The morning of November 9th, 2016, citizens of the United States awoke to learn that Donald Trump would be the next President of the United States. Some cried, some cheered, as for me, I felt numb as I sat looking at my phone in disbelief. As I reflected on the past few months, many thoughts rattled around my head and disappeared, but one message remained. Donald Trump didn’t win the election because he knows politics and how to lead the most powerful nation on planet earth, he won the election because the voters of the United States were sold a bill of goods. Trump told his audiences what they wanted to hear and what they would believe. He played on their emotions and many times, what he said was not the whole truth. Fast forward two months,
…show more content…
Food Inc. suggests that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas influenced the decision on the Pioneer Hi-Bred International v. J.E.M Ag Supply case, and that he was biased because he was a former employee of Monsanto. Once again, further investigation on this situation shows that this relationship not one worth considering when bashing the government and Monsanto. Justice Thomas did work for Monsanto, in the 1970s, when the company was not a seed business and had nothing to do with biotechnology. Which the case in question was focused on. Food Inc. made a weak connection to create a make believe conflict of interest. In the documentary, Moe Parr makes a claim that it is impossible to win against Monsanto because of financial burdens, even though he is the one who took Monsanto to court. His claim is wrong. If Parr used the word rare in place of impossible, it would be more accurate. A quick google search provides a list of many farmers who have defeated the company in court. In addition, Monsanto only takes legal action against people who they have evidence of a violation of the patent rules. My parents, for example, have purchased seed from a farmer in Springport, who cleans seeds. Monsanto suspected him of cleaning patented seed and inspected his business thoroughly. Upon the inspection he was proved innocent and no court action took place. So it is rare for a farmer or individual to come out of the courts victorious, however not
Food Inc. suggests that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas influenced the decision on the Pioneer Hi-Bred International v. J.E.M Ag Supply case, and that he was biased because he was a former employee of Monsanto. Once again, further investigation on this situation shows that this relationship not one worth considering when bashing the government and Monsanto. Justice Thomas did work for Monsanto, in the 1970s, when the company was not a seed business and had nothing to do with biotechnology. Which the case in question was focused on. Food Inc. made a weak connection to create a make believe conflict of interest. In the documentary, Moe Parr makes a claim that it is impossible to win against Monsanto because of financial burdens, even though he is the one who took Monsanto to court. His claim is wrong. If Parr used the word rare in place of impossible, it would be more accurate. A quick google search provides a list of many farmers who have defeated the company in court. In addition, Monsanto only takes legal action against people who they have evidence of a violation of the patent rules. My parents, for example, have purchased seed from a farmer in Springport, who cleans seeds. Monsanto suspected him of cleaning patented seed and inspected his business thoroughly. Upon the inspection he was proved innocent and no court action took place. So it is rare for a farmer or individual to come out of the courts victorious, however not