Home

TS Radio Network: THE USDA HOUR 6/27

Leave a comment

 

Join us this evening June 13, 2019 at 7:00 pm CST More

Contacting a public official? That could be deemed harrassment or threatening!

Leave a comment

Endangered_Species_sGlenda O. just wrote an interesting article on the arrogance of Congress.  Glenda should have gone one step further and examined the arrogance and imperialistic attitude of some of the “unelected” bureaucrats that populate the District of Criminals. 

 

One of these is a gentleman named Chandler Goule.  Mr. Goule is currently the paid “mouth” for the office of Rep. Collin Peterson (D) MN, and works to advance the agenda of the most special and invisible, Mr. Peterson.  Goule is the “House Agriculture Subcommittee Staff Director” and works directly for Peterson assembling teams going out to advance the National Identification System and Premises ID, among other things.  Goule is paid by Peterson to “talk up” these anti-American, anti-family farm and ranch, pro-corporate laws that will destroy the most productive and safe agricultural system in the world and convert it to industrialized corporate farming, rending our food supply unfit to eat at any cost.

 

Recently, several individuals, unable to gain Peterson’s direct attention (Peterson is renowned for refusing to acknowledge receipt of any information that does not correspond to his plans) began emailing Mr. Goule with their concerns about NAIS and Premises ID.  Mr. Goule, obviously shocked that any peon out here in real world would actually question his assertions, or who would attempt to supply him with actual facts and data not molested by USDA number spinners apparently became frightened and paranoid and, at the end of one very ill constructed email attested to the fact that he did not like to be “threatened.”  

 

Now, try as we might we have been unable to find any instance where Mr. Goule was being threatened.  Apparently, having to actually be faced with the truth about the agricultural and consumer community’s response to these destructive and ill advised programs was more than Mr. Goule could bear and having worked so closely with his mentor and bill payer, Collin Peterson, has adopted  Peterson’s penchant for becoming indignant when questioned or queried directly. 

 

(If you have never attended a public meeting where Collin Peterson is present, you are in for a real show!  Peterson, who likes to plant shills in the audience with pre-planned questions so that he can give his pre-planned answer and control the dialogue by only selecting his shills for questions,  becomes visibly agitated, red-faced and bug eyed if someone slips through and asks him a real question or presents him with actual information that refutes what he claims he knows.  Many of those who watched the March 11, 2009 Ag hearings couldn’t help but note Peterson looking as if his head was going to explode and fly off across the room when Dr. Thornsberry delivered his fact filled critique of NAIS.)

 

We did do some preliminary searching on Goule’s assertions that poultry, pork and dairy are fully on board with these programs, but unless he believes that these groups are comprised solely of corporate operations, his assertions are not true.  These groups are NOT totally or even marginally on board unless they have a corporate origin and will benefit directly from the reduction of competition and the favoritism written into these new Nazi style laws for them.

 

We also fail to understand why Mr. Gould would consider documented and resourced information contrary to his promotional propaganda to be “harassment” as he claimed.  Or was it simply the idea that anyone would dare to bother him with their opinions or contradictions of his “talking points” was something he should not have to endure, what with being so special and all.

 

Mr. Goule appears to suffer from the same sense of arrogance that our elected officials do.  For some reason, the position they have attained somehow relieves them from any sense of obligation to the public at large. Now, cloistered in their privileged political positions none seem to be aware of or have any memory of the people they swore to serve.  In Mr. Goule’s case, being unelected seems to heighten his sense of privileged disassociation.

 

Sue Deiderich from Illinois recently wrote a lengthy but pointed letter  to Mr. Goule in which she pointed out that although he is hired by a Congressman, he is by extension supposed to be working for the people of the United States and is a public officer.  As such, I cannot conceive how he or any of the other and various public officials can conclude that they either will not listen to the public, or for some reason are not obligated to.

 

© 2009 Marti Oakley

%d bloggers like this: