Thompson Square "Just Awful!"

Dear Readers,

In the James Bond movie Goldfinger, Sean Connery playing British Agent 007 gets out of bed and leaves Jill Masterson (Shirley Eaton) lay there because he insists on properly chilling their champagne before drinking it.

Bond says, "My dear girl, there are some things that just aren't done, such as drinking Dom Perignon '53 above the temperature of 38 degrees Fahrenheit."

Then he goes on to say, "That's just as bad as listening to the Beatles without earmuffs!"

Well, I really understand that concept, especially after Thursday night attending the Thompson Square concert.

Thompson Square was "just awful!"

Now, it is no secret that I have a problem with so-called "Country Music" these days and that night was a reminder exactly why I'm leaving so-called "Country Music" to young kids and children who will be deaf sooner than later.

Today's so-called "country music" is pretty awful. Yes, most of it stinks!

In fact, on Thursday night I was reminded of part of the problem with today's "country" sound: It's not "country," and it's louder than hard rock ever was in the pass.

How loud was it on Thursday night?

Well, like wearing earmuffs when listening to the Beatles, I found out why many guests, and some of the staff at the Jackson Rancheria, believe they have to wear ear-plugs when at concerts these days.

It's all simply because the bands want to play louder than they should.

Thompson Square is no exception!

Since my wife wanted to go see them, we spent the $50 to buy tickets to see the duo Thompson Square on their return to Jackson Rancheria's Grand Oak Ballroom Stage on Thursday, February 6th, at 7 p.m.

And yes, they were loud, very loud! So loud that many there informed me, "people have to wear ear-plugs at these things or they risk hearing damage!"

Maybe if it were "music" than that would be one thing? But frankly, it was all just loud blaring "noise"!

The noise started with a hard rock/heavy metal recording blaring at 7pm with the band standing out there alone for almost 15 minutes before the singing duo decided to join the show.

And yes, believe it or not, once on stage, Keifer grabbed an electric guitar and it got even louder from there!

Who is Thompson Square?

Well, in case you have never heard of them, don't feel alone if you haven't.

For me, it was only after my wife reminded me of one of their songs that I realized who she was talking about getting tickets to see.

The band Thompson Square is composed of a husband and wife team, and is supposed to be one of Country Music’s hottest duos today.

The story goes that Keifer and Shawna Thompson met at a singing competition in Nashville in 1996 where they were both looking to expand their solo careers.

After every effort to break into the music world on their own, Keifer and Shawna decided to create Thompson Square and try to do it as a duo.

In January 2010, Stoney Creek Records signed the couple.

Their first hit, “Let’s Fight”, was released in May of 2010 and their second single “Are You Gonna Kiss Me Or Not” hit number one on the Country Charts and went Platinum in the United States.

Their second album Just Feels Good is said to be a more personal album for the husband and wife duo.

According to the write up on the Jackson Rancheria website about the group:

"You won’t find their relationship plastered on magazine covers or tabloids, but rather in the lyrics of their songs. Each of the songs in Just Feels Good reflects how their marriage has evolved, changed and strengthened through their claim to fame. With hits like “If I Didn’t Have You,” “Everything I Shouldn’t Be Thinking About,” “Just Feels Good,” and “That’s So Me and You,” Just Feels Good has taken country radio stations by storm."

What the website doesn't tell you is that they are loud, extremely loud, and almost completely incomprehensible.

How loud? Well, like most "country" bands today, so-called "country" is a lot more like hard rock was many years ago except today the noise from the instruments completely drowns out the singers.

And yes, someone has to ask if the extreme noise is a way of covering up for no talent singers? I mean, really, why else would anyone have to wear ear-plugs at a concert?

As for how incomprehensible were they? Well, they could have been reciting the alphabet for all we knew.  All of the people, both young and old guests who I spoke to said that they could not tell what they were saying while screaming into the microphones. 

No Talent? Lot Of Talent? Who Can Tell!

Does Keifer and Shawna sound good together? Who knows! It was all drowned out by the noise!

Honestly, the group was so obnoxiously loud that I can't tell you if they sound good together or not.  As I found out later, like many many others, I couldn't hear the lyrics other than maybe a single word here and there.

Does Keifer sound like he's screaming something-or-other into the microphone? Sure, but what he's saying is up for grabs!

And as for the female vocal? I couldn't tell if Shawna was singing or not. Frankly, I don't know if there was a female vocal up there on the stage except for a few times of her trying to get the crowd to join in yelling, "A!" or "Oh!

So yes, if asked, does Shawna Thompson have a nice voice? Does she have nice range? Is her voice something that I can see myself wanting to listen to later? Or really, is she just another "Country Screamer?"

Sorry folks, I couldn't tell if she has a nice voice because I couldn't hear it. And yes, if I was pressed for an answer, I'd have to say that she's just another screamer who thinks yelling is singing.

What Keifer and Shawna were doing on stage was not what I would call "entertaining."

And yes, I love reviews such as the one who wrote: "The title track Just Feels Good has a relaxed feel about it with the verses being the real stand-out sections. It's not very often verses stand out more than the chorus but I love the reggae feel to the instrumentalisation and Shawna and Keifer's voices play off each other well."

I don't know who that idiot was talking about, it certainly wasn't Thompson Square.

And if it was, it certainly wasn't at that noise fest they tried to pass off as a country music concert on Thursday night at the Jackson Rancheria.

Now as for the Thompson Square band itself, well if blaring indiscernible noise with no melody or tune is what they were shooting for? Those guys have it perfected!

It became obvious real quick that this is not a "country" band, and was in reality all hard rock heavy metal and screaming vocals that were completely impossible to understand.

Some will say that the room was too small, that it was just the closed venue, or that it didn't give justice to a loud band who really needs to be out in some open parking lot somewhere screaming and playing loud noise.

