<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for Thoughts on Obama’s USDA pick]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by davedenali http://www.grist.org/article/More-on-Vilsack/ Wed, 17 Dec 2008 10:40:04 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/More-on-Vilsack/1 why organic activists lose these fights

I empathize with the sustainable ag and organic communities, who are on the right side.  Tom Vilsack WAS elected governor of Iowa, though -- as farmy a farm state as they come.  The sustainable ag folks seem to act as if it were them vs Monsanto, and the truth is a lot more complicated than that.  America's farmers --real farmers, not just ADM -- often do not hold environmentalists especially dear. People who hold views like Tom Vilsack's -- who do not think genetically modified crops are the spawn of the devil -- win elections in farm states like Iowa.  And no President is going to appoint a Secretary of Agriculture who is not acceptable to the public at large in farm states.

]]> why organic activists lose these fights

I empathize with the sustainable ag and organic communities, who are on the right side.  Tom Vilsack WAS elected governor of Iowa, though -- as farmy a farm state as they come.  The sustainable ag folks seem to act as if it were them vs Monsanto, and the truth is a lot more complicated than that.  America's farmers --real farmers, not just ADM -- often do not hold environmentalists especially dear. People who hold views like Tom Vilsack's -- who do not think genetically modified crops are the spawn of the devil -- win elections in farm states like Iowa.  And no President is going to appoint a Secretary of Agriculture who is not acceptable to the public at large in farm states.

]]> Comment #2 by Green Granny http://www.grist.org/article/More-on-Vilsack/ Wed, 17 Dec 2008 19:06:52 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/More-on-Vilsack/2 You're right Dave

And though I don't like to hear it, thank you for reminding us.  If we are to achieve sustainable ag, we must convince farmers of the benefits. . .  After all, it is the farmers who buy GMO seed, pesticides, fertilizers, and all the other "stuff" associated with big industrial agriculture.  If they don't buy it, Monsanto won't have a market.  And, sad as it is, you are right that most "real farmers" "often do not hold environementalists especially dear."  Why is that?

"We must be the change we wish to see in the world." -- Mahatma Ghandi

]]> You're right Dave

And though I don't like to hear it, thank you for reminding us.  If we are to achieve sustainable ag, we must convince farmers of the benefits. . .  After all, it is the farmers who buy GMO seed, pesticides, fertilizers, and all the other "stuff" associated with big industrial agriculture.  If they don't buy it, Monsanto won't have a market.  And, sad as it is, you are right that most "real farmers" "often do not hold environementalists especially dear."  Why is that?

"We must be the change we wish to see in the world." -- Mahatma Ghandi

]]> Comment #3 by realfarmer http://www.grist.org/article/More-on-Vilsack/ Thu, 18 Dec 2008 09:14:44 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/More-on-Vilsack/3 who's your farmer?

let me get this straight: "real farmers" are the ones who grow high fructose corn syrup? the ones who would go out of business if not for government subsidies?

call me crazy, but i think "real farmers" are the ones who grow "real food." i think "real farmers" are the ones who actually turn a profit. i think "real farmers" are the ones who don't beg for corporate welfare from politicians.

it's about time that environmentalists realized that we can create a sustainable future only by ending the Farm Bill altogether. all those so-called "farmers" couldn't afford to buy GMO seeds, pesticides, and fertilizers if the government weren't PAYING THEM TO DO IT!

i'm a real farmer, and i approve this message.

]]> who's your farmer?

let me get this straight: "real farmers" are the ones who grow high fructose corn syrup? the ones who would go out of business if not for government subsidies?

call me crazy, but i think "real farmers" are the ones who grow "real food." i think "real farmers" are the ones who actually turn a profit. i think "real farmers" are the ones who don't beg for corporate welfare from politicians.

it's about time that environmentalists realized that we can create a sustainable future only by ending the Farm Bill altogether. all those so-called "farmers" couldn't afford to buy GMO seeds, pesticides, and fertilizers if the government weren't PAYING THEM TO DO IT!

i'm a real farmer, and i approve this message.

]]> Comment #4 by zbouchard http://www.grist.org/article/More-on-Vilsack/ Sat, 27 Dec 2008 23:42:33 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/More-on-Vilsack/4 Ethanol?

I thought this debate ended a while ago, not just among the environmental community but to all those who have studied the facts.  Even cellulosic ethanol, a more efficient form of ethanol, is a death wish to the world as we know it.  How could someone as smart as Obama pick someone who is a staunch proponent of ethanol?  

Trying to make a better form of gasoline is missing the point.  If by 2030 we are running cars on any form of gasoline, we will have MAJOR problems. Goals of gasoline for 2045? That's just silly. If all goes well, in 10 years our cars will be run by electricity powered from renewable energy grids (solar/wind).  

