It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Rand Paul votes NO to labelling GMO foods!! How did your Senator vote?!?!

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 23 2012 @ 06:55 PM
link   
I was going to add this to the ongoing thread,

Senate rejects bid to label genetically modified food

BUT, considering that this is also big news on how Rand Paul has turned to the dark side, I figured it deserved its own thread! PLUS, I think this issue deserves alot more attention!

What happened to this guy? His dad must be so ashamed of his son, endorsing Romney and then suddenly turning all the way around and towing the party line. What happened to the libertarian? The guy that everyone hoped would take after his dad and be the man in the coming years?! Ugh..

Blacklistednews


Thought that endorsing Romney was bad enough? In another turn of events that exposes the corporatist leanings of Rand Paul, Senator from Kentucky, he has voted NO on a GMO labeling amendment to the farm bill “to permit States to require that any food, beverage, or other edible product offered for sale have a label on indicating that the food, beverage, or other edible product contains a genetically engineered ingredient.” The following is taken from the United States Senate Website.






Also, from Farm News

How did your senator vote? In the other thread a couple members had checked, one was proud of their senator for voting for required labelling, another was disappointed to find out their senator voted against the labelling.

WAKE UP PEOPLE! YOU DESERVE A CHOICE OF WHAT YOU EAT! There are folks on here who support GMO, and thats fine, their choice.. BUT don't you deserve a choice in what you eat? Wouldn'y you like to know what products are in your food?

Remember, Senators are YOUR VOICE, and work for you! Remind them if you feel like they voted the wrong way! Write letters, Email, share this vote with others in your area! Show up at their office and DEMAND an answer! Make these people accountable for your actions! Ask them why they didn't vote for the labelling!

Beware, you may get an answer like this, which just shows the blatant corruption and obvious huge Monsanto Lobby within the senate:
VPR News

Michigan Democrat Debbie Stabenow is the chair of the Senate Agriculture committee. She opposed the plan because she was concerned that it would interfere with the development of drought resistant crops


Oh yea.. thats a good reason to vote no.. !!!!


Maxmars put it this way in a reply:


Isn't it amazing how complex they can make this matter.

"Dude, what is in this stuff your selling?"

"The law says I don't have to tell you!"


..... "Really?"



Thoughts?!?!




posted on Jun, 23 2012 @ 07:00 PM
link   
Surprised to see that BlueStatePatriot didnt author this thread.

Second



posted on Jun, 23 2012 @ 07:04 PM
link   
Have you read the full bill?

Also last I checked Ron Paul was against any and all government intervention.
Pretty sure forcing companies to put stuff on labels qualifies as intervention.

Do I agree with Montosanto? Nope they can all go choke on their GM Foods but the gov can also take a hike.



posted on Jun, 23 2012 @ 07:19 PM
link   
OK Rand is officially a tool..............



posted on Jun, 23 2012 @ 07:21 PM
link   
reply to post by IntegratedInstigator
 


hah Right,,,He isnt intelligent enough to post stuff that matters....I cant beleive Rand did that,,,well i guess I can,,his career as far as needing his dads supporters IS OVER !



posted on Jun, 23 2012 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Azdraik
Have you read the full bill?

Also last I checked Ron Paul was against any and all government intervention.
Pretty sure forcing companies to put stuff on labels qualifies as intervention.

Do I agree with Montosanto? Nope they can all go choke on their GM Foods but the gov can also take a hike.

Ok, tell me how required labelling will happen without government enforcement?



posted on Jun, 23 2012 @ 07:31 PM
link   
First I apologize I stated Ron Paul not his son but my other comment still stands.

As for how will they get labeled, who said you even need these misleading labels that are on food? Do you really need the government to tell you what is in the food you are eating or are you smart enough to figure out that buying processed junk is bad for you?



posted on Jun, 23 2012 @ 07:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Azdraik
 


I dont know. If no one forces them to tell you whats in it how are you supposed to know what exactly is processed or if its junk food?
This is a slippery one as on one hand you have a non-internationalist (gov don't force me!) and on the other hand someone needs to make them disclose what they are doing to our foods!



posted on Jun, 23 2012 @ 07:46 PM
link   
I would have to ask what the definition of 'genetically modified' is. I used to be concerned about GMO but logic overtook me and I realized that we've been genetically modifying food for centuries.

Is it the act of cross-breeding species of plants or is it the influence on the chemicals within foods? Should we just insist on more strict requirements on the 'certified organic' labels that already exist?

This particular provision in the bill doesn't seem all that important to me, on the grand scale of things.



posted on Jun, 23 2012 @ 07:50 PM
link   
Yes it is a slippery slope but, who is to say what is on the label is correct? Look at current labels, how many people can even read the ingredients let alone know what they do?