And yes, I refuse to call what they were doing "music"! Blaring noise is not music! 

Others will say that I don't understand that sort of event, or that I'm simply too old to understand the attraction of a band that is way too loud and incomprehensible. 

Well friends, I actually thought the same thing until my wife and I had enough and walked out. 

That's when we met others, many who are very young, all who were there in the lobby because they had enough as well.

We were told by Jackson Rancheria workers that they often wear hearing-protection at the concerts to stave off hearing damage.

I was told the bands absolutely refuse to turn it down - even a little.

All in all, I feel cheated out of $50!

Yes, it was a complete waste of $50 for the tickets. And yes, I absolutely refuse to call them "entertainment"! Because honestly, even with all of the lights and so on, it wasn't.

They stunk! They were just awful!

And no, that's not just my opinion, a couple of young ladies were angry that they came to hear great songs they heard on the radio but couldn't hear the words to the songs there at the concert. They were very disappointed.

When I asked a few others who left to get away from the noise, "What do you think about the show? Do you think you'd see them again?"

Many replied, "They're just awful!" And many said, they won't see them again. 
Like them, I thought they were just awful.

Frankly, I would not go back to see Thompson Square even if someone gave me free tickets and a huge steak dinner afterwards. They are just not worth it!

And yes, the Jackson Rancheria should think twice before bringing them back. They really were that bad.

And honestly friends, none of us should have to make sure we have our ear-plugs when we go to hear a concert -- any concert!

That's just how I see it!

Tom Correa

Shouldn't "Income Equality" mean "Skill Equality"?

Can we have "Income Equality" without "Skill Equality"?

I've been thinking a lot about the Democrat Party's latest so-called issue which they are trying to use as another wedge to divide Americans.

Their latest attempt at Class Warfare is what they are calling "Income Inequality."

During President Obama's State of the Union address he was expected to focus in part on "reducing" this thing the Liberals are calling "income inequality" by raising the federal minimum wage.

And yes, he did talk about it. But besides his half-truths, yes his normal lies, there was nothing new coming from the Liar In Chief.

How did he lie?

He did not address the real problems and simply played to his audience of Obama Worshippers who swallow everything he says as the absolute truth.

He knows his followers do not question what he has to say because they like hearing his voice.

Where Bush told the truth with some pronunciation problems, Obama enunciates perfectly while telling lie after lie.

Of course, while blaming companies for profits and making them sound as if they are Slave Owners for paying a hamburger flipper a healthy minimum wage, Obama blames others for this and that while distracting his audience from the real problems we face.

Real problems, such as:

• a bad economy,
• a lack of good skilled jobs in most of America,
• companies relocating due to over-regulation and over-taxation,
• government stifling business creation and subsequently job creation,
• manufacturing leaving the United States for other more 'business friendly" nations without the EPA and other government agencies controlling their private business,
• and of course the worse problem of all, an administration who sees a nation of low-paying service related jobs as OK for America.

Yes, we have a president who believes that mediocrity for America is just fine - and people should get paid better for their lack of skills.

It's true, these are the "real problems" that Obama does not want to talk about. Instead it seems that Obama want to revert to Class Warfare.

He would rather push something called "income inequality" and the concept that "unskilled labor" and those making minimum wage should be making the same wages as those who have worked so hard to become skilled labor.

So the question has to be asked, if the unskilled labor in America gets closer to the wages of skilled labor  - who have had to go through in most cases years of apprenticeship - then what incentive is there to become skilled when you don't have to earn it?

Should there be Income Equality when one works a Skilled Job and another
doesn't?

When I worked in an unskilled labor position, I was paid a lower wage. Once I received training and joined the ranks of skilled labor, my wages went up dramatically.

Where is the mystery here?

Friends, I have been there - especially when I left the Marine Corps back in the 1970s when President Jimmy Charter had us in a horrible economy because of his Socialist policies.

In 1980 under President Carter economic policies, the nation's economy was in the toilet.

And yes, it is a fact that too many forget, the unemployment rate in some cities were at
Depression Levels.

There was no work no matter how many qualifications you had. Time and Newsweek Magazines even ran stories at the time about College Graduates with Masters Degrees who were taking laborer jobs.

Many good-paying jobs in areas such as manufacturing have disappeared thanks to Democrats pushing more and more regulations, restrictions, and over the top taxation on companies who have found it easier to operate a business overseas and away from an administration that has proven itself to be anti-business.

The American middle class is shrinking and bumping people with higher levels of education into lower-wage jobs.

The Associated Press, who is working in concert with the White House, is helping to push the idea of "income inequality." They report that "stagnant wages and income inequality" play an increasing role in the growth of food stamp rolls.

No kidding, imagine that!

They don't say that the bad economy has affected all working Americans that way and not just the ones on the lower rung of the ladder. It has affected everyone!

And really, this whole notion that they are the only ones hurting today is non-sense.

I know qualified people who have been stuck in their position and can't go higher up the ladder simply because America has returned to the days when anyone working better be thankful that he or she simply has a job -- skilled or not.

Point is no matter where you are on the ladder, everyone has the problem of stagnant wages these days.

As for income inequality, all workers are not equal.

A guy with no training nor drive flipping hamburgers is not equal to an EMT or a Fireman or an Electrician.

As shocking a concept as it is for Democrats to grasp, it's true.

Though they enjoy pushing warfare between the races, the sexes, and wage earners, like it or not, this is not a Communist Country where a laborer is supposed to get the same wage equal to a Doctor!

Maybe their Class Warfare strategy is founded on the Democrat Party belief that they are dealing with idiots who actually believe what they are saying?

Maybe it is a way to play into the thinking of young Americans who have some youthful preconceived notion that they are supposed to start life making the big bucks right out of high school?

Yes, as if they are entitled to the big money without earning it by going to a Trade School or a Technical College.