To those interested in learning about sustainable agriculture, I suggest reading Michael Pollan's latest novel "In Defense of Food" as well as his recent article in the New York Times, found at http://www.michaelpollan.com/article.php?id=97.

This is hardly the type of overall change that Obama promised. This is a blatant disregard of science and Obama should make good on his commitment to change and support someone who is looking out for the planet.  Obama's children should be enraged.  A move from Big Oil to Big Ethanol is more of a Bush like era of rule.  GMOs, ethanol, pesticides, oil, giant factory farms, etc need to become a mistake of the past - not a blue-print for a bleak future.

Zach Bouchard - GreenShopper.com

]]> Ethanol?

I thought this debate ended a while ago, not just among the environmental community but to all those who have studied the facts.  Even cellulosic ethanol, a more efficient form of ethanol, is a death wish to the world as we know it.  How could someone as smart as Obama pick someone who is a staunch proponent of ethanol?  

Trying to make a better form of gasoline is missing the point.  If by 2030 we are running cars on any form of gasoline, we will have MAJOR problems. Goals of gasoline for 2045? That's just silly. If all goes well, in 10 years our cars will be run by electricity powered from renewable energy grids (solar/wind).  

To those interested in learning about sustainable agriculture, I suggest reading Michael Pollan's latest novel "In Defense of Food" as well as his recent article in the New York Times, found at http://www.michaelpollan.com/article.php?id=97.

This is hardly the type of overall change that Obama promised. This is a blatant disregard of science and Obama should make good on his commitment to change and support someone who is looking out for the planet.  Obama's children should be enraged.  A move from Big Oil to Big Ethanol is more of a Bush like era of rule.  GMOs, ethanol, pesticides, oil, giant factory farms, etc need to become a mistake of the past - not a blue-print for a bleak future.

Zach Bouchard - GreenShopper.com

]]> Comment #5 by concernedhuman http://www.grist.org/article/More-on-Vilsack/ Mon, 05 Jan 2009 09:17:56 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/More-on-Vilsack/5 Ethanol? Seriously?

I thought this debate ended a while ago, not just among the environmental community but to all those who have studied the facts.  Even cellulosic ethanol, a more efficient form of ethanol, is a death wish to the world as we know it.  How could someone as smart as Obama pick someone who is a staunch proponent of ethanol?  

Trying to make a better form of gasoline is missing the point.  If by 2030 we are running cars on any form of gasoline, we will have MAJOR problems. Goals of gasoline for 2045? That's just silly. If all goes well, in 10 years our cars will be run by electricity powered from renewable energy grids (solar/wind).  

To those interested in learning about sustainable agriculture, I suggest reading Michael Pollan's latest novel "In Defense of Food" as well as his recent article in the New York Times, found at http://www.michaelpollan.com/article.php?id=97.

This is hardly the type of overall change that Obama promised. This is a blatant disregard of science and Obama should make good on his commitment to change and support someone who is looking out for the planet.  Obama's children should be enraged.  A move from Big Oil to Big Ethanol is more of a Bush like era of rule.  GMOs, ethanol, pesticides, oil, giant factory farms, etc need to become a mistake of the past - not a blue-print for a bleak future.

Concerned Animal - GreenShopper.com

Check out GreenShopper.com

]]> Ethanol? Seriously?

I thought this debate ended a while ago, not just among the environmental community but to all those who have studied the facts.  Even cellulosic ethanol, a more efficient form of ethanol, is a death wish to the world as we know it.  How could someone as smart as Obama pick someone who is a staunch proponent of ethanol?  

Trying to make a better form of gasoline is missing the point.  If by 2030 we are running cars on any form of gasoline, we will have MAJOR problems. Goals of gasoline for 2045? That's just silly. If all goes well, in 10 years our cars will be run by electricity powered from renewable energy grids (solar/wind).  

To those interested in learning about sustainable agriculture, I suggest reading Michael Pollan's latest novel "In Defense of Food" as well as his recent article in the New York Times, found at http://www.michaelpollan.com/article.php?id=97.

This is hardly the type of overall change that Obama promised. This is a blatant disregard of science and Obama should make good on his commitment to change and support someone who is looking out for the planet.  Obama's children should be enraged.  A move from Big Oil to Big Ethanol is more of a Bush like era of rule.  GMOs, ethanol, pesticides, oil, giant factory farms, etc need to become a mistake of the past - not a blue-print for a bleak future.

Concerned Animal - GreenShopper.com

Check out GreenShopper.com

]]>