Obama looks to Monsanto ally to oversee food safety

by mtippett | July 24, 2009 at 09:18 am
310 views | 50 Recommendations | 22 comments

Videos

Food Inc Official HD Trailer

see larger video

sourced by mtippett

Food Inc Official HD Trailer

This is an alarming development for anyone who has a serious interest in food safety in America.

The person who may be responsible for more food-related illness and death than anyone in history has just been made the US food safety czar. This is no joke.
recommend This comment thread is now closed
1
Paschen

That is like giving the devil the key to Heaven. 

0
sara star

Did something get lost in translation here? Do I hear "population control"... not to spread any conspiracies or anything.... but it just doesn't make sense.

2
Roy C

This is just like letting Goldman Sachs capture the regulatory system in Washington and have actual Goldman Sachs board members, ex-lobbyists and ex-CEOs in charge of watching Goldman Sachs.

You Obama-worshipers were warned about this. We skeptic populists/libertarians have been saying for years that the two-party system of Democrats and Republicans doesn't work. That they are both owned by Wall Street.

Obama talked the talk, and very well, I might add. Only by having been around a lot of radical people in my adolescence and in my early adulthood have I been able to see my way past this type of soft demagoguery.

Frankly, I thought Obama was too intelligent for the cap-and-trade mess, too intelligent to allow Goldman Sachs free rein, and too intelligent for a stimulus plan that was not really good at all.

Now I want to see those grades at Occidental College and his thesis.

His real problem, though, is not his intelligence, of which he has more than enough. His real problem is that he has never been forced to admit to error, compounding a high degree of narcissism. He never admitted that the surge worked in Iraq, but he kept Gates on as Def Sec.

That is why Rep Bobby Rush called Obama " an educated fool". The label has begun to stick.

1
rng

I think this is a bad decision.

I am however, a little confused by your logic. Is the problem Obama, the two party decision or both? If Obama had risen to power under a multiple party system, wouldn't he still be in the Chief Executive role making the decisions regardless? Would a 3rd party under the same electoral system have the same potential to be 'owned'. I think this needs some more explanation to make sense

3
Roy C

Obama is sold-out. Hillary Clinton is sold out. Many of the republicans are sold out. The two-party system is about to die.

The system is its members. Only someone sold out is allowed to ascend in the ranks.

0
rng

So the system is the problem, and Obama is a product of that system as are all the other politicians ..you mention one other democrat by name, Clinton, but I suspect following your logic that any other elected rep regardless of party is a "sold-out" too

 So on that line of reasoning unless you have degrees of "sold-out" which I guess is a theory, then all politicians are pretty much useless.Sort of makes a mockery of the US representative system then, doesn't  it it you follow that line? Not too hopeful a prognosis for the country though.

0
Roy C

No, we are going through a major crisis in the world and the regular people have to get off their duffs and stop letting elitists, demagogues, disguised as "operators of change", dupe them into merely reshuffling the status quo.

Even the commies, the most radical reformers seen so far, just put themselves in as "the new boss", to use the phrase from "The Who's" song.

Transparency and accountability. Without them there will be no change, no re-structuring. And we, the people, must demand them. The elites will not yield on this because we asked or because "it is the right thing".

They are addicted to power.

0
rng

They are addicted to power....and the regular people have to get off their duffs and stop letting elitists...

They, he , who? I think you are voicing dissatisfaction with the current regime, but it is not at all clear, at least to me, what you are attempting to articulate as option. Do you think a McCain/Palin victory would have been a better outcome, or are you disparaging all the options the electoral system served up? If so, in what way would it be reformed to produce a better result? Your point, other than the consistent anti-Obama rhetoric, is all a little vague to offer any option for consideration so we have nothing to consider as a meaningful opposition

1
Roy C

No.McCain was a continuation of Bush, and Obama is a continuation of Bush with more left-wing merde thrown in, like his woeful version of "health care reform" that reforms nothing, really. 

So, I didn't vote.

0
rng

So, I didn't vote.

Non-action is always an option.. I guess. If the individual becomes a collective action though, it sort of negates options for improvement. It sort of also contradicts, on the surface, your recommendation for individuals needing to act. Absenting the electoral system doesn't seem to gel with that philosophy

...his woeful version of "health care reform...