Maybe Democrats are pushing this notion of "income inequality" in an effort to take the focus off of the real problem in America these days - that we have a a shortage of quality skilled labor and an abundance of college graduates with worthless Liberal Arts degrees?

Yes, worthless College Degrees!

We have an abundance of College Graduates who have no skills. So much so that states like Texas and South Dakota who need engineers and skilled tradesmen are right now going overseas to find them.

When someone like Obama talks of "income equality," people should not take what he is saying with a grain of salt.

We should all remember the lessons learned from history, especially that of the former Communist/Socialist nation of the Soviet Union.

The State, the Communist Government, treated people like cattle and tried to make all of their citizens completely equal. From the way they were clothed to the rations they received, the Communist idea of Utopia was a world where drive and ambition had no place to thrive.

The government ruled and regulated everything under the sun, but they couldn't control free will and self-motivation.

For example, the Soviet farmer knew that the government owned his land -- so other than being threatened, the government gave the farmer absolutely no incentive to work and plant crops.

The farmer said, "why should I work if a person who does not work or is not as skilled as I am gets the same as me?"

So the farmer did nothing and subsequently the people starved.

It was a case of "income equality" for "skill inequality."

Part of what makes us great is the idea that with hard work and drive, we Americans don't have to restrict ourselves to live in poverty.

Obama thinks by raising their pay that his party gets more votes and that's the end of it.

Obama and the Democrat Party don't understand that a raise in the wage of unskilled labor only motivates skilled labor to demand more money themselves.

And no, it won't stop there. There starts the vicious cycle.

All of this only proves that 'income equality" is a fantasy of Communists who see people as cattle - stupid cattle who should all shut up and be happy with whatever a Socialist government gives us.

Or so the Democrats think!

That's just how I see it.

Tom Correa

ObamaCare could cost America over 2.3 Million U.S. Jobs

A report released on February 04, 2014, says that the long-term effect of ObamaCare on the U.S. economy are worse than expected.

The Congressional Budget Office issued a revised projection that reports that nearly 2.5 Million American workers could opt out of full-time jobs over the next 10 years -- allowing employers to wipe 2.3 Million full-time jobs off the books.

Why? ObamaCare!

Budget experts say that because ObamaCare offers an insurance alternative to employer provided coverage, many Americans who hold full-time jobs may decide to work part-time -- or not at all -- and get their coverage from the exchanges.

The report drew immediate reaction from GOP lawmakers, including House Speaker John Boehner who said the report indicates ObamaCare is only making it harder for middle-class Americans to survive in the bad economy.

Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wisc., weighed in in a written statement, “ObamaCare is only making things worse. This costly law is not only pushing government spending to new heights, it is disrupting coverage and leaving millions of Americans worse off.”

The budget office says jobs will also be lost because employers may choose to hire less full-time workers or reduce the hours of their staff.

In 2010, the CBO projected ObamaCare would lead to about 650,000 fewer jobs. This new 2.3 Million estimate is scary in the fact that it was not expected.

The report states ObamaCare will also lead to a reduction of the net number of total hours worked by as much as 2% in the period from 2017 to 2024.

It states that “lower-wage workers” will see the biggest reduction in the number of hours worked.

Yes, lower-wage Americans are going to feel the pain worse than anyone else - Thanks Obama!

The agency did reduce its estimate of the number of uninsured people who will get coverage through the health care law.

Penalties being the number one reason young people are staying away, the second reason is the website, and lastly because more and more young people are having to face the fact that they supported Obama and he lied to them - that in itself is keeping more young people away.

The reduced number is expected to be about 2 million fewer people than is needed to get covered this year.

Sen. Orrin Hatch, a ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, called the report “devastating” to the millions of Americans seeking employment.

“A direct threat to the long-term health and prosperity of our nation, this law must be repealed,” Hatch, R-Utah, said in a statement. “Its impact and consequences are too great.”
House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan said the report indicates ObamaCare is making things worse for Americans.

“This costly law is not only pushing government spending to new heights; it is disrupting coverage and leaving millions of Americans worse off,” Ryan, R-Wis., said.

Will 2.5 Million Unemployed Americans decide to "ursue their dreams" without incomes or medical coverage?

The White House focused on the report's claim that the loss of jobs will not be due to employers cutting back, but due to Americans choosing to voluntarily leave the workforce.

Believe it or not, in one of the worse economies in US History, the Obama White House is now trying to spin this around to make things appear as though ObamaCare is allowing Americans to leave their jobs, and be "empowered" to "pursue their dreams".

While 90 Million Americans are out of work, and jobs are hard to find, the Obama White House is saying

"Americans would no longer be trapped in a job just to provide coverage for their families, and would have the opportunity to pursue their dreams," White House spokesman Jim Carney said.

"This CBO report bears that out, and the Republican plan to repeal the ACA would strip those hard-working Americans of that opportunity."

So let me get this straight, 2.5 Million Americans might lose their jobs because of ObamaCare - and the Obama White House sees this a good thing?!

The Obama crew thinks 2.5 Million Un-employed Americans will like being laid off because they can now "pursue their dreams"?

Are these jokers kiding?!

Wow! Talk about a group out of touch with the real world!


Tom Correa

Predator Drone helps convict North Dakota Farmer - well sort of!

This is the first case of its kind, but it could be the future!

Dear Readers,

The above picture is a U.S. Air Force MQ-1 Predator unmanned aerial vehicle assigned to the California Air National Guard's 163rd Reconnaissance Wing flies near the Southern California Logistics Airport in Victorville, California. 

This is one of those news stories which I will get letters about so I may as well say it now, I'm not for drones in the hands of the federal, state, or local government.

I simply don't like the idea of Big Brother doing a fly-over of my property.

So now, with that being said, I'm almost certain someone will surely ask me if I feel the same way about the helicopter fly-overs around these parts looking for pot growers in this area of Glencoe?

