Comments on: Congress Debates Use Of "Downer" Cows

Agriculture Secretary Argues Not All Cattle That Are Unable To Walk Are Unsafe To Eat

Add a Comment See all 29 Comments
by jslepian1 February 29, 2008 1:10 PM EST
All I hear about is the safety of the food supply ... does anybody care about the cruelty to these animals ? These are sentient beings ... downer cows should not be processed for food because it''s CRUEL, regardless of the safety of the food supply.
There are so many options for people these days ... meat substitutes, free range beef ... there''s no legitimate reason to support this horrible, horrible agribusiness industry by purchasing factory slaughtered beef.
Reply to this comment
by ianlou February 29, 2008 11:40 AM EST
Salad anyone?
Reply to this comment
by greeneyes222 February 29, 2008 10:48 AM EST
I see the agriculture secretary is no better than the heads of other government agencies. Cater to the good for business crowd, and ignore the well-being of the people.

Exactly when did the mission of government agencies change from regulation and protection to paid spokesman for various industries?
Reply to this comment
by brianbwb-2009 February 29, 2008 9:25 AM EST
Posted by GrammaWhamma

But do you trust a proven-corrupt meat packing industry to make that determination by themselves without checks and balances?
Reply to this comment
by grammawhamma February 29, 2008 8:48 AM EST
If a cow is down due to an injury and not an illness there is no reason why it can''t be used for food. Cows that are too "ill" to stand should not be used for food.
Reply to this comment
by stephanienym February 29, 2008 4:54 AM EST
I%u2019m so disgusted by this tape that I just can%u2019t eat meat anymore, I can%u2019t stomach it%u2026
This is all about special interest groups in Washington%u2026MONEY, MONEY, MONEY
Reply to this comment
by brianbwb-2009 February 29, 2008 4:01 AM EST
Two articles in today''s news use the word "fairness", Bush says it is not fair that telecoms be held liable for violating the privacy rights of the users, and this clown saying it is not "fair" that meat companies be held liable for introducing tainted meat into the food supply.

Is this the new neocon strategy, whining about "unfairness" after thirty plus years of profiteering earned not through merit, but through unfair corruption and collusion?
Reply to this comment
by brianbwb-2009 February 29, 2008 3:33 AM EST
"Schafer told reporters after the hearing that it was not fair to cattle owners to ban the slaughter of cows that may be perfectly safe to eat and just have a broken leg or hip."

What he fails to discuss is how it can be determined that a downer cow was simply an injured animal, in light of the insufficient number, and corrupt nature of the meat safety inspectors. The E. coli epidemic is proof that the inspectors are not doing their jobs, but this corruption supporter wants to posit that we ignore the dangers because of the potential lost profit.
Reply to this comment
by michellem99-2009 February 29, 2008 1:20 AM EST
I have seen this issue on KIRO 7 TV in Seattle WA and it made me sick the way those animals were treated. The humane thing is to put them to sleep and not put meat from them in the food chain. A total ban on dower cows. We demand safe meat not any less just to make a buck. The meat plants yhat do this need to be shut down.
Reply to this comment
See all 29 Comments

Exclusive Webshow

Mike Huckabee on GOP "rock stars," 2012, health care reform and more. Watch Now

  • MOST POPULAR
Discussed
  1. Lambert: Offering No Apologies

    (490 recent comments)

Latest News
News in Pictures
Scroll Left Scroll Right
Connect with CBS News

Stay connected with the CBS News using your favorite social networks and online news applications: