FDA Bets It Will Escape Coming Political Hurricane, Targets Raw Camel Milk

camelmilkWhen government regimes change, the people with the best noses for where things are headed are usually the bureaucrats. They spend years, even decades, watching politicians of all stripes come and go, and learn to read the tea leaves.

Right now, we are witnessing regime change in the extreme. We have a president who has threatened to eliminate huge agencies, like those in education and energy, and is preparing to carry out a major purge in the normally sacrosanct area of national intelligence. He has gone around the Defense Department (and the sitting President) to dress down military contractors. So you know bureaucrats everywhere in Washington have spent the last couple months watching very nervously for signs of what life will be like in their own particular bureaucracies, post-January 20.

It’s in this charged atmosphere that wily operatives within the dairy division of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration have determined that their place in life is secure enough that they can renew at least part of their assault on raw milk. In just the last couple weeks, they have targeted a small Missouri farm that produces camel milk, accusing it of violating the federal prohibition against interstate sale of raw milk. In the process, the FDA has felt confident enough to declare that raw camel milk—until now a regulatory exception— is illegal to ship in interstate commerce.

Understand, the matter of regulating camel milk has lurked in the regulatory background for several years now. The FDA, along with state regulators in California and elsewhere, have been monitoring rapidly expanding production around the U.S., in response to exploding public demand, despite prices of $100 a gallon and more. Its primary appeal is that it appears in at least some cases to moderate the symptoms of autism in children.

Raw camel milk has not been regulated by the FDA or CDFA (California Department of Food and Agriculture) becuase it does not come from a hooved animal. Camels have pads on their feet and, as a direct result of this physical characteristic, appear to be outside the traditional raw milk laws or regs.

But in a December 19 warning letter to the small Missouri farm I mentioned, Hump-Back Dairys of Miller, MO, the FDA states that it has re-interpreted its own regulations regarding the definition of raw milk: “The term ‘milk product’ is defined as ‘[f]ood products made exclusively or principally from the lacteal secretion obtained from one or more healthy milk-producing animals, e.g., cows, goats, sheep, and water buffalo . . . .’ This definition clearly includes the commercial lacteal secretions from all healthy milk-producing animals. Although the definition refers to the examples of cows, goats, sheep, and water buffalo, that list is not exhaustive. The definition thus includes the commercial lacteal secretions from other animals as well, including camels.”

Presto, the FDA has ruled that camels are part of a list once limited to hooved animals.

So how might this FDA sleight of hand affect the national supply of raw camel milk, especially for parents of autistic children desperate for an ongoing supply? For now, the big picture seems unchanged.

According to one newspaper report, the owner of Hump-Back Dairys has agreed to discontinue shipping his camel milk outside of Missouri. But one of the largest distributors of raw camel milk,  Desert Farms Inc., says it plans to continue its national distribution of raw camel milk, using milk from farms like Hump-Back Dairys. The owner, Walid Abdul-Wahab, says the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund has helped his company make its case to the FDA that raw camel milk isn’t subject to the same interstate-commerce restrictions as raw milk from hooved animals. Abdul-Wahab says he has farmer sources around the country supplying raw camel milk. Moreover, other farmers have begun supplying raw camel milk directly to food clubs around the country, in response to heightened demand.

But if the FDA is planning a truly major assault into this arena, then all supply sources could be in for some difficult times.

Now, why would the incoming Trump administration be expected to take notice of the FDA’s aggressiveness against raw camel milk? First, of all, Trump at one point last fall ranted against the “FDA food police,” accusing the agency of “inspection overkill.” (However, the criticism never made it to Trump’s web site, and was never mentioned again during the campaign.)

In addition, a number of raw milk proponents have said they are certain Trump and/or his family are avid raw milk drinkers, buying it via food clubs in Florida, but just not yet ready to go public. No real evidence has ever emerged on this matter, either.

Finally, Trump has indicated support for the theory that childhood vaccines lead to autism. But he has also said he supports vaccination—just would like to see them spread out some more.

So, does Trump care about raw milk and small farms, or not? The FDA is clearly betting he doesn’t care. I’ll tweet a link to my post to @realDonaldTrump, see if he takes notice. You might as well, too, if you’d like to test him out. Let’s see if the FDA bureaucrats have bet right on their venture into the political hurricanes swirling out there.

