lots of people died in the horrible 50 years from 1900 to 1950, Jews were part of the victims, and sometimes the perpetrators.

      • Let me guess. Another “collectivize the atrocity” book?

        It’s quite popular, you know.

        And quite a predictable reaction. Since the guilt was collectivized, yet there were bad individuals, let’s go ahead and collectivize that guilt and just call it all even.

        Fuck that.

      • No its not, its a fascinating account of Jews in the 20th century. Its a mainstream historian not a crank, and its widely praised and contains no conspiracy theories. The point is not to collectivize anything. Its to knock down the Eternal Victim mythology around Jews. This is a 3D version of history not a boring 2D one.

      • Well to be conciliatory, no, Im not for the generalized, collectivization of victims either. Either you, an individual, are a victim with an associated victimizer, or you’re not. You’re not a victim just because of some racial, ethic, gender or special interest identity.

      • I have no idea under what “rational” that would in the remotest sense not be dropped out of hand that includes extermination in Germany for whatever sins individuals committed elsewhere.

        It’s non-sequitur.

  3. P. J. O’Roarke used to be relevant.

    I don’t think it is the republican elite that is stupid, I think it is the voters. The republican party used to be smart but then they let the evangelicals get a foothold and now they think that

    - girls keeping their legs closed is the best form of contraception
    - the planet Earth is only a few thousand years old
    - natural selection does not result in evolution of species over a period of millions of years
    - I have a Lord, and that Lord is invisible, but he used to be a guy who lived in the Middle east a couple of thousand years ago

    Many democrats believe or pretend to believe the same things but I don’t think that is much of a defense against a charge of “stupid.”

    • I have been told right here on this very site that “Jesus is your LORD!”

      I doubt that poster was a democrat, most likely she was a republican.

      Over the past thirty years the republican party has become the Jesus Party, so that unless a candidate has impeccable Jesus Credentials he or she has no chance of being in contention for the nomination, leading to total crackpots becoming national political figures.

      I don’t really care if 100% of democrats voted against milk, I am lactose intolerant.

      What I would like is for everyone to cut back on the Jesus stuff. Imo it is the province of effeminate men and frustrated women.

    • “P. J. O’Roarke used to be relevant.”

      Really? I know. When he wrote for Car & Driver….or was it Motor Trend of some other deal like that.

      Other than that, the only other thing I read was “Parliament of Whores,” circa 1990. Old enough to srtill be relevant? Or, is you first paragraph simply meaningless?

      “I don’t think it is the republican elite that is stupid, I think it is the voters. The republican party used to be smart but then they let the evangelicals get a foothold and now they think that”

      Cool. You contradict your first sentence with your second.

      • And in case it’s not clear to you what I mean by that, it is precisely the Republican elite who have become so stupid. Ever since Evangelicals had a role in getting the Great Lord and Savior Reagan elected, the elite have never realized that was a point in time and Evangelicals are like a terrier who’ll just never let go. They’re a cancer, and all these idiots do is feed it and it will never get them anywhere.

        Stupid politicians.

      • “Cool. You contradict your first sentence with your second.”

        I don’t see how. Forty years ago the republican voters tended to be pretty well educated, now their only concerns are God, Guns and Gays. They disdain education.

        So it is the republican voters who are the problem. Where is the contradiction?

        The meme is that the republican elite is stupid, and the republican voters are smart, can you find me an instance where the republican voters were smart?

        The reality is that republican politicians are being smart in taking advantage of voters who are incredibly dumb.

        How stupid do you have to be to question evolution and natural selection in 2012?

        Plenty stupid.

      • “now their only concerns are God, Guns and Gays”

        Not really. The vocal minority. Most are more concerned with fiscal issues. And even most of the religious ones really mostly want to be left alone. Even the gay issue, even the abortion issue, most just don’t want to pay for it.

        This is the logic you get from leftist politics where its life’s blood is taking money to redistribute for various “social causes.”

        Go ahead. I know a ton of them. Ask a pro-gun, anti-abortion, anti gay republican how much money they are actually willing to spend to enforce their way. Now contrast that with a commie who wants to raise taxes in order to bring on their view of utopia.

        There’s a difference and it’s at the heart of the antagonism. When you force people to pay for stuff like schools and such, they are logicaly going to demand their say in how things are spent. But by and large, even godsquad republicans, if they had their rathers, would rather their money stay in their pocket to spend on their own values as they see fit.

        That’s why I generally don’t find godsquad republicans as evil as commie democrats.

