Wednesday, January 29, 2014



TEXAS MAJOR LOSER IN FARM BILL BECAUSE OF FAILED LEADERSHIP BY REPUBLICANS

THE LRGV IS REALLY THE BIG LOSER -  Yes, it is true I hold on to things.  For 14 long years I have been arguing why hemp is good for the LRGV.  It uses 50% less water than cotton, and requires no chemicals for growth or protection against bugs.  Our soil and weather were made for hemp.

The industrial uses for hemp are endless.  We could have taken the lead in growing the hemp, processing the hemp, and manufacturing (if we only had any leaders with the vision of training our workers in robotics manufacturing)

The LRG Valley is doomed by a feckless leadership without even the modicum of vision.  Last March I did one of my many in depth posts on the issue, pushing the 2013 Hemp Act, a bi-partisan Bill in the US Senate and House.  The Texas Legislature could have done their part so Texas could benefit from the new Farm Bill - but no - Texas Republicans are too busy regulating my penis to be concerned with jobs and the future.


"For the first time, the farm bill will authorize colleges and universities to grow industrial hemp for research purposes in states that permit growth and cultivation of the plant. Currently 11 states — Colorado, Hawaii, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Montana, North Dakota, Oregon, Vermont, Washington and West Virginia — have such laws."

Source:  Washington Post

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

You are definitely a man with vision. I still have hope.

Anonymous said...

Bob, I disagree with your backing if the Hernandez clan, but on the national, liberal, views...you are an ave in the hole! Good work!

BobbyWC said...

I do not understand your statement about the Hernandez family - so you just want me to lie about my analysis? You have never heard me defend any contract or politiquera issue concerning the Hernandez family.

I took no issue with the jury verdict in the Raul Salazar case - now are you saying if perjury was used to secure the conviction as someone who believes in law and order you still want the conviction to stand?

I simply do not understand - if there was no perjury and the verdict is good remember I am the guy who said I would have given him the full 12 months.

On Count 7 in the Ernie indictment Montoya spent months trashing David Garcia - do you really believe it was Ernie and not Cris Valadez feeding him the information?

Is evidence meaningless - should we just convict him because he used ballot-harvesting in the past?

Someone needs to explain this to me because I see evidence and go with it - not a preconceived bias

Bobby WC