43 comments to FDA Bets It Will Escape Coming Political Hurricane, Targets Raw Camel Milk

  • Mark Mcafee Mark Mcafee


    The fda seems to make up its own rules as they go along and as they see fit. Just like someone else we think we know. The Slovakian wife has not said a word…..I think she is terrified of being the First Lady. She now refuses to live in the whitehouse…and never thought running for presudent was for real. She thought it was all for show….then Trump stirred up the emotions of the foolish and shazzam. He is president.

    Where are the promised taxes??? Lets see how many millions you make in Russia??? Now you pissed off the CIA and FBI, not a smart move.

    As for Camels raw milk, I saw this coming in 2008 in Florida at the NCIMS convention. Welcome to the world of FDA and raw milk !!

  • Bob

    They don’t want regulation because it interferes with big business but they do favor regulation that squashes competition to those big businesses. I hate to use the f word but this is what fascist governments do. So the FDA may be right in their calculations.

    • Use of the ‘f’ word is informally proscribed because it states an essential truth. “f” parties have been in the ‘West’ too – natural enough for descendants of corporately run governments of the privileged class ( feudalism ).

  • Joe C.

    Obama is still in office as this is taking place, and the FDA is currently under the Obama administration. I don’t think Trump should be blamed for this as this is not taking place under a Trump administration.

    • David Gumpert David Gumpert

      Interesting point. FDA may simply be trying to get as much nasty stuff as possible done under tho old regime. BTW, I am not criticizing Trump, just speculating about how FDA is reading the tea leaves.

      • Gary Ogden

        Good point, David. Shove as much through as they can, while they can. This is likely the reason for the CDC’s recent granting itself unconstitutional powers to detain incommunicado and forcibly medically treat and electronically monitor anyone they see fit to (I’m not making this up). I think Obama is simply ignorant about all issues in science, health, and medicine. Actually, I still like him as a human being, while deeply dissatisfied by his presidency.

        • Ken Conrad Ken Conrad

          I am inclined to agree with you about Obama… It would take one hell of a powerful individual/personality to successfully challenge and stand up to the bureaucratic juggernaut that exists in Washington and across America. Kennedy tried and we all know the result there.

  • Gary Ogden

    We will know more when he appoints a new FDA commissioner. I am hopeful. He does seem to have some awareness of what is, and what is not wholesome in food. By the way, David, it is not a “theory” that vaccines cause autism. It is a fact. The Court of Special Masters in Washington, D.C., which adjudicates all claims of vaccine injury (since manufacturers are fully indemnified), has compensated at least 83 cases of children in ruling that the vaccine produced the encephalopathy whose result was a diagnosis of autism. Today, they play semantic games. Today, the “a” word is not used by claimants with any hope of compensation, since the ruling in 2009 in the Omnibus Autism Proceedings denied nearly 5,000 claims at once, with the stroke of a pen, and represents the greatest miscarriage of justice in U.S. history. Encephalopathy, yes-it is on the table of injuries; autism, no; it is not. This fact is easily checked here: digitalcommons.pace.edu/perl/vol28/iss2/6
    The vaccine court is not a real court. Neither federal rules of evidence nor procedure apply; it is claimants and their attorneys (whose fees are determined and paid by the court) against a judge who is assisted by often vicious career DOJ attorneys. It is part of the dark underbelly of our government, and gets virtually no press, so the public, and many doctors, have never heard of it. Shame on you for repeating this canard. It is because you haven’t yet accepted the truth that newspaper and broadcasters, on the issue of vaccines, are propaganda organs for pharma. They are craven and cowardly.

    • David Gumpert David Gumpert

      Doctors as well are nearly unanimous in their support of vaccination. I’ve had lengthy discussions with some, and they have all kinds of research to support their side. I’ve also had lengthy discussions with parents who are certain vaccinations made their kids autistic. I just don’t know enough about the research, the methodology of each report, and so forth, to make an absolute statement, so I refer to the “theory” or “argument….for each side.

      • Ken Conrad Ken Conrad

        I agree with David Ayoub, MD, “I am no longer “trying to dig up evidence to prove” vaccines cause autism. There is already abundant evidence,…… This debate is not scientific but is political”.

        As I stated earlier, “The testimony of individuals and parents (all of whom were more or less pro vaccination) is what carries the most weight with respect to vaccine safety and effectiveness. They are ultimately “the proof that is in the pudding”.

