Eating tacos and drinking tequila shots are offensive to people of Mexican descent, according to a Latino student group at Northwestern University.
“Drinking tequila shots, eating tacos, and wearing sombreros do not commemorate Mexican culture; on the contrary, that offends, marginalizes and isolates many of our friends, classmates, and community leaders and casts our entire community in poor light,” wrote members of the group Alianza in a letter that was published in The Daily Northwestern.
The letter was signed by members of the university’s Associated Student Government as well as members of the Latino group in response to Cinco de Mayo celebrations.
“Some of our peers choose to throw ‘Mexican-themed’ parties that are culturally insensitive, offensive and detrimental to the Northwestern community,” they wrote.
This is what happens when leftist indoctrination enters the brains of morons
She’s discovered the fountain of youth, and it’s crispy and delicious.
.
105-year-old Texas granny Pearl Cantrell credits bacon – and lots of it – with helping her live a long, happy life.
“I love bacon, I could eat it for every meal – and I do!” Cantrell, of Richland Springs, told local NBC affiliate KRBC-TV. “I don’t feel as old as I am, that’s all I can say.”
.
The lively lady, who recently celebrated her birthday, received a special visit from the Oscar Mayer Weinermobile after the company learned of her love for cured, fried meat. Riding “shotbun,” she took a spin around the town, population 332, to the cheers of her friends and neighbors.
Cantrell’s 105 years haven’t all been smooth sailing: She raised seven children, outliving three of them, and has worked hard her entire life.
“I would go to the field and work till dinner, then come home to fix dinner, then I would go back out to the field and work again until supper,” she told the station.
.
“She’s taught us to work hard and to get up every morning and think about living. She’s never thought about dying,” her daughter added.
Science doesn’t find the same life-giving properties in bacon. In fact, a recent study linked regular consumption of it and other processed meats to an increased risk of premature death.
But if bacon really is the secret to a long life, Cantrell is in luck: Oscar Mayer gave her a free supply of it, promising more on the way.
Buried amid the generally gloomy news last week was a development that is a true cause for celebration. By July, the Twinkie, and other favorite Hostess brands will return to store shelves. Two investment companies bought assets of the bankrupt snack company and plan to re-open four plants and hire 1,500 workers in the coming weeks. Labor unions, however, will not be invited back.
.
Hostess Brands, the venerable 86-year maker of Twinkies, Zingers, Ho-Hos and other popular snack cakes closed its doors last November. The company had said it needed wage and benefit concessions from its largely unionized workforce in order to survive. The Teamsters, the union representing the largest number of Hostess workers, agreed to the concessions and urged other unions to join them. A little known union, the Bakers and Confectioners workers, however, refused to accept the modest compensation cuts. As a result, the company shuttered its doors, throwing all of its workers into the unemployment line.
The chief executive of the new Hostess Brands has said the new owners will pump $60 million in new capital investments into the company. Without labor bosses demanding uncompetitive wages and benefits, the company has a good chance to survive.
I admit that, as I’ve grown older, I had kind of forgotten about the Twinkie and Zingers, the absolute best of the snack cakes. So maybe this latest example of union folly has a silver lining. I, and probably millions of others, will never again take snack cakes for granted.
The New York Timesreported Friday that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has likely enabled massive fraud in the Pigford series of legal settlements, in which black, Hispanic, female and Native American farmers have claimed to be victims of past discrimination.
.
The cost of the settlements, which could exceed $4.4 billion, is the result of a process that “became a runaway train, driven by racial politics, pressure from influential members of Congress and law firms that stand to gain more than $130 million in fees,” the Times notes.
Among those influential members of Congress was then-Senator Barack Obama, who made Pigford payouts a priority in exchange for political support for his 2008 presidential campaign among a coveted group of black voters in the rural South, the Times reports.
As president, Obama continued to support payouts for new groups of claimants while abandoning a review process that had been used to fight fraud. The aim was “buying the support” of minorities, according to the Times, while middlemen created a “cottage industry” in defrauding the government.
The Times investigation, led by reporter Sharon LaFraniere, vindicates the late Andrew Breitbart, for whom Pigford became a crucial issue in demonstrating the cynical use of racial politics by the institutional left to hurt the very people they claimed to be helping. Breitbart directed investigations of the Pigford fraud and championed the cause of the original black farmers in the lawsuit, arguing that many of them had been left behind while opportunistic lawyers and fraudulent claimants looted the federal treasury in exchange for votes and support.