Look, I know that they are going to take place in the so-called "War on Drugs." But, I'm just concerned about being watched on a daily basis by some government agency who believes for some reason that I need to be watched.

I don't like the idea, the whole concept that our government would believe that we are like some herd of animals that can't be trusted.

Friends, even folks raising bison, with as ornery as they can be, do not watch them daily. Yes, even badass bison are trusted to live freely.

I don't need a Big Brother watching or monitoring my movements as if I were in some sort of prison system. And since I used to work in a prison system, I know exactly how the prisoners are watched constantly.

As for the criminal in North Dakota, well what began as a wild west-style cattle-stealing case may have ushered in what is now being called "a brave new world of law enforcement" by using drones to gather evidence to put Americans behind bars.

Cattle Rustling and Standoff!

Have you ever wondered about some of the things that can be avoided sometimes?

Which came first, the chicken or the egg, is an old question that seems to apply to law enforcement now and then. 

Rodney Brossart



In the case of farmer Rodney Brossart, after his arrest there was still "an armed standoff" with his family about going onto their property - I assume to look for the stolen beef.

A supposed cattle thieve?

Brossart was arrested on June 23, 2011, but his family refused at gunpoint to let authorities armed with a search warrant onto their 3,600-acre property to investigate the neighbors' complaint.

Nelson County authorities say Rodney Brossart and his family of Lakota threatened officers with guns and ignored repeated orders to appear in court.

Though it sounds as if the evidence was overwhelming, it sounds like the cows were never found. How does that happen?

Brossart was later released on bail, and warrants issued for his three sons. I gather because of the "armed standoff".

But the rest of the family refused for months to respond to orders to appear in court, and their refusal prompted Nelson County Sheriff Kelly Janke to have the U.S. Border Patrol deploy a Predator drone to conduct live video surveillance of the farm.

Now in the first-ever case of a U.S. citizen being convicted and sentenced to prison based in part on evidence gathered by a drone, in Lakota, N.D., Rodney Brossart got a three-year sentence for his role in an armed standoff with police that began after he was accused of stealing his neighbors' cattle in 2011.

The drone monitored the family's movements on the farm following what has been labeled "an armed standoff."

It is not clear how long the drone was deployed or whether it gathered evidence of the alleged cattle theft, or exactly why it was deployed to conduct such a surveillance?

After waiting long enough, it appears that the eye in the sky gathered enough evidence to prompt Sheriff Janke's men to finally move in in November 2011.

They arrested the other five family members on "terrorizing" charges.

Not on charges of cattle-stealing, but on "terrorizing"charges.

“We put a 'tactical operational plan' together this afternoon and we implemented it and everything went as planned for us, so we're very pleased that we did end with a peaceful resolution this evening," Janke told WDAZ at the time.

Remember the chicken and the egg, well here it comes again.

A jury found Brossart not guilty of stealing the cows, valued at $6,000.

Imagine that! Farmer Brossart was found not guilty of stealing the cows!

But, Brossart did get three years - all but six months of which was suspended - for his part in the "armed standoff" -- based in part on video supplied by the drone to court officials, according to the Grand Forks Herald.

So the guy is found not guilty for stealing the cows, but was found guilty for not allowing the police to come onto the property and look for the non-existent cows.

I know that I'm going to get letters from folks saying that I'm for criminals and so on, but that's not the case.

Please understand that Mr Brossart has rights. If his rights against undue search and seizure are violated - than ours can be as well.

Granted that taking up arms against the law is not a good way to stop the violation of your rights, but that is exactly what was done.

Search Warrant or not, that family was not about to allow anyone to come on "their property" and search it.

The skeptic can say, "Oh, they were probably hiding the cows or something else!"

But remember, there are those who may look at this and say, "Since the man allowed himself to be arrested, what more did the police need?"

And I guess that's where I come from on this. If the police had enough evidence to arrest Rodney Brossart for stealing cattle, than why did they need to go onto his property?

Was it to look for more than just the missing cows?

The case could prove significant, because Brossart's attorney tried unsuccessfully to have the terrorizing charges related to his standoff with police dropped because evidence was gathered by the drone without a search warrant specifically allowing for it.

Prosecutors had previously dropped charges against Brossart’s wife and daughter, for their alleged roles in keeping police at bay.

Charges against his three sons related to terrorizing are still pending.

And yes, there sits the chicken or the egg, or as State District Judge Joel Medd said in court, "This case should have never happened. Chalk it up to stubbornness, to stupidity, to being at odds with your neighbors or any combination of those. We should never have been here if the cows would have just been returned."

Of course that goes to the other question, did Rodney Brossart have the cows to return? The story doesn't say one way or another.

Back East, Forbes magazine predicted it won't be the last time drones are used to put Americans in prison - and reports the use of drones for police missions is on the rise.

Between 2010 and 2012, law enforcement agencies used CBP Predator drones for 700 missions, the media outlet reported.

But this, well this is said to be the first time someone has actually been convicted because they were under "surveillance" from a drone.

So now, let's stop talking about our rights of privacy from Big Brother and instead let's talk about "the need" for this to have taken place.

So what "justified" using a Predator Drone in this case?
Does it make me wonder if he really stole the cows? Sure it does.

Does it make me wonder what made him so darn important that the local police needed to watch him so much? You bet!

Please understand what I'm getting at here; was this such a horrible crime, such a crime against humanity, a crime committed by a career criminal, or a crime that had something to do with put lives at risk, such a crime of such a degree that all resources needed to be put into action? Well, no.

It was a crime of the "possible" theft of a couple of cows.

Now, is that enough to get shot in some places, such as around here included? Yes, it certainly is.

But, that is usually if the person is caught red-handed with the cows.

From the reports, that's not the case here. Remember the cows were never found anywhere, and a jury could not prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that he stole them.