      • Richard, I like your commentary on this subject. If I can get some time today I plan on contributing more. What is great about your blog is how it has evolved over the years. It seems you went from “only meat” to “some carbs are good” to “I’m pretty sure I am right but who the heck knows”. You have the courage to change your mind based on doing your own research and I respect that a great deal. My biggest issue with conservatives: the strong conservatives I know argue with a rigteous condesention which is unfair. I’ll be 33 next month and not a single republican in my lifetime has balanced a budget yet conservative publications like “National Review” consistenly write articles bashing liberals even though those they support have completely lost thier way. George Bush was not a conservative yet the publication created by Buckley, staunchly conservative, didn’t put his feet to the fire–instead they went liberal bashing.

      • Until Obama, Reagan and then King Bush the 2nd were the biggest spenders and increasers of Fed debt since LBJ.

        Largest tax cut in history: JFK

      • “How stupid do you have to be….”

        You’ve missed the point and the context.

        In WHAT context am I speaking here, rob?

  4. Here is the text of the discussion about the bill before it was voted on, for those who are interested: thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r112:1:./temp/~r112h11rJi:e204483: . The opposing viewpoint to this bill seems to be this: a big part of the FDA’s function right now is to enforce that nutritional claims about a product are truthful, and this amendment would essentially remove that power.
    From the discussion on the senate floor: “Under this amendment, substances that today are considered drugs and used to treat diseases as serious as cancer or HIV could be marketed without any rigorous FDA review that we have heard from many speakers here today is the gold standard of drug regulation throughout the world. It would turn our current system of drug regulation on its head. It would be a huge setback for health. It would foster a system rife with potential for health fraud. The big losers would be patients.”
    So while I wish legislation was passed legalizing raw milk, its not as simple as each senate democrat being a “Big Brother sellout who supports the FDA having more guns pointed in the faces of raw milk farmers.”

    • “From the discussion on the senate floor:”

      Any excuse for tyranny is as good as any other, I guess, so long as there are plenty of “discerning” and “distinguishing” apologists.

      Yea….hey, we don’t shut down those Amish and Chinese herbalists, it will be “a huge setback for health.” Fucking laf. Have you looked around at the “state of health”? Huh?

      “It would foster a system rife with potential for health fraud.”

      Laf.

      • Would you rather the FDA not be able to review the health claims of drugs for validity?

      • “Would you rather the FDA not be able to review the health claims of drugs for validity?”

        Funny how you pose that question.

        It’s kinda like a question, assuming there’s an all-powerful deity, would you rather the all-powerful deity not be able to do something he’s powerful enough to do, and there’s nothing to stop him.

        So, perhaps from that, you can glean the answer to your question.

        I’m guessing you haven’t read much of my blog. Which is OK. I perhaps ought not be so asshole always.

      • Lute Nikoley says:

        There are many drugs being prescribed by physicians every day that kill people which where approved by the FDA. Take statins for instance, doc’s will prescribe these even knowing the damage they do because they are approved by the FDA.

  5. Also, “100% of Senate Democrats Vote Against Farmers and For the FDA” isn’t entirely true – 4 senate democrats didn’t vote.

    • Goos point Matt – I was hoping someone would tell the whole story rather than the knee-jerk one. *sigh*

      • Yea, it’s an “excellent” point. So “knee jerk” to not point out that 4 abstenters didn’t actually vote, only 100% of those who did.

        Shit like that earns you a righteous “go fuck yourself.” *sigh*

      • I wasn’t trying to detract from the argument in the blog post, just pointing out that the title was incorrect.

      • Well, yea, OK, but what’s the point, really? It’s highly material that 4 of the what, 55 dem out of 100, abstained when 51, 100% of the other voted against?

        And if that’s material, then it would certainly be material to ask why they abstained.

        Red herring if I ever saw one, and I hate red herrings.

  6. it all comes down to the “nanny state” nonsense where the government is trying to protect people from themselves-

    god forbid a willing buyer would want to buy raw milk from a willing seller

    maybe they will legalize it for personal consumption- 1 gallon or less you get a pass

    • “god forbid a willing buyer would want to buy raw milk from a willing seller”

      Or that mom sends her kid down to the local drugstore for her morphine fix, like it used to be in the good ‘ole days when every fucking person was on their fucking own and we weren’t fucking with evolution in order to promote fuckups at the expense of those who get along.

      I’m no elitist and in fact, nothing thrills me more than to see someone come up from a mud pie to be a tycoon, honestly. I just hate fucking with the natural order of sink or swim.

    • “maybe they will legalize it for personal consumption- 1 gallon or less you get a pass”

      Or maybe they’ll take the Washington Stare route where if you smoke outdoors you have to prove it’s not marijuana, and if you smoke indoors you have to prove it’s not tobacco. :)

  7. appears paleo drama is defunct-

    http://paleodrama.tumblr.com/

    shit- it was always good for a laugh

    I guess the word cunt has a shelf life- lol

    • I doubt it. My tumblr blog is down too.