The left, led by the George Soros-funded Media Matters for America, attempted for years to dismiss claims of fraud in Pigford, calling it Breitbart’s “stupidest conspiracy theory.” When Fox News picked up the story, Media Matters called it an attempt to attack “anti-discrimination efforts.”
In fact, the 5,529-word report by LaFraniere shows that Pigford and subsequent settlements had little to do with redressing discrimination and everything to do with politics and greed, while the true victims of discrimination continued to suffer in obscurity.
In 2010, Breitbart was accused by the left of using a dispute with the NAACP to disrupt Pigford funding. That motivated him to investigate.
“I had never heard of Pigford, so for the last four and half months, all I’ve been doing is eating, breathing, sleeping Pigford, researching Pigford, finding whistleblowers who are hiding in plain sight who have been wanting to tell the story of how this was rigged,” he told the Daily Caller in December 2010.
The Times story credits Breitbart News and Rep. Steve King (R-IA) for drawing attention to the issue.
LaFraniere and colleagues conducted their own, independent investigation, “based on thousands of pages of court and confidential government documents, as well as interviews with dozens of claimants, lawyers, former and current government officials and others involved in the cases over the past 14 years.”
Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack told the Times that the settlements opened “a new chapter of civil rights at U.S.D.A,” claiming that critics of Pigford and other payouts were motivated by a “Pandora’s box” of hidden racial agendas.
Yet the Times documents how Pigford became a “magnet for fraud” across the South. “In 16 ZIP codes in Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi and North Carolina,” LaFraniere writes, “the number of successful claimants exceeded the total number of farms operated by people of any race in 1997, the year the lawsuit was filed. Those applicants received nearly $100 million.” The government let many of the fraudulent claims slip by unpunished because “the bar for a successful claim was so low that it was almost impossible to show criminality.”
Much of the fraud was enabled by the Clinton and Obama administrations, and by members of Congress seeking to reward special interests. Then-Sen. Obama sponsored new Pigford legislation in 2007, while Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) threatened in 2009 to lead protests against the administration if it did not bend to the wishes of Hispanic claimants.
Meanwhile, whole families, including young children, filed claims for past discrimination to reap $50,000 each in cash payouts. As yet, Congress has failed to investigate Pigford.
Judicial Watch today released documents detailing how the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is working with the Mexican government to promote participation by illegal aliens in the U.S. food stamp program.
.
The promotion of the food stamp program, now known as “SNAP” (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program), includes a Spanish-language flyer provided to the Mexican Embassy by the USDA with a statement advising Mexicans in the U.S. that they do not need to declare their immigration status in order to receive financial assistance. Emphasized in bold and underlined, the statement reads, “You need not divulge information regarding your immigration status in seeking this benefit for your children.”
The documents came in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request made to USDA on July 20, 2012. The FOIA request sought: “Any and all records of communication relating to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to Mexican Americans, Mexican nationals, and migrant communities, including but not limited to, communications with the Mexican government.”
The documents obtained by Judicial Watch show that USDA officials are working closely with their counterparts at the Mexican Embassy to widely broaden the SNAP program in the Mexican immigrant community, with no effort to restrict aid to, identify, or apprehend illegal immigrants who may be on the food stamp rolls. In an email to Borjon Lopez-Coterilla and Jose Vincente of the Mexican Embassy, dated January 26, 2012, Yibo Wood of the USDA Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) sympathized with the plight of illegal aliens applying for food stamps, saying, “FNS understands that mixed status households may be particularly vulnerable. Many of these households contain a non-citizen parent and a citizen child.”
The email from Wood to Lopez-Coterilla and Vincente came in response to a request from the Mexican Embassy that the USDA FNS step in to prevent the state of Kansas from changing its food stamp policy to restrict the amount of financial assistance provided to illegal aliens. In a January 22, 2012, article, the Kansas City Star had revealed that the state would no longer include illegal aliens in its calculations of the amount of assistance to be provided low-income Hispanic families in order to prevent discrimination against legal recipients.
