R-CALF extends olive branch

[Cattleprod24]

Haymaker: You can believe what you want, but you have been seriously misled if you think that the $100,000 spent suing former directors is to the benefit of cattle producers. That money has gotten R-CALF members absolutely nothing in return. It could and should have been spent on actual cattle producer issues. The facts of this case are on www.swiftstallions.com - there is nothing on that site that is untrue. I challenge Bullard or Thornsberry to truthfully tell their members how much has been spent on this case and what advantages have been gained for their members. (They will never do that because they would have to admit to spending $100,000 of your money irresponsibly!)

You also seem to ignore the fact that all those who left R-CALF and reorganized as U.S. Cattlemen's Association are those who originally founded R-CALF. Those who left, Danni Beer in particular, are the ones who while at R-CALF and then at USCA helped get COOL passed.

Regarding the checkoff, the late Jim Hanna's legacy is being continued with those at USCA.

R-CALF no longer has the credibility it once had in D.C. Even its founder, Leo McDonnell, is no longer with R-CALF. In fact, Bullard and Thornsberry are now going after Leo in this lawsuit.

You either don't have all the facts or you are ignoring them. R-CALF simply is not the orginization it once was and unfortunately members like yourself are not being told the whole story.

[RobertMac]

If the government allowed voters to vote on the personal income tax, I bet it wouldn't pass! So, is the government "stealing" money from us and using it as they see fit without voters being "given the opportunity to vote on whether or not to" ??????

[Cinch]

[Cattleprod24]

Bottom line, the lawsuit was unnecessary, expensive, and a total waste of producer money. If you don't believe me, just look up the court documents and you will see where the judge in this case says the same thing!

Please show me where in the bylaws Bullard and Thornsberry are given authority to spend $100,000 of membership dollars WITHOUT membership approval. I guarantee if this was put on a ballot, it would not have passed - ranchers are smarter than that and are pretty darn careful of where their hard earned dollars are spent.

If this was truly a membership-driven organization, R-CALF members would not be paying a $100,000 legal bill with nothing to show for it.

Once again, where's the transparency? Why are members denied financial information? Why is there so much secrecy going on at the leadership level in a non-profit, member organization? This is no longer the same open organization as it was when Leo was at the helm.

[Oldtimer]

Did you ever notice how these folks that want to slam and bash R-CALF are usually ANONOYMOUS ones that just show up out of the blue ...And the coincidence of 2 of these brand new anonymous 1st time posters showing up in one day backslapping each other- both bashing R-CALF...

Stinks to high heaven- just as bad as the chickensh*ts with their swiftboating web site that hide in the shadows.....

If you ain't man enough to put your name behind what you stand for- than you don't stand for much in my view....

[HAY MAKER]

[Cattleprod24]

I don't see the identities of Haymaker and Old Timer revealed either!!

Maybe if we knew who you two were, we would understand why you refuse to believe the facts of how Bullard and Thornsberry have duped R-
CALF members.

If you support the actions of Bullard and Thornsberry, then by all means feel free to continue to give them your money.

But the R-CALF general membership needs to know the facts of what has been going on behind closed doors on litigation not approved by ballot vote. After they have reviewed these facts, then they can decide for themselves if this is an organization they wish to continue to fund. (Go to www.swiftstallions.com)

Unless Haymaker and Old Timer are disguised as Bullard and Thornsberry, I find it hard to believe you do not support the concept that the R-CALF membership should have been advised of this litigation when it was first filed last year, and given continued updates of the progress of the litigation, including the costs.

Membership should expect no less from their organization since it is their money and they have an absolute right to know where it is being spent.

[Oldtimer]

[Sandhusker]

[Oldtimer]

And if you were a regular on here- and not a fly in and run Dittmer type attack dog (or maybe you're even Dittmer), you'd know who ol Haymaker is and where he lives- as he ain't been bashful about it- but I'll let him introduce himself....

[HAY MAKER]

[RobertMac]

Let's see...the law suite was because the board thought that some ex-board members had information that they would use to try to turn the membership against the organization. Considering the actions of swiftstallions and your action here, couldn't one assume they had just cause?!?!?