      However, last time I peeked, last post was like 2 weeks ago by now.

      • it appears her indignation is withering with the passing of the moons . . .

        time is a leveler of things big and small . . .

      • The real thing that was kinda underhanded about it is that when it first started, she didn’t identify herself. At a point she said “you haven’t figured it out yet?”

        Then, she had it opened up for people to contribute posts, and those posts were never attributed to her or anyone, so unless it was clear Melissa was speaking in the first person, you just didn’t know. And even, a couple of times, she feigned innocence over a couple of things posted because SHE didn’t submit them (just approved them for posting).

        ….Anyway, pretty hard to build something based exclusively on trashing other people.

      • dude-

        she was just pissed off and that was her way of venting . . .that’s the way I look at it-

        did she start tumblr anonymously? Maybe she was trying to “slap you down” without you knowing it was her?

        In any event it created “drama”- her goal I guess

      • Yea, it was anonymous in terms of it saying nothing about Melissa or anyone. It was only until perhaps a half dozen posts that little clues gave her up and she admitted it.

  8. Jay Booth says:

    If the FDA is the “gold standard” we’re proper fucked then.

    • “If the FDA is the “gold standard” we’re proper fucked then.”

      I would argue that the mere idea of a “gold standard” is a fool’s fantasy in the first place. It presupposes either that everyone will willingly accept the same standard of good, or that they must be compelled to.

      People from all different walks of life are going to have all sorts of different standards for all different sorts of things and it will be the case that one person or group’s standards appear as ludicrous to you or others.

      So be it. Everyone go mind their own fucking business.

      95-fucking% of EVERYTHING that goes on at all levels of government would be superfluous tomorrow but for everyone following one simple rule they out to have learned the first time they tattled: mind your own business.

      Of course, underlying that is the very root thing the State does: they seek to make everyone’s business everyone else’s.

  9. 15 Republican senators voted for the bill, as opposed to 0 Democrats. That lends support to Richard’s hypothesis.
    If you are fond of imagining worst case scenarios (analogous to the ridiculous ‘ticking time bomb’ torture question), then there’s enough horror in the current system to not need any imagination.
    There’s always 2 sides to a transaction – buyer and seller (at minimum). Positing retarded scenarios of people being cut open by plastic knives if patently stupid and disqualifies you from any intelligent discussion of systemic alternatives.
    Do yourself a favor and read a few books on the history of medicine and pharmacology in the United States pre-FDA instead of using your indoctrinated imagination.

    • The idiocy is yours dear Woo, for you not what you speak of. A simple read of history of medicine will cure you of your FDA fetish. Like Richard said, you could go down to the apothecary and get yourself as much morphine as you wanted, addiction rates weren’t any higher (probably significantly lower) and no one was dying on the street. Private underwriters and certifications that have long existed in electronics can easily fill the gap in the public’s knowledge as there is obviously demand to find out whether something will kill me. If such demand doesn’t exist, then there’s no demand! There are also reputational incentives which are severely distorted by the feds. The whole shebang is a sham.

      • “like going to the store to buy milk and KNOWING it is clean/safe, eh?”

        EXACTLY. Just like your spinach.

      • Hey Woo.

        Pop Quiz: How do you KNOW all all your electrical appliances are safe, i.e., won’t short out under normal use and shock you, burn your house down, etc?

      • “The supplement industry reminds me of why I love government so much. I’ve literally purchased bottles of pills and gotten sawdust and who knows what else.”

        I hear ya.

        https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=list+of+fda+recalled+drugs&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

        Laf.

        You remind me of someone who thinks the entire world began the day you were born, that the way things are done now are the only possible way they could ever have been done, and the best way.

        Another pop quiz: In the London Cholera epidemic, who figured it out and who blocked the solution?

      • Your assumptions are false and your ego is showing. Its particularly ironic for you of all people who know nothing about the history of medicine to lecture me on ‘zealotry’.

      • Indeed.

        In addition I would add the mandatory reading list.
        http://www.amazon.com/Economics-Regulation-Principles-Institutions/dp/0262610523

        Where the fuck is your evidence that regulation does what its intended to?
        Post hoc ergo propter hoc? What was the incidence of food borne illness before and after the FDA? What was the slope of the decrease if any?

        http://www.scu.edu/civilsocietyinstitute/articles/upload/EconagainstFDA.pdf

      • BTW, the answer to the first pop quiz is Underwriter’s Laboratories, a private institution, as are virtually all standards institutions worldwide, including ISO, IEC, the largest.

        The very vast majority of all industrial standards worldwide are voluntarily adopted because it’s generally good for business on a variety of levels. Only a small handful by comparison are government mandated.

        Of course, since you are so woefully ignorant of all of this, all you have ever heard about are those mandated by law, because the Media sucks politician cock all the day long for access, and of course when anything goes wrong it’s an opportunity to sell more advertising (i.e., private profits) by increasing ratings via sensationalism–not to mention spin the illusion that business=bad, government=good, which you lap up like there’s no tomorrow because you have been conditioned and indoctrinated as such all your life. It’s the mainstream view, which of course makes it generally ignorant, where not downright moronic.

      • Well, that Klein article is certainly well argued. I’ve heard all of those arguments before over 20 years but sure nice to have such a short, concise, compilation and integration of all the best ones.

        Bookmarked.

        Anxious to see Woo’s take. Or will we get crickets?

      • Hey Woo, one excuse is as good as another, all excuses being bad excuses by definition.

        Catch’cha later, I hope?

      • Classic feminized discourse. Retreat to sarcasm, and your own feelings who no one here gives a fuck about. If you want to joust, come prepared with facts and a sense of history; an affinity for comparison and rumination should help as well.
        Once you realize that we are all constrained in our thoughts by what we see and hear you may realize the fragility of your own ideas and the stupidity of ignorant sarcasm. Unless you are devoted to a topic or at least spend a couple hours researching various points of view especially on something as complex as the history of medicine, the economics and efficacy of regulation and the role of the state in protecting people from themselves and others, you can only produce juvenile bullshit.
        Very smart and knowledgeable people have been discussing and debating these things for decades, and some for centuries. Then comes Dumbass Woo who can’t even produce a mortality graph on food borne illnesses to tell us we are zealots.

  10. Ah, conflating society with State, again. I’ll catch it every time, you know.

    • The Left has a tendency to do this. They mistake government for something that can be tamed and made nice. The Right, on the other hand, makes the mistake of going after the bear of government with a sharp stick. Government is serious, dangerous, bad news: stay away from it if you want to have a nice life (and spread the love around). The appeal to collective force is always evil.

      • Good point.
        This is why the only strategy for liberty is radical decentralization. Whether you are a hardcore Evangelical or a stoned brownie seller on Silk Road who just wants to be left alone, the only way to get there is to nullify as many laws as possible at the local level, decouple yourself from the federal leviathan, and just throw monkeywrenches into as many mechanisms of oppression as possible. So yeah, get on that jury and nullify any non-violent drug verdict. Pass nullification statutes in your town/county for raw milk consumption or general food freedom (a town in Maine did this). Obviously the feds will try to crush these actions, but their resources are running out, their legitimacy is in tatters, and the more blows you deliver, the more likely is the next one to stick.

  11. Democrats and republicans are a comedy duo where the republicans play the straight man.

  12. So, this measure failed because it would allow “..substances that today are considered drugs and used to treat diseases as serious as cancer or HIV could be marketed without any rigorous FDA review…”

    Yet the California Court of Appeals rules that a pharma rep’s right to free speech allows him to make non-FDA approved claims regarding these same medications, effectively circumventing “rigorous FDA review”?

    In other words, unsubstantiated claims by big pharma companies that can cough up lobbying dollars and participate in this revolving door employment relationship with the FDA are safe, whereas claims by small, independent companies who have far more at risk if they are caught in a lie are a dangerous risk to public safety.

    And how convenient that this congressional debate overlooks the trail of corpses that has resulted from the esteemed “gold standard, rigorous FDA review,”

  13. Raw Milk Lover says:

    Raw milk “spreads disease and is a health risk.” Really? How do you know? What do you know? Have you examined CDC statistics on raw milk and foodborned illness as has this pathologist?
    http://www.realmilk.com/real-milk-pathogens.html

    Interesting that there has been mentioned Jewish government influence in this discussion thread. It was a Jewish industrialist, Nathan Strauss, who spearheaded the pasteurization of milk in this country, claiming that raw milk killed his son. What a hero, huh? Just wanted to make sure no one else got hurt. This was during a time when prestigious hospitals throughout the country were using the “Milk Cure” – a raw milk diet fast to heal patients of a range of inflammatory diseases, including cancer, diabetes, gastrointestinal issues, arthritis, etc. One of the doctors who helped found the Mayo Foundation – a forerunner to the Mayo Clinic – was so impressed by raw milk’s healing powers he thought it would change the face of medicine. Guess he didn’t know about Nathan Strauss, or the FDA, or our cowardly U.S. Congress.