The documents, obtained by Judicial Watch in August 2012, include the following:
* March 30, 2012 – The USDA seeks approval of the Mexican Embassy in drafting a letter addressed to consulates throughout the United States designed to encourage Mexican embassy staffers to enroll in a webinar learn how to promote increased enrollment among “the needy families that the consulates serve.”
* August 1, 2011 – The USDA FNS initiates contact with the Mexican Embassy in New York to implement programs already underway in DC and Philadelphia for maximizing participation among Mexican citizens. The Mexican Embassy responds that the Consul General is eager to strengthen his ties to the USDA, with specific interest in promoting the food stamp program.
* February 25, 2011 – The USDA and the Mexican Consulate exchange ideas about getting the First Ladies of Mexico and United States to visit a school for purposes of creating a photo opportunity that would promote free school lunches for low-income students in a predominantly Hispanic school. Though a notation in the margin of the email claims that the photo op never took place, UPI reported that it actually did.
* March 3, 2010 – A flyer advertises a webinar to teach Hispanic-focused nonprofits how to get reimbursed by the USDA for serving free lunch over the summer. The course, funded by American taxpayers, is advertised as being “free for all participants.”
* February 9 , 2010 – USDA informs the Mexican Embassy that, based on an agreement reached between the State Department and the Immigration & Naturalization Service (now ICE), the Women, Infants & Children (WIC) food voucher program does not violate immigration laws prohibiting immigrants from becoming a “public charge.”
As far back as 2006, in its Corruption Chronicles blog, Judicial Watch revealed that the USDA was spending taxpayer money to run Spanish-language television ads encouraging illegal immigrants to apply for government-financed food stamps. The Mexican Consul in Santa Ana, CA, at the time even starred in some of the U.S. Government-financed television commercials, which explained the program and provided a phone number to apply. In the widely viewed commercial the Consul assured that receiving food stamps “won’t affect your immigration status.”
In 2012, Judicial Watch reported that in a letter to USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack, Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions questioned the Obama administration’s partnership with Mexican consulates to encourage foreign nationals, migrant workers and non-citizen immigrants to apply for food stamps and other USDA administered welfare benefits. Sessions wrote, “It defies rational thinking,” Sessions wrote, “for the United States – now dangerously $16 trillion in debt – to partner with foreign governments to help us place more foreign nationals on American welfare and it is contrary to good immigration policy in the United States.”
“The revelation that the USDA is actively working with the Mexican government to promote food stamps for illegal aliens should have a direct impact on the fate of the immigration bill now being debated in Congress,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “These disclosures further confirm the fact that the Obama administration cannot be trusted to protect our borders or enforce our immigration laws. And the coordination with a foreign government to attack the policies of an American state is contemptible.”
Warner Todd Huston has the story from, where else, Marxifornia
The State of California has one of the worst proposals of any legislature in the country this year with a new bill that would force every restaurant and food service business in the state to commission an expensive “risk assessment” test for every menu item
Such a test could cost thousands of dollars for every food item sold. This outrageous and cost prohibitive testing would certainly cause all but the biggest chain restaurants to go out of business almost instantly.
In another exercise in nanny-statism, California’s State Senate Democrats want this “risk assessment” conducted to determine whether food being sold “contributes significantly to a significant public health epidemic.”
The bill, Senate Bill 747, is an addition to the current health and safety codes and is currently set for a hearing on April 17. It was written and introduced by Sen. Mark DeSauliner (D, Concord).
The introduction of the bill clearly says that the law would require the food service companies to pay the state for the testing in order to fill state coffers. It notes that without the assessment, the state would have the right to shut an offending restaurant down.
This bill, known as the Public Health Epidemic Protection Act of 2013, would require the department, for every product intended for consumer consumption for which it has credible evidence that the product significantly contributes to a significant public epidemic, to conduct a risk assessment evaluation to determine whether the product contributes significantly to a significant public health epidemic, as defined, and whether the adverse public health risk would have a fiscal impact on the state of $50,000,000 or more. The bill would authorize the department to charge the manufacturer of the product for the reasonable costs of producing the risk assessment and would create the Public Health Fund, to be used by the department, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to fund the program. If the department determines that the criteria are met, the bill would require the manufacturer to create, for approval of the department, a public health impact report (PHIR) containing specified information, including a list of adverse public health impacts and a mitigation plan for those impacts. The bill would authorize the department to enforce the PHIR and would authorize the department to restrict or suspend sales of the product in the state if the PHIR is insufficient or if the manufacturer is not complying with the terms of the PHIR.