Which particular version,  all the potential options that they are looking at, or just any reform at all?

2
eastvanray

All I can say is I hope that inauguration party for the Obamaholics was worth the 4 years of hangover for the whole US.

1
Barbara McPherson

If people generally don't take the time and interest to ensure that their food is safe to eat and nutritious and produced in a sustainable manner we will continue to get mega-food-factories.  Vegetables grown on depleted soil lack nutrients, shipping them adds CO2 to the atmosphere and massive distribution centres spread the bacteria from tainted food far and wide.  Witness the current recall in the US and Canada of romaine lettuce because of Salmonella contamination.  Once these mega corps eliminate all but 'boutique' family farms, you can bet the price of food will skyrocket as well.  Buy locally.  Support farmers' markets.  Grow what you can.

3
a211423

Perhaps Obama's advisors did not investigate his background fully, or were not aware of what Monsanto has done in the U.S. and in other countries.

Forty years ago India had 100,000 varieties of rice. Today it is difficult to find fifty. Why? The introduction of genetically engineered or terminator seeds by Monsanto.  They would offer farmers free seeds.  The farmers had no idea that these were engineered to kill all competing seeds leaving only the Monsanto seeds.  Then Monsanto would go back to the farmers, but this time the farmers had to buy the Monsanto seeds.  The farmers had no choice because indigenous varieties would no longer grow.  If the farmers could not afford Monsanto seeds, they lost their farms and their livelyhood.

These kinds of practices where profit supercedes health and livelyhood by Monsanto together with the ones stated in the article it is impossible to support the Obama Administration's choice.    

 

2
sara star

It is criminal.

3
Roy C

Sounds like your making excuses for "the smartest guy to ever get into the White House" with an "IQ so high it is off the charts".

Those of you who want reform, wake up and let yourself crash off the high of thinking you had gotten what you wanted.

Obama doesn't have the guts to do real reforms. Never has done real reforms. Never will do real reforms.

0
rng

Obama doesn't have the guts to do real reforms. ...Never will do real reforms...

There you go with those opinions and hypotheses penned as declarative sentences again. You might be right, but there again...unless you got a time machine, the jury is still out.

1
Roy C

Name one campaign promise that Obama has kept so far.

0
rng

I believe this lists over 30 to date:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/rulings/promise-kept/


1
Roy C

Really, as if "posts bills on-line for 5 days"? Or is "bi-partisan"? Or will end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"? or won't increase taxes? Or will end the war in Iraq? Or will clean up Wall Street? Or end the earmarks?

Yes, you have there 30 inconsequential promises.

0
rng

bi-partisan"? Or will end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"? or won't increase taxes? Or will end the war in Iraq? Or will clean up Wall Street? Or end the earmarks?

Jury is still out, if at the end of his first term this is still true please get back to us.

Iraq - you can go there of course, but it is ill-advised given the Bush-negotiated SOFA and the contractor not military provisions which make a mockery of it anyway. That will be a multi-generational problem we got dumped with, sadly

I get it Roy, you don't like him, your reaction almost feels a little visceral, but you have nothing to lynch him on yet. You may, but so far it is a project in progress.

I think he is way wrong on certain policies, including Afghanistan which is major, but I won't blanket condemn him or blanket praise him - either would be purely emotive not logical positions

You asked me to name 1 - I gave you a list of 32. The fact that you think those 32 aren't important enough...says you are seemingly wanting to weight the issues to only the agendas you consider important, which says much

1
QueensHart

This is really insane.  Now he will have another group ready for revolution with this already hot button topic!  MONSANTO?  He will have his ratings really plummet down when this gets discussed more than the Gates fiasco.


0
eastvanray

How dare you speak ill of the Emperor's new clothes!

This story was created over 3 months ago, the comment thread is now closed.

What is NowPublic?

NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.

Find out more

Crowd Power

Paschen
First Flagged at 9:53 AM, Jul 24, 2009 by Paschen
These members have powered this story:

Most Recommended Stories in Environment

Recommendations (50)

Most recently recommended by:
 

closeSign in to NowPublic

is reporting from