And as a matter of fact, the neighbor's cows weren't found by the drone either.

So now, for that county Sheriff to spend the huge funds needed to get a high-tech Billion Dollar drone from a Federal Agency simply to watch a guy who may or may not have stolen a few of cows worth $6,000 - well, where's the justification? 

Yes, whether the guy is a jerk or a nice guy is beside the point, I believe that someone must have wanted to screw Rodney Brossart real bad.  At bad enough to throw all of this manpower and technology in the game to get a conviction. 

And also, I'd like to know how a Sheriff actually justifies using drone surveillance on a small time suspect over a few missing cows?  How do you justify paying for such a thing?

Thinking about this for a moment? They paid for the use of a high-tech Billion Dollar drone, the cost of a drone operator or possible a more drone operators because they obviously didn't want him to get away?

All just to see if the guy had a couple of cows? Sure I understand what those cows were worth to the farmer who lost them, but is the price tag of trying to convict Brossart for this crime justify it?

Is this crazy or what?!

Friends, this is not exactly like watching a suspect who may have stolen the Mona Lisa or the Crown Jewels of England?

Maybe this Sheriff  has such a large budget, and the local taxpayers don't care that he or she just threw it away on crap like this? Maybe he or she thinks this all sounds like a great reason to allocate such resources and utilize high-tech tactical equipment?

For me, I would think a Sheriff's Department would have better things to do with its funds than to spend it on getting such a criminal which they didn't even get.

Remember, even after putting out all of that cash, manpower, and high-tech tactical equipment to use trying to nail farmer Rodney Brossart -- he was found Not Guilty and walked away with time served!

I'm sorry, but to me, even though I can sympathize with the neighbor who lost his cows, this seems like a lot of all sorts of resources for very little in return -- and it didn't solve anything.

That's just how I see it.

Tom Correa

47 Million Americans on Food Stamps

Dear Readers,

As the number of those collecting Food Stamps as grown to a record 47 million Americans, a Republican congressman has renewed his call for Congress to require able-bodied adults on food stamps "to work or volunteer" in order to keep receiving the benefits.

"I think it makes sense," Rep. Steve Southerland, R-Fla., said on Fox News.

After a week during which the Obama administration proposed new initiatives to target poverty, both parties are floating ideas to address the problem.

Of course the newest Liberal catch-phrase these days is "income inequality." It comes after 50 years of the "War on Poverty."

Whether it is "Income Inequality" or "War on Poverty," the last 50 years have proven that Democrats Socialists only pay lip service to the problem.

They Dump Money Into The Welfare Program And Do Nothing Else.

Has it been successful?

Honestly, in Conservative terms of wanting to see folks get back 0on their own feet and do for themselves -they have had limited success.

In Liberal terms of wanting to see a huge increase of Democrat Voters all dependant on the Democrat Party in the exact same way slaves are dependant on the crumbs thrown to them by their Owners - they have had great success.

Over a 50 year span, Democrats have successfully taught those on government programs that Food Stamps and Welfare is their only course in life - no different than the slave who barely make it through life because he or she is fed everyday and has to do nothing in return.

Social Conditioning

Many on Welfare and Food Stamps today have become conditioned by Democrats to believe that that is their lot in live.

Republicans say they are better than that, that they can want and acheive if steered in the right direction

Representative Southerland's proposal "to work or volunteer" in order to keep receiving benefits was included in a House-passed version of a food stamp bill approved this past fall, but the House and Senate still have not agreed on final legislation addressing both food stamps and farm subsidies.

Southerland, co-chairman of the Republican Study Committee's Anti-Poverty Initiative, stressed that his plan would exclude disabled people, seniors and children.

He claimed most people would agree that food stamp recipients should work, train, look for work, or at least do volunteer work while on the benefits.

And yes, I think he is right.

But Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., top Democrat on the House Budget Committee, noted that the other part of the House Republicans' bill would cut billions from food stamps over the next decade, and said many households receiving the benefits are in fact working households.

"You're actually sending a very bad message about work," he said.

But what's so wrong with the message when people want to work and be independant?

The problem is the Democrats and the Obama administration who are working so hard to stifle job creation across the country.

In a first, working-age people now make up the majority in U.S. households that rely on food stamps - a switch from a few years ago, when children and the elderly were the main recipients.

Some of the change is due to demographics, such as the trend toward having fewer children.

Obama seems to be the problem - his economic policies have made a lot of very wealthy Liberals but has had a horrible effect on average Americans who are now looking in poverty for the first time in their lives.

Our slow economic recovery with high unemployment, stagnant wages and an increasing gulf between low-wage positons and high-skill jobs also plays a big role.

While the government spends $80 billion a year on a Food Stamp program, twice what it cost five years ago, because of Obama's economic policies, many of the problems plagueing working people don't see an end to the troubles anytime soon.

Food stamp participation since 1980 has grown the fastest among workers with some college training, a sign that the safety net has stretched further to cover America's former middle class, according to an analysis of government data for The Associated Press by economists at the University of Kentucky.

Formally called Supplemental Nutrition Assistance, or SNAP, the program now covers 1 in 7 Americans.

This huge growth in the need for Food Stamps is a big part of Obama's legacy.  It is a leading indecator of how the economy is doing.

Right now, the economy looks to be in the toilet for millions of Americans, it's a shame Liberals who see Obama as "can do no wrong president" would never admit to that.

Recognition of a problem is the first step in fixing it!



Tom Correa

A Well Fed Horse - Advice from 1914

Besides the horse having a keen appetite, and have a sleek lustrous coat, a well fed horse is healthy, content, and alert.

About 75% of the cost of having horses, aside from the initial purchase, is feed.

Overfeeding can be wasteful and expensive, and underfeeding or a nutritional deficiency will not permit optimum performance.

Feeding Practices

In order for a horse to be in the best possible condition, observe the following feeding practices:

• Since horses depend so much on their wind, feeds should be clean and free of mold and excessive dust.
• Feed a balanced ration. The term "ration" denotes feed for a 24-hour period.
• Accustom horses to feed gradually.
• In general, they maybe given as much hay as they will eat.
• It is safe to start horses on 1/2 pound of grain daily for each hundred pound's of the animal's weight. Thereafter, 1/2 pound of grain added to the total ration every third day is advisable.
• Of course, as the grain ration is increased, roughage consumption will decline.
• Feed horses regularly: In warm weather, early and late feeding during the cooler hours is preferred.
• Feed two or three times daily. Usually feed grain before roughage.
• Avoid sudden or abrupt changes in types of rations. Horses can go off feed.
• Keep troughs and water containers clean.

Consumption and Weight

Horses can eat about 2 to 2-1/2 pounds of air-dry feeds, such as grain in the bin and hay in the bale, daily per 100 pounds of their body weight.

In average condition, a mature mare over 14.2 hands (58 inches) will weigh approximately 1,100 pounds - while mature geldings and stallions will weigh about 1,200 pounds.

Mature ponies under 46 inches will weigh from 400 to 600 pounds. Taller ponies up to 56 inches will average 700 to 900 pounds.

Weanling horse foals will weigh from 400 to 600 pounds when 7 months old. Pony foals will weigh from 200 to 300 pounds when 7 months old.

Well-fed foals will reach about 50 to 60 percent of their mature weight during the first year and about 75 percent at the end of the second year.

Horses reach maturity between four and five years of age.

Formulating Horse Rations

Water, protein, minerals, vitamins, and energy are essential nutrients in a horse ration.

Observe the following points when formulating the ration.

• Is the total quantity of the ration adequate?
• Is the energy produced by the ration suitable for the work or the performance required?
• Is the amount of crude protein (digestible protein) adequate?
• Is the proper amount of minerals and of vitamins A and D included in the ration?
• Is the ration economical but still nutritionally adequate?

Water

The average mature light horse may drink about 10 to 12 gallons of water daily varying with the amount of work, the type of feed, and the weather.

Horses should be watered regularly and frequently.

After heavy exertion, very warm or very thirsty horses should be watered lightly until they are properly cooled.

In very cold weather, water should be heated to 40 or 500 F.

Protein for Horses

Horses need protein for muscle growth, for lactation, and for reproduction.

Protein needs are expressed as percent crude protein or more precisely as percent digestible protein of the ration.

Horsemen usually add supplemental protein such as linseed meal, soybean meal, or other purchased protein to grass hay and grain rations.

Legume hays such as alfalfa and red clover are also good protein sources.

The average ration should contain approximately 12 percent crude protein.

Two good common oilmeal protein supplements that can be added to grass hay and grains are linseed meal and soybean meal with hulls.

Soybean meal is more palatable and of higher quality for foals and young horses.

Other purchased protein supplements without urea can be used.

In some cases peanut meal, cottonseed meal, and safflower meal are good substitutes if they  are economical. 

Four pounds of quality legume hays (alfalfa or clover) furnish approximately the same amount of digestible protein as 1 pound of soybean, linseed, or cottonseed meal.

The highest amount of protein is needed during early lactation. Later the amount can be reduced.

The amount of protein needed depends on how heavy is the breeding service. The minimum is 14 percent.

A very young foal may need up to 20 percent protein. At 6 months, 14 percent is sufficient

Energy Needs

The basic ration for a horse is hay plus grain.

The amount of grain a horse needs depends on the growth or performance expected.

The amount of total ration is based on a consumption of 2-1/4 pounds of hay fed per weight.

Thus a 1,000-pound horse would receive a total daily ration of 22-1/2 pounds.

The energy need is often expressed as total digestible nutrients (T.D.N.).

Generally grains provide more energy than hays because they analyze higher in T.D.N. and lower in crude fiber (C.F.).

An idle mature horse weighing 1,000 pounds should receive 22-1/2 pounds of hay with no grain while a similar horse doing heavy work or a stallion in heavy service should receive about 10 pounds of hay and 12.5 pounds of grain daily.

It is usually sound economically to feed and grow weanlings well the first and second years because young horses are more efficient and generally need less feed per pound of weight increase.

Some horses can be safely fed more than 1-1/4 pounds of grain per hundredweight.

However, when fed heavily, care should be taken to see that horses get plenty of exercise and do not become swollen or puffy in their legs.

Pastures

Good pastures are an excellent source of nutrients.

Pastures can supply the complete ration, but usually working horses and lactating mares are fed additional grain. Foals on pasture are often creep-fed as well.

Both temporary (one-season) and permanent pastures are used to provide feed for horses.

An example of pasture seeding schedule is as follows:

•  Season Forage Seeding time Grazing time
•  Spring Oats and barley Late March and April May and June
•  Summer Pearl millet Late April and May June until frost
•  Fall Wheat and rye Late August and September October and November; April
•  Some horsemen use sudangrass during the summer, but an occasional case of urinary cystitis infection has been recorded from sudangrass grazing.

Sudangrass is not safe for grazing immediately after frost or when severely stunted by drouth. Cured sudangrass can be used as hay.

Mixtures of legume and grasses in permanent pasture provide variety and more forage.

Establishment of a permanent pasture involves a considerable investment in money and labor. Good management is also required.

The following suggestions will help you establish and maintain a good permanent pasture: 

• Test the soil fertility and add necessary limestone, phosphorus, potassium, and nitrogen.
• Prepare a good seedbed.
• Use recommended and adapted seeds and inoculate legumes.
• Use a grass-legume mixture.
• Seed at the proper time, preferably in early spring or fall.
• Seed with a nurse crop. Oats are good. Remove the nurse crop early when oats are in the dough stage.
• Cover the seed with 1/4 to 1/2 inch of soil.
• Firm the seedbed by rolling.
• Clip weeds, setting the sickle bar high.
• Do not pasture the first season because horses will trample the seedlings.
• To improve forage growth, topdress pastures with nitrogen in early spring (where legumes are less than 25 percent) with 50 to 70 pounds of actual N per acre.

Permanent and rotation pasture mixtures are very productive for both pasture and hay.

The inclusion of orchardgrass with bromegrass will furnish more grazing in midsummer when bromegrass may be semidormant.

Agasin, all interesting advice from 1914!

Our Farm Subsidies for Muslim Terrorist Groups?

Dear Readers,

This is one of those stories that might make you angry!

It has everything to do with Farm Subsidies which are governmental subsidies paid to farmers, ranchers, and other agribusinesses, to help supplement their income, manage the supply of agricultural commodities, and to help influence the cost and supply of agricultural commodities in the U.S..

Not hard to understand what the Farm Subsidies are for, so why was it that a Muslim terrorist group - or as some like to put it, a Muslim group with ties to terrorists - have been given Farm Subsidies even without growing a single crop.

On February 01, 2014, it was reported that a Muslim group called The North American Islamic Trust received U.S. Farm Subsidies even though they did not harvest a crop -- not a singe one.

The taxpayer subsidies to the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) are just a slice of the questionable payments that, as has been well documented, go to millionaires and non-farmers every year.

But as Congress moves to rein in the program, these subsidies stand out considering the group's involvement in the Holy Land Foundation case of 2008.

During the trial, this Muslim group's Farm Subsidies stopped - yet were reinstated by a Federal Judge.

The North American Islamic Trust's history is complicated -- as the offshoot of the Muslim Students Association and its financial arm, NAIT was founded in 1973 by Middle Eastern-born college students.

The majority of NAIT's founders were members of the very anti-American Muslim Brotherhood, and the group continues to be backed by Saudi Arabia.

NAIT uses "Shariah Law" approved investing with its own company called Allied Asset Advisors to built mosques and community centers.

Because this Muslim group was once listed by the Justice Department as a co-conspirator in a terror case, I really believe that such groups are in fact Muslim "terrorist cells."


Former Allied Asset Advisor board member, Jamal Said, preached the most conservative forms of Islam and was specifically named as a co-conspirator in the terror-funding case.

In the Holy Land Foundation case of 2008, which prosecuted investors charged with sending money to Hamas, NAIT was named by U.S. federal prosecutors as a co-conspirator and an entity that is or was "a member of the Muslim Brotherhood" (the parent organization of Hamas).

The Holy Land Foundation's five accused individuals were sentenced for funneling $12.4 million to the terror group, which controls the Gaza Strip and is dedicated to the destruction of Israel. NAIT never was formally charged in the case.

NAIT's sheer size may have worked against it. An estimated one in five mosques in the United States is owned by NAIT; those properties are estimated to be worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

But honestly, most of those mosques have been places of worship for those convicted in terror activities.

But even before a verdict in the 2008 Holy Land Foundation case had been reached, NAIT appealed their co-conspirator status, saying that they had "suffered injuries" from a "public branding."

In October of 2010, the Fifth Circuit Court overturned the group's "co-conspirator" status after NAIT's appeal and pressure from the ACLU. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals said "if NAIT could have been accurately characterized as a joint venture," that "does not carry an inherently criminal connotation."

NAIT's farm subsidies stopped in 2008 during the trial and were first received again in 2011.

Every farm subsidy to the North American Islamic Trust has been received at the mailing address of the Islamic Center of Central Missouri Mosque, records show.

The USDA lists the "farm location" as Boone County, Mo.

But aerial searches of the "agricultural" properties owned by the North American Islamic Trust reveal that the plots are undeveloped, tree-dotted land combined to form just over 100 acres valued at about $59,000.

According to the USDA and OpentheBooks.com, about half of NAIT's subsidies were "Direct Payments," a program which costs taxpayers an annual $5 billion.

By 2011, the North America Islamic Trust began obtaining subsidies under the auspice that it is a "church, charity, or non-profit organization."

The payment program in question, though, could be under the budget knife in the latest farm bill which passed through the House earlier this week.

The federal government began farm subsidies during the Great Depression, in part because farmers were producing surplus crops and could not sell to a struggling market.

The total cost for farm pay-outs in 1995 was just over $8.1 billion, when planted farm acreage in the United States stood at roughly 260 million.

By 2012, taxpayers were subsidizing farmers by nearly double when planted acreage had decreased by millions of acres.

As for Federal Farm Subsidies:

• Subsidies are primarily awarded to farmers who produce the following crops: corn, wheat, rice, soybeans and rice.


• There are emergency disaster loans available that allow farmers to borrow up to $500,000.

• There are a variety of loans available in the federal subsidy program. These loan programs allow farmers to use their crop as collateral and repay loans based on the profits or losses from the eventual sale of their crops.

• Some subsidy programs have specific enrollment periods, while others accept applications on an on-going basis.

• The agricultural commodity that receives the most payouts from federal subsidy programs is corn.
But records show that since 1998, the North American Islamic Trust has received over $10,000 across 34 separate taxpayer-funded programs.

NAIT's two relatively small land plots are tax-zoned as "agricultural," but they aren't developed.


Supposedly the Muslim group has been able to obtain farm subsidies "legally" without producing any crops because it is a non-profit "charity group" landowner.

So yes, believe it or not, they receive Farm Subsidies on top of being Tax-Exempt.

"Organizations with no history in agriculture are getting in on taxpayer-provided farm subsidies," said Adam Andrzejewski, founder of OpenTheBooks.com and former Republican candidate for governor of Illinois.

He said the NAIT's subsidies are "probably legal," adding: "The federal farm bill has become so large that it has nothing to do with 'preserving the family farm' or 'creating a stable food supply'."

Many groups that have received thousands of American taxpayer dollars in Federal Farm Subsidies without ever producing any crops at all, zero crops, I believe they committed a federal criminal act!
Whether it is for fraud and the taking funds under false pretenses, or the theft of federal funds, or using taxpayer funds to finance Islamic terrorism, this Muslim group should be prosecuted for committing Federal Crimes.

If we follow the money to the source, we can stop the funding of terrorist groups.

That's just how I see it!


Tom Correa

California Cuts Off Water To Millions Amid Drought

Dear Readers,

The Associated Press out of Sacramento today reported that amid a severe drought, California officials announced that it is now a fact that they won't send any water from the state's reservoir system to local agencies beginning this spring.

No kidding! This is real big deal, and as unprecedented a move as there can be.

Their move affects drinking water supplies for 25 million people and irrigation for 1 million acres of California farmland.

Chuck Bonham, director of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, urged everyone to come together during the crisis, saying,

"This is not about picking between delta smelt and long-fin smelt and chinook salmon, and it's not about picking between fish and farms or people and the environment.  It is about really hard decisions on a real-time basis where we may have to accept some impact now to avoid much greater impact later."

The announcement marks the first time in the 54-year history of the State Water Project that such an action has been taken, but it does not necessarily mean that every farm field will turn to dust and every city faucet will run dry.

The 29 agencies that draw from the state's water-delivery system have other sources, although those have been hard-hit by the drought as well.

Many farmers in California's Central Valley, one of the most productive agricultural regions in the country, also draw water from a separate system of federally run reservoirs and canals, but that system also will deliver just a fraction of its normal water allotment this year.

A few months ago, a couple of friends who live in the San Joaquin Valley told me horror stories of losing wells for the first time in 40 years. And no, they are not alone.

There a many farmers in the valley who are paying hundreds of thousands of their own dollars to get water to their orchards, fields, and livestock.

The government hasn't helped them in the past, so they have had to go it alone.

The announcement today affects water deliveries planned to begin this spring, and the allotment could decrease if weather patterns change for the worse.

Of course, it could also increase if more storms hit the state in the next few months.

About 12 years ago, I remember us going through the same sort of drought conditions with a dry winter. That January and February were especially bad, but a so-called "March Miracle" saved the day.

Ten years or more have gone by and the State of California, governed by Democrats and other Environmental Extremists, have done absolutely nothing to prepare for this.

People have taken a back seat, and now 25 Million people and over 1 Million acres of prime farmland that helps feed the world is in danger.

Yes, you can thank tree-hugging environmentalist nutcases for part of the problem. They're only concerned with their own short-sighted ideals.

Too bad, as usual, their real world education comes at the expense of others.

Now, hopefully, not even those tree-hugging loons can ignore the problem as Friday's announcement put an exclamation point on California's water shortage - which has been building for some time now.

"This is the most serious drought we've faced in modern times," said Felicia Marcus, chairwoman of the State Water Resources Control Board.

"We need to conserve what little we have to use later in the year, or even in future years."

The California Department of Water Resources Director Mark Cowin said there simply is not enough water in the system to meet the needs of farmers, cities and the conservation efforts that are intended to save dwindling populations of salmon and other fish throughout Northern California.

For perspective, California would have to experience heavy rain and snowfall every other day from now until May to get the state back to its average annual precipitation totals, according to the Department of Water Resources.

"These actions will protect us all in the long run," Cowin said during a news conference that included numerous state and federal officials, including those from wildlife and agricultural agencies.

Friday's announcement came after Gov. Jerry Brown's official drought declaration in mid-January, a decision that cleared the way for state and federal agencies to coordinate efforts to preserve water and send it where it is needed most.

The governor urged Californians to reduce their water use by 20 percent.

Imagine that for a moment, cut back by 20%!

But does anyone in Northern California really believe that the folks in Southern California who take their cars to car-washes every other day and keep their swimming pools filled are going to cut back at?

Does anyone really think the folks in Los Angeles are worried about crops and food?

I'm betting not many! At least, not many who know better!

Fact is, this announcement reflects the severity of the dry conditions in the nation's most populous state.

Though back East and down South have been hit with record breaking snow storms, officials here in the West say 2013 was this state's driest calendar year since records started being kept - and this year is heading in the same direction.

A snow survey last week in the Sierra Nevada, one of the state's key water sources, found the water content in the meager snow-pack is just 12 percent of normal.

Reservoirs are lower than they were at the same time in 1977, which is one of the two previous driest water years on record.

State officials say 17 rural communities are in danger of a severe water shortage within four months. Wells are running dry or reservoirs are nearly empty in some communities. Others have long-running problems that predate the drought.

The timing for of Friday's historic announcement was important: State water officials typically announce they are raising the water allotment on February 1st. Instead, this year's winter has been so dry they wanted to ensure they could keep the remaining water behind the dams.

The announcement also will give farmers more time to determine what crops they will plant this year and in what quantities.

Lord Help Our Farmers And Ranchers!

Besides lack of help and more hindrance from the State and Federal Governments, farmers and ranchers throughout the state already have felt the drought's impact.

They have been tearing out orchards, fallowing fields and trucking in alfalfa to feed cattle on withered range land as never before.

And where Real Estate speculators from the San Francisco Bay Area see this as a good thing because they see money strapped farmers and ranchers as targets to sell, others see the opportunists as nothing but sharks who sense blood in the water.

Without deliveries of surface water, farmers and other water users often turn to pumping from underground aquifers.

Though some counties are attempting to do it, as far as I know most counties and the state governments have no role in regulating such pumping.

"A zero allocation is catastrophic and woefully inadequate for Kern County residents, farms and businesses," Ted Page, president the Kern County Water Agency's board, said in a statement.