Most people I work with just look at the pretty numbers. Even if they printed GMO in giant letters on the side how many people do you think would look at it, shrug, and buy it anyway? The people who want them labeled already know what not to eat ect.

There is no easy solution to this.... well take that back there is but not many people would support that much violence.



posted on Jun, 23 2012 @ 08:07 PM
link   
Wouldn't surprise me too much if the senators in states that produce a large amount of GMO voted no, which at a quick glance seems like it might be the case...minus California, because they're California.


Senators are responsible for the economy, and this would, at least in the short term, hurt their economy...probably part of their reasoning.



posted on Jun, 23 2012 @ 08:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Azdraik
First I apologize I stated Ron Paul not his son but my other comment still stands.

As for how will they get labeled, who said you even need these misleading labels that are on food? Do you really need the government to tell you what is in the food you are eating or are you smart enough to figure out that buying processed junk is bad for you?

The average sheep would neve find out if they arent labelled.. Yes you and I know, but your average fellow citizen doesnt! We need numbers to fight back, and unless they are labelled GMO, they wont know!



posted on Jun, 23 2012 @ 08:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nspekta
The average sheep would neve find out if they arent labelled.. Yes you and I know, but your average fellow citizen doesnt! We need numbers to fight back, and unless they are labelled GMO, they wont know!


There is a difference... even if they are labeled I say the average sheep would not care.

Just think, they pass the labeling law. Ok, they are all labeled. So, the food companies go into spin mode say how the lovely GMO food keeps prices down uses less pesticide ect. New studies come out showing GMO food has no adverse affects on people.

That is what would happen. I do not think any thing would change.
edit on 23-6-2012 by Azdraik because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2012 @ 09:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Azdraik

Originally posted by Nspekta
The average sheep would neve find out if they arent labelled.. Yes you and I know, but your average fellow citizen doesnt! We need numbers to fight back, and unless they are labelled GMO, they wont know!


There is a difference... even if they are labeled I say the average sheep would not care.

Just think, they pass the labeling law. Ok, they are all labeled. So, the food companies go into spin mode say how the lovely GMO food keeps prices down uses less pesticide ect. New studies come out showing GMO food has no adverse affects on people.

That is what would happen. I do not think any thing would change.
edit on 23-6-2012 by Azdraik because: (no reason given)


What matters is, would labeling increase or decrease consumption of GMO foods. Fairly safe to say it wouldn't increase consumption so it'd have some effect. They can spin it all they want but then the obvious question would remain for some consumers, why is there a label?



posted on Jun, 23 2012 @ 11:57 PM
link   
Rand Flip Flops Paul: really... vote against drones...TSA...etc, but nay on GMO labeling? Oh well, Rand-not Libertarian-Paul, with the grand Flip Flopper endorsement, what can one expect that apparently.

At least up this way, Surrounding NW, Murray(WA), Cantwell(WA), Wyden(OR)... thank you!
edit on 24-6-2012 by dreamingawake because: link

edit on 24-6-2012 by dreamingawake because: edited out link



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 12:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Turq1

What matters is, would labeling increase or decrease consumption of GMO foods. Fairly safe to say it wouldn't increase consumption so it'd have some effect. They can spin it all they want but then the obvious question would remain for some consumers, why is there a label?


So, your saying a lack of a increase in consumption would be due to a new label? What if there was a lack of decrease? Would that also be due to the label?

Do you ask yourself why there is a label ever time you look at a product with 100% Whole Grain on it?
edit on 24-6-2012 by Azdraik because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 08:38 AM
link   
reply to post by links234
 


Exactly we have been genetically modifying plants and animals since the birth of agriculture. The only thing that has really changed between then and now is we have more precise control of what we are modifying. It still begs the question of the possible repercussions of doing it and what effect it can have on the environment by creating fast changes. But it doesn't change the fact we have been doing it all along.



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 07:44 AM
link   
what i found odd was that Rockefeller voted 'yea'

and now I know Rubio is a tool.



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 07:52 AM
link   
The so call drought resistance crops poison GMOs are a rat, they are the ones burning now in the dry spell that is hitting the Midwest, learn people they are about to receive billions of dollars on subsidies for their poison lost.

Yes the whores in congress are all in their pockets and I imagine that the tax payers money that is going to be dispense for their loses will end up also back in the whores pockets.

This is what a corporate dictatorship does to a nation and their slave citizens.

I hope their entire crap of poison crops burn in the drought, after all it suppose to survive extreme conditions, the only thing they are surviving is the billions of our money in their dirty pockets.

Despicable, any politician that are taking money from any GMO company are nothing but whores.



new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join