        What is known in measured detail is how vaccines are manufactured…

        Anyone that would consider it acceptable to bypassing natural censoring mechanisms by injecting multiple foreign antigens and toxic ingredients into an infant, are fools! The attempt to compel and coerce parents to capitulate to such a procedure is unconscionable. Indeed as Dr. Robert Mendelsohn suggests, “The greatest threat of childhood diseases lies in the dangerous and ineffectual efforts made to prevent them through mass immunization…..There is no convincing scientific evidence that mass inoculations can be credited with eliminating any childhood disease.”

      • Mr. J. Ingvar Odegaard Mr. J. Ingvar Odegaard

        Well, there is “Vaxxed: From Cover-up to Catastrophe” which is a movie. The associated website is vaxxedthemovie.com

        Has anyone seen it?

        Mr. J. Ingvar Odegaard

        • Gary Ogden

          Mr. Odegaard: Yes, like more that 50,000 others, I have seen it. As Robert DeNiro said, “People should see this movie.” This is the story of blatant scientific fraud at the CDC. God bless Andy Wakefield (the director of Vaxxed); he is a soft-spoken moral pitbull.

      • Gary Ogden

        David: I almost choked on my coffee when I read “Doctors as well are nearly unanimous in their support of vaccination,” and “. . . they have all kinds of research to support their side.” First, medical schools teach almost nothing about vaccines other than the schedule and how to properly make an injection. Second, there are hundreds of U.S physicians who have spoken out in public about the very real risks of vaccination and stated their opposition to the CDC schedule. A brief list Toni Bark, M.D., Suzanne Humphries, M.D., Paul Thomas, M.D., Kenneth Stoller, M.D., Russell Blaylock, M.D. Those are the ones I can think of off the top of my head. There are thousands of physicians and scientists who know only too well that vaccines are dangerous, but keep their mouths shut because they know that speaking up is career suicide. They know about the kangaroo court which destroyed the career of one of the finest researchers in the U.K, Dr. Andrew Wakefield, a man of uncommon moral courage, to protect the profits of SmithKline Beecham (and with assistance of the Murdoch empire). (read his book, “Callous Disregard,” and David L. Lewis, PhD’s “Science for Sale.” Dr. Lewis was the EPA scientist who discovered the dangers of improperly-cleaned dental hand pieces and colonoscopy endoscopes. His career was destroyed to protect the sewage sludge industry-I’m not making this up). They also know about the Medical Board of California’s current attempt to take away the license of Dr. Bob Sears, a nationally known pediatrician and author, for writing a medical exemption. Doctors are intimidated into silence. As for research, they have none of any value exception the one which supports the Wakefield hypothesis, which they threw in the garbage can (this is the subject of the whistleblower claim by William S. Thompson, PhD., a CDC scientist and one of the authors of the study-you can easily search his name and find the statement he released through his attorney, and you can find the video of U.S. Rep Bill Posey on the floor of the House pleading for the relevant committee to subpoena him. This is the only way he can testify, and he is eager to.) The Institute of Medicine rejected 17 of the 22 studies the CDC trotted out to dismiss the link between vaccines and autism. The five they accepted are all population studies. Ask any statistician how easy it is to manipulate data in a population study. You’ll get a chuckle. The truth is, David, there is not a single proper study, that is, a controlled trial, examining the link between vaccination and autism, except the one they threw in the garbage can. There has never been a study comparing vaccinated with unvaccinated (the Thompson study looked only at timing of the MMR shot). Representatives Weldon(R) and Maloney(D) tried to get a bill through the House to do this, but failed. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. calls the CDC “a cesspool of corruption,” and he is correct. Tuskegee; bird flu (1976); Agent Orange; swine flu , 2009-10 (the miscarriage rate rose 4,000% with the double shot); zika; and on and on. Last year, a new medical textbook, “Vaccines and Autoimmunty,” was published. The editor is Yehuda Schoefeld of Tel Aviv University, the world’s leading autoimmunologist. Dr. Shoenfeld knows, physicians know, NICU nurses know, and mothers, who know their children better than anyone, know. The reason you, and most of the public don’t know, is that there is a self-imposed near-complete blanket of censorship in our media against any information about vaccines other than cheerleading. Truly frightening, David. I realize this is not your area of interest, and that is perfectly fine, but as an American citizen who cares about health and the future of our nation, It would be a good idea for you to get some basic information about the disaster we have created. There is a wealth of information, and good science available (on PubMed), but you won’t see it in any newspaper or hear it on TV.
        On another note, there was a coup de etat on Friday. Homeland Security has taken control of U.S. elections.