The Nanny State rolls on, destroying jobs, dreams, and liberty wherever it is implemented
NCBA and the National Pork Producers Council are both furious with EPA for handing extremist groups illegally gathered data on farmers who operate confined animal feeding operations.
NCBA said early this week it was notified by the EPA that the agency had been collecting information from states on CAFOs. The information was requested by extremist groups, including Earth Justice, the Pew Charitable Trust and the Natural Resources Defense Council through a Freedom of Information Act request and was given to them.
The information released by EPA covers livestock operations in more than 30 states, including many family farmers who feed less than 1,000 head and are not subject to regulation under the Clean Water Act.
“When we reviewed the information submitted by the states and released by EPA, we were alarmed at the detail of the information provided on hard working family farmers and ranchers, family operations including my own,” said NCBA past president J.D. Alexander, a cattle feeder from Pilger, Nebraska.
“It is beyond comprehension to me that with threats to my family from harassment atop bio-security concerns, that EPA would gather this information only to release it to these groups. This information details my family’s home address and geographic coordinates. The only thing it doesn’t do is chauffeur these extremists to my house. For some operations, even telephone numbers and deceased relatives are listed.”
The problem had recent roots in January 2012 when EPA proposed the Clean Water Act Section 308 CAFO Reporting rule to collect information from CAFOs and make it publicly available and readily searchable through their website.
Rep. Rick Crawford (R-AR) released a statement and video condemning the EPA for their illegal acts.
In Arkansas, farming is a way of life. Agriculture is the number one industry in our First Congressional District and for many families it’s a rich tradition. As Arkansas’s only representative on the House Agriculture Committee, I fight each day to ensure farm families in our state can continue producing the safest, most abundant and reliable source of nutrition food on the planet.
Recently, I was informed the Environmental Protection Agency had released the personal information of livestock and poultry producers to extremist environmental groups. The information was released after the groups filed a request through the Freedom of Information Act.
The EPA turned over personal information like phone numbers, addresses and even geographic coordinates to environmentalists. An overwhelming majority of the information released appears to be from farms owned by families who may now face threats to their homes and businesses.
I have serious concerns over the EPA’s release of this information, particularly regarding individual privacy rights and possible bio-security threats to the nation’s food supply. Releasing this type of information makes producers potential targets of harassment, or even bio-terrorism. Unfortunately, this release of information is yet another example of the EPA’s overreach into the lives of hardworking individuals in rural America.
As Chairman of the Agriculture Subcommittee on Livestock, Rural Development, and Credit, I am leading a group of 40 House members in writing a letter to the acting director of the EPA expressing our concerns and asking the acting director to ensure the released information is not improperly used. In the letter, we demand answers on why the EPA obtained producers’ private information and, most important, what steps the agency will take to protect the affected producers while ensuring these actions will never happen again.
It is unacceptable for the EPA to do anything that could jeopardize our nation’s food security or threaten American farm operatins. The EPA must be held accountable for their actions and bureaucrats in Washington must consider the livelihoods of farm families and our nation’s food-security before they cower to extreme environmental groups.
As schools across the country tighten security in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook massacre, one Maryland school district is taking it to the extreme, banning everything from hugs to birthday cake.
St. Mary’s County adopted the new security measures in its 17 public schools in the aftermath of the shooting in Newtown, Conn. that left 20 school children dead as well as six adults.
The new policy is meant to protect against a number of potential threats to children’s safety, including food allergies, inappropriate contact between adults and minors, and even hurt feelings.
‘We think it’s the right balance between safety and parental involvement,’ Kelly Hall, the district’s executive director of elementary schools, told Southern Maryland Newspapers.
Specifically, the rules ban hugs between children and adults who aren’t their parents, limit sibling visits during the school day, and prohibit kids from sharing baked goods or giving out birthday invitations at school.
Impromptu teacher-parent conferences are also banned in the new policy.
Referring to the rule regarding party invitations, Hall said, ‘If there are 20 individuals in the class and someone brings in seven birthday invitations, it was creating an academic disruption. People were getting their feelings hurt.’
School board member Cathy Allen said she thinks the new rules are ‘horrible’ and will have the unwanted effect of discouraging parents from volunteering at the school.
‘The idea that you can’t go into a school and be hugged by a child, or go in [to] have lunch or be out on the playground and that you can only push the swing for your child and no one else’ is unacceptable, she told NBC News.
But in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook massacre, ‘everybody’s anxiety is high’ and the rules help to assuage parent’s worst fears when they send their kids off to school every morning, said school board member Mary Washington.
‘We are entrusted to protect all our students,’ Washington said.
The school board was considering the new guidelines prior to the Sandy Hook tragedy, and then decided to implement them in its aftermath. School officials say they are not final – even though they are already in place – and that they are looking for feedback from parents.
A new video has been posted to the Live Leak site that claims to be a North Korean propaganda video showing a dystopian American society.
It’s unclear if the translation is accurate, and whether the video did in fact originate in North Korea. But it’s tempting and easy to believe the video is the real deal. After all, it was only last month that the North Korean government released a truly strange propaganda video that depicted one of its citizens having a dream in which the U.S. is attacked by Korean missiles – set to the 1980s’ charity song sensation, “We Are the World.”
But if true, the video is hilarious in its attempt to create an imaginary America where the population lives off of snow and has eaten the entire population of birds. Yes, that’s right, the video repeatedly claims that there are no birds in America because the people have been forced to eat all of them.
.
.
“Drinking coffee made from snow, living in tents and buying guns to kill each other, especially children,” the video intones. “You’ll see there are no birds. They have been eaten by the people who live in these tents and corridors.”
In one of the stranger moments, the video shows a person who supposedly lives in one of these tents. “The American Red Cross supplies curtains for walls for the tents with material from North Korea,” the translator explains.
And in another, a bearded, apparently homeless man waits in line for food from a street truck vendor. “This man, a former Republican candidate from Oregon, is having to get coffee made of snow from trucks,” our narrator grimly intones.
“People pass by, not caring, for they are in the same situation.”
The line that has generated the snarkiest responses so far comes at the video’s conclusion: “This is how they live in America: the poor, the lonely, the homosexual.”
So, what do you think? Is this propaganda video for real or is it too weird even for the North Korean government?
A Michigan elementary school is defending its decision to confiscate a third-graders batch of homemade cupcakes because the birthday treats were decorated with plastic green Army soldiers.
……….
Casey Fountain told Fox News that the principal of his son’s elementary school called the cupcakes “insensitive” – in light of the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut.
“It disgusted me,” he said. “It’s vile they lump true American heroes with psychopathic killers.”
Fountain’s wife made a batch of 30 chocolate cupcakes for their son Hunter’s classmates at Schall Elementary School in the town of Caro. The 9-year-old helped decorate the treats with plastic figurines representing World War Two soldiers.
The following morning Fountain said his wife delivered the cupcakes to the front office. The secretary complimented her on the decorations and then took the cakes to Hunter’s class.
“About 15 minutes later the school called my wife and told her the couldn’t serve the cupcakes because the soldiers had guns,” Fountain told Fox News. “My wife told them to remove the soldiers and serve the cupcakes anyway – and I believe she may have used more colorful language.”
The school complied and confiscated the soldiers – sending them home with Hunter in a bag.
“I was offended,” Fountain said. “I support our soldiers and what they stand for. These (plastic soldiers) are representations of World War Two soldiers – our greatest generation. If they aren’t allowed in our schools – who is?”
Principal Susan Wright released a statement to local media defending the decision.
“These are toys that were commonplace in the past,” she wrote. “However, some parents prohibit all guns as toys. In light of that difference, the school offered to replace the soldiers with another item and the soldiers were returned home with the student.”
“Living in a democratic society entails respect for opposing opinions,” she stated. “In the climate of recent events in schools we walk a delicate balance in teaching non-violence in our buildings and trying to ensure a safe, peaceful atmosphere.”
Fountain said it was beyond outrageous to compare American soldiers to deranged mass murderers.
“In our politically correct society they can’t separate the good from the bad,” he said. ”I’m sure hammers are allowed in schools – although a lot of people are killed by hammers.”
Principal Wright explained in her statement that she meant no disrespect to the military.