        • Ken Conrad Ken Conrad

          Very well said Gary…
          I would just like to add that the following book should be required reading for everyone who administers injections, everyone who receives injections, and everyone who authorizes injections for children.


          In a review of the above book Stephanie Seneff, PhD, senior research scientist, MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory “This magnificent book is in a rare class of books that present impeccable scientific evidence in prose that is accessible to the educated lay public, while slowly unfolding a gripping mystery that grabs the reader’s attention all the way through. If Heather Fraser is right about the link between vaccines and peanut allergy, and the evidence speaks for itself, then it opens up the frightening possibility that vaccines play a major role in all the food allergies that beset today’s children.”

          Vaccinations and their relationship to food allergies, eczema etc. has been an on-going topic of discussion for over 100 years and as I previously stated, “Unfortunately, TPTB do not want to head down that path just as they do not want to head down that path when it comes to autism”.

  • Gary Ogden

    David: Voltaire is credited with the following (in my paraphrase): “In order to know who rules over you. it is only necessary to find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” The CDC runs a multi-blliion dollar public relations operation (I’m not making this up), complete with an army of trolls who attack anyone who questions vaccine safety or policy. Newspapers and television do not allow any stories contradicting official vaccine policy, either.

    • David Gumpert David Gumpert

      Think you’re right about CDC PR operation. But newspapers and TV do sometimes include Qs/concerns about vaccination. Dr. Oz is one who has questioned, and taken heat for it. http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/09/12/has-dr-oz-become-antivaccine/

      • Gary Ogden

        David: You’re right. I stand corrected. Dr. Oz really is a good guy, even though he sometimes errs, like all of us.

      • I have also seen reports that Dr. Wakefield’s discrediting was itself a scam and falsehood.

        • Gary Ogden

          John Farnham: Absolutely right. Dr. Wakefield’s codefendant before the GMC kangaroo court was Professor John Walker Smith, a coauthor of the Lancet paper, and one of the world’s leading pediatric gastroenterologists. Although retired by then, he wished to clear his good name. To his good fortune, his insurance funded an appeal, and he was fully exonerated by the British High Court (Justice Mitting’s decision is a good read; he essentially calls the GMC [equivalent to our state medical boards] incompetent to even understand the charges). Dr. Wakefield’s insurance refused to fund his appeal, and there it stands today. Virtually everything the media has printed about Dr. Wakefield is a lie and a smear. This is why governments and industry use propaganda. It is effective. Tell a lie often enough and people eventually think it is truth.

  • Gary Ogden

    David: Read the January 6, 2017 Cleveland Plain Dealer. Dr. Daniel Neides of the Cleveland Clinic giving good advice to stay healthy this new year. The result? A vicious attack by the CDC’s army of trolls.

    • David Gumpert David Gumpert

      Thanks for providing this info. I take back what I said that doctors are nearly unanimous in their support of vaccination. There clearly is a vocal minority asking tough questions. Here is a link to article by Dr. Daniel Neides.

      One quote: “Why do I mention autism now twice in this article. Because we have to wake up out of our trance and stop following bad advice. Does the vaccine burden – as has been debated for years – cause autism? I don’t know and will not debate that here. What I will stand up and scream is that newborns without intact immune systems and detoxification systems are being over-burdened with PRESERVATIVES AND ADJUVANTS IN THE VACCINES.”

      And this negative reaction from business magazine Forbes:

      • Ken Conrad Ken Conrad

        That Forbes article can best be described using the author’s own words…
        “It is difficult to overstate the harm” Tara Haelle “is causing” with the “misinformation” in her article.

        I wonder what her reaction would be to this interview and the thousands of similar situations that are coming to light with respect to vaccine caused injury and death? I have seen people like her, who claim that“science” is on their side who scoff at such testimonies. She would likely be no exception.

        Both of my wife’s parents have a doctorate in pharmacology, her father taught at one of Canada’s leading universities. A number of years ago they both decided to receive the flu shot together at the same time and both of them acquired the flu within a couple of days and were laid up for over a week. They both recognized that they had acquired the flu from the vaccine and swore that they would never get another. This incident occurred long before I met and married their daughter Sara. They also supported our decision not to vaccinate the children…their grandchildren.