“By not permitting toy soldiers on cupcakes at school, no disrespect for our military or for the brave men and women who defend our rights to have our differences was intended,” she wrote. “Our commitment is always to our children and creating a safe place for them to learn, grow and have respectful dialogues about their differences.”
Fountain said his little boy is aware of the controversy but doesn’t quite understand what all the fuss is about.
“He’s nine-years-old,” Fountain said. “He was just glad to get his soldiers back.”
“It’s not about a toy,” he said. “It’s not about a cupcake. It’s what the toy represents – and we’re just taking political correctness too far.”
We all have dreams. Some dream of feeding all the starving people in the world. Some say, “F**k the starving people. I want all the meat for myself.”
Those people would probably love the idea of Steak ‘n Shake’s new 7×7 Steakburger.
Though the idea of a 7×7 cheeseburger isn’t new — In-N-Out, for one, has been willing to pile as many layers of patty and cheese onto a bun as you’re willing to request for as long as I can remember — the idea of a major chain putting such a burger in writing on a menu is raising some eyebrows.
But wait, the shock doesn’t end there: because according to Huffington Post, the 7×7 appears exclusively on Steak ‘n Shake’s new AllNighter Menu. Yup, you’re encouraged to eat this 1,330 tower of cheap dining excess exclusively between the hours of midnight and 6am.
Another case of ludicrous cultural sensitivity for the sake of ensuring that everybody – no matter their religion or cultural background – is served food prepared under the most unreliable concept of supervision (via Jihad Watch):
A dinner lady has been sacked for accidentally serving non-halal meat to Muslim students at a multi-faith school.
The incident outraged parents at the ‘halal-only’ Moseley School in Birmingham, and they have forced the headmaster to apologise for ‘insulting’ their faith.
The member of staff has been dismissed after the ‘unintentional error’ on December 12 last year recently came to light.
All 1,400 students at Moseley school are served halal meat, regardless of their religion.
It has not been specified what type of meat was served, but the person responsible for serving the food was dismissed following a disciplinary hearing last Monday.
Well God forbid a Muslim be offended! I suppose mistakes are unforgivable, especially if you offend the Religion of Peace
For those of you not sure what halal means here it is
In Arabic, the word halal means permitted or lawful. Halal foods are foods that are allowed under Islamic dietary guidelines. According to these guidelines gathered from the Qu’ran, Muslim followers cannot consume the following:
pork or pork by products
animals that were dead prior to slaughtering
animals not slaughtered properly or not slaughtered in the name of Allah
blood and blood by products
alcohol
carnivorous animals
birds of prey
land animals without external ears
People can eat what they want, but to force your dietary habits onto a culture that you are a minority in is wrong. If it that big a deal, pack your own lunch. In other words grow up and stop expecting the world to change to protect your feelings! Maybe Islam needs a new rule, like STOP WHINING!
All Around Pizza and Deli in Virginia Beach, VA, is offering a 15% discount to customers who carry a gun in with them or show a concealed carry handgun permit.
The discount began last week, and Jay Laze, the store’s owner, says 80% of his customers have been visibly packing heat ever since.
And the weapons they carry in aren’t limited to handguns. Customers have carried in Ruger Mini-14 rifles and at least one AK-47.
After a long legal battle Morningland Dairy in Missouri was raided by the government and their property destroyed this week.
………
On January 25, 2013, Morningland Dairy in Missouri was raided and over 36 tons of personal property was confiscated by the Missouri State Milk Board. In operation for over 30 years, Morningland Dairy has never received one complaint from a customer or any illness reported as a result of consuming their product.
Will your business be next?
.
.
From the video: Moriningland Dairy, a family business that has been in operation for over 30 years without a single complaint or report of any illness has ceased today. The over two year battle they’ve had with the Missouri Milk Board ended today with a raid and confiscation of over 250 thousand dollars of inventory seized by the state. As a result of the legal stipulations put on Morningland Dairy which are impossible to comply with they will no longer be able to produce their product.
The real crime they are being persecuted for is producing cheese with raw milk. Whether the state wants to admit it or not that is what their real charge is and that in itself is criminal.
This should be the shot heard ’round the rural world. What has been done to this family is a travesty of justice. Their livelihood has been destroyed. These are good people who ran an honest business. How much more tyranny will we tolerate before we tell the state, Enough!
darcprynce
Dave C
Gatordoug