        My mother would never receive the flu shot, but my dad (the picture of health), about twenty years ago decided that he would. He too became ill shortly after receiving the vaccine; he developed pneumonia and was sick all winter.

        If I had received 10 dollars for every person that I know that acquired the flu after receiving the flu vaccine, I would be well off by now!!!

      • Ken Conrad Ken Conrad

        Tara Haelle’s reductionist approach to formaldehyde in vaccines for example is grossly misleading … If one follows the CDC’s recommended vaccination schedule, a child in the US will receive 43+ doses of 14 vaccines by the time he/she is 6 years of age. What are the synergistic and cumulative affects of injecting that number of multi-dose vaccines into an infant that contain not only formaldehyde or formalin but also include various other solvent detergents, preservative, adjuvents and excipients such as, Triton X 100, polysorbate 80, acetone, MSG, antibiotics, aluminum potassium sulfate, aluminum hydroxide, aluminum phosphate, aluminum hydroxyphosphate, etc. etc. etc.? Simply put, THEY DON’T KNOW… and based on this lack of knowledge they persist with their criminal assault on human dignity and human rights with their enforced vaccine mandates.

        The following article is worth reading,

        “The key to all the above, as I assess it, is this which the formaldehyde document points out:
        ‘Genetic and related effects: Formaldehyde is a direct-acting genotoxic compound that affects multiple gene expression pathways, including those involved in DNA synthesis and repair and regulation of cell proliferation. … In vitro studies with mammalian and human cells were positive for DNA adducts, DNA-protein crosslinks, DNA-DNA crosslinks, unscheduled DNA synthesis, single-strand breaks, mutations, and cytogenetic effects (chromosomal aberrations, sister chromatid exchange, and micronucleus induction)’.”

        And this article…

        How could the government recommend limiting exposure to formaldehyde as much as possible and yet at the same time recommend injecting your child with frequent doses of it via 25 recommended vaccines by the age of 6 months, 36 vaccines by the age of 18 months, 43 vaccines by the age of 4-6 years old and a whopping 68 vaccines by the ages of 11-12 years old?

      • Gary Ogden

        David: It’s absolutely chilling. And it comes from desperation. They are losing the public relations battle. The best they can do is argue from logical fallacy, such as a priori-“the science is settled,” or the argument from eminence-“experts say,” or the ad hominem attack. They absolutely refuse to engage in a factual discussion, in actual science other than “many studies have shown.” What studies? Name them and defend them! The Greater Good website has a link to a wealth of scientific research on this topic. What has happened to our nation when we are not allowed to question a medical procedure? This is why it is not Trump who scares me, but the juggernaut which is the medical industry (and food industry) and their enablers in Congress, the bureaucracy, and the media. And Obama simply doesn’t get it, or is too spineless to do anything about it. We are in grave danger. We’ve all seen the vicious attacks on farmers producing real food. Doctors have considerably more autonomy, but they don’t hesitate to attack them. Here in California the are trying to destroy Dr. Bob Sears simply for writing a medical exemption! This is all part of an agenda of control. It serves the interest of industry to have a docile population swilling their junk food and dosing on their “medicines.” The 2017 NDAA Obama just signed has established a Ministry of Truth, to control the message. Facebook is now blocking legitimate web sites such as Age of Autism. These are ominous developments, David.

      • Ken Conrad Ken Conrad

        This could be Tara Haelle. Indeed, the anti vaccine or vaccine choice movement was built on and continues to grow on the pain and suffering of parents whose children were harmed by the very modality they thought was supposed to protect them… and others.

        Christy Engelhart states, “I was that pushy pro-vaccine supporter who shamed mothers for not vaccinating. I thought I was protecting my kids,” admits Christy. “It’s crazy, you never think something like this can happen to your family…until it does. And then when you research it, you realize it happens EVERY DAY to families around the US.

        ‘Christy now funnels her pain and anger into educating others on the REAL risk of death and harm from vaccines. “Raising awareness is now what’s important to me. It’s too late for Reid, but I will do whatever I can to save another baby from the same fate,” explains Christy. “I can at least plant a seed and, hopefully, get at least one mother to do the research before she vaccinates her baby. I would give anything to go back in time and do the research before vaccines killed my baby. Now, I speak out so something good might come out of this tragedy.”

  • Mr. J. Ingvar Odegaard Mr. J. Ingvar Odegaard

    Humor sketch: 3 1/2 minutes as a lady deals with a roomful of bureaucrats,


    Happy New Year

  • Mr. J. Ingvar Odegaard Mr. J. Ingvar Odegaard

    Well, trivial humour is just that, but perhaps it can buck-up our spirits a little bit here at the beginning of the new year.

    That sketch with the Spanish actress, Carolina Bang was pretty good.

    Here, in this sketch we have a committee and some red lines.


    I’m done.

    God bless you all.


  • Mark Mcafee Mark Mcafee

    God. I love Meryl Steep.

    • Ben Toldovigan

      I had to turn it off. Nothing I detest more than an icon of the Liberal Elite lecturing away at a captive audience. Especially when the lecturer has zero credentials and a history of activist screw ups — the alar scare, for example, leaps to mind whenever I see or hear Streep.

  • Gary Ogden

    David: Fascinating article today on greenmedinfo.com about the annihilation of germ theory by new research. This research completely undermines the foundation of vaccination theory. We know so woefully little about the microbial world and its interaction with higher animals, but exciting research is being done. The implications of this new knowledge are revolutionary. Only a matter of time until they are attacked by media and blocked from research funds and publication.

  • Mark Mcafee Mark Mcafee


    Meryl Streep has distinguished herself as a selfless and highly conscious spirit that brings our American story to life in her characters. She is one of us. To denegrate her is a reflection on oneself.

    She spoke truth to power…..she spoke about Trump when he denegrated the physically challenged and women and other races and other cultures. For that you condemn her???

    What does denigrating Meryl Streep mean? It reflects on you. Look in the mirror. Shame in you.

    • Mr. J. Ingvar Odegaard Mr. J. Ingvar Odegaard

      Meryl Streep is an actress and a good one. She is NOT, however, informed. She bashed Trump for something he didn’t do and ignored the actual attack on someone with mental retardation (not just a simple birth defect), committed by Trump-hating thugs. Get a grip Hollywood. Time to wake up to reality and stop being shameless pawns. Just for clarification, I don’t watch the Golden Globes or any of those overrated Hollywood slobberfests. What a waste of time. –Dane

      Ingvar here
      Well, Trump did not so mock a reporter. I found this: “Thus the true story is as follows: Donald Trump embarrassed the media by finding the 9/11 Washington Post article. The media found the reporter who tried to backtrack. Trump impersonated the reporter backtracking. …
      Thus, Trump’s impersonations of a flustered reporter several months ago was turned into a left-wing and Establishment GOP narrative whereby Trump somehow hates the disabled.”

      What I cite above, I found here:

      All the best,

    • blesse\'d are the cheesemakers

      I should have known Mark would be all over Meryl Streep and her shameless speech at the Golden Globes. She is a fake person who reads lines written by others as though they were her own. She has no original thought. She is an actress who mimics and imitates life.

      She is a narcissist and a hypocrite. Her quote: “Disrespect invites disrespect.” Yes. She disrespected the man and the office before he’s even taken the oath.

      Nearly everything she said can be turned around on her and her Hollywood Elite Leftists.

      “When the powerful (or at least influential, in her case) use their position to bully others we all lose.”

      She is correct on that one. Her mindless, bigoted, scripted speech brought humanity down a few notches.

      Of course, McAfee loves that Hollywood unreal fake scum. By the way, don’t you love it when someone calls you out for “denigrating” someone only to denigrate you? Yes, I am guilty as charged, too. I couldn’t help it in this case.

      Welcome to the Hotel California.

    • Gordon Watson

      “truth to Power” ?! hold on a minit. Mr Trump isn’t even sworn in yet.

      If your heroine was a genuine patriot, then, instead of fawning all over the drag queen consort to President Suetoro, she would’ve mustered the courage to confront the O’bamanations who’d insinuated demselves in to the White House. Streep and the denizens of Hollyweird knew all along that so-called “Michele” is a man. As flawed as he may be, the election of Trump demonstrates that the conscience of white Christian America is reviving.

      It’s going to be an awfully long 8 years for the citizens who cannot accept the outcome of what – on other days – you refer to as “democracy”.

      • Gordon S Watson

        your latest cry of anguish proves old Harry Truman knew whereof he spoke = …”if’n you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen”.

        ever thought of the possibility that “your heart and humanity” made a great big mistake… coming on so politically chauvinistic in this venue? But the good news is = you’ve proven my theory … [ re-iterated to death ] … that raw milk is produced (mainly) by white people, for white people because it suits something in the Caucasian DNA. And that the overwhelming majority of those who pay attention to David Gumpert’s blog and forum, voted for Mr Trump as the lesser of 2 evils because their conscience reached its limit of tolerance for the filthy perverts in the satrapys of the Obama regime. The analysts on the losing side, who managed to be honest, admitted that Donald Trump prevailed because he understood “The White Vote”.

        You backed yourself into a corner … Donald & the Deplorables are the very same people who compose the majority of customers for Organic Pastures products. What are you going to do now? Refuse to serve them because you don’t like the way they vote?

  • mark mcafee mark mcafee

    Clearly, my humanity, soul and heart is made up of different DNA than some of the voices around here. I am going to excuse myself from further comment because it does not seem to make a difference and is a total waste of my time and energy. Those that know me know my humanity and my heart and what drives me.
    Do not think for one moment that you have won….you have not. What you have done is clearly express your hatred for good and your distain for consciousness and humanity.

    • David Gumpert David Gumpert

      Mark, clearly some people’s sense of reality has shifted in our new political age. That shift involves complete denial of a point or idea or event found to be unpleasant to them. So now I see people here and on FB turning themselves into pretzels to claim that, no, Trump wasn’t really mocking the disabled reporter. How so? Well, it turns out he has mocked other people, who don’t have disabilities. So, there, because Trump mocks normal people, the mocking of a disabled person doesn’t count. Got it? One person even put together a YouTube segment to make the point. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgaC0leEb68

      • Amanda

        Let me just say that — as someone who happens to have a VERY similar “disability” to that with which this reporter is inflicted — I find it disgusting that the media has exploited his physical condition to get a cheap shot at Trump. I also find it sad that Hollywood stars have taken it upon themselves to further exploit his condition so that they may portray themselves as white knights coming to his rescue. The reporter has a physical disability, not a mental disability. If the man has something to say to Trump in his own defense, well, he is more than capable of doing so himself. After all, we are talking about an extremely successful professional adult who has managed to land himself a career reporting at both the WAPO and the NY Times. Hardly a victim needing the world’s sympathies. If I were him, I’d be less worried about Trump mocking me (not even knowing that I was “disabled” when he did so) and more irritated by the media’s inability to shut up about my irrelevant physical condition which, in any case, has nothing to do with why he was being mocked in the first place. But, who knows? Maybe this reporter finds it easier to hide behind his physical condition rather than own up to his past work in question, which has now resurfaced and become a thorn in the side of his former employer? If that’s the case then I’m afraid he deserves all the criticism he gets over this. There are plenty of legit reasons to criticize Trump. This one is really reaching, and I guarantee you that reporter knows it.

    • Bless\'ed are the cheese makers

      Okay, we need to do a time out here. This is BS. If someone disagrees with you because that someone sees things from a different perspective, that does not mean that person hates good, disdains consciousness and disdains humanity. What a pile of crap and cop out argument. Typical leftist comeback.

      I disagree with you. “You’re a racist.”

      No, I just disagree with you. “You’re a misogynist.”

      No, I just see things from a different perspective. “You’re a homophobe, then.”

      No, I just disagree with you. “Well, you’re a xenophobe, then.”

      No, I just disagree with you. “You’re in denial, then.”

      No. I just disagree with you and I can cite as many references to support my argument as you can yours.

      “Then I’m going to take my football and go home.”

      Well, Okay, then. If that’s how you want to play it.

      Perhaps we should stay on point with this blog, “The Complete Patient.” I think we can all agree that we have much work to do regarding our industrial controlled Big Ag food system, raw milk issues, vaccinations, etc. Maybe we should stay with that general subject so we can all point our weapons at the same foe rather than forming a circular firing squad.

      Just sayin’ . . .

    • Ben Toldovigan

      Oh good lord, if we all had a dollar for every time Mark has left here in a snit, usually with the false promise never to return, well, we could all enjoy a nice dinner out on the town with cash left over to leave a generous tip for the waitstaff. In fairness, the preponderance of “hatred and disdain” I’ve seen exuded around here has come from McAffe himself (there’s a close runner-up, but I won’t dilute Mark’s prestigious award by mentioning any second string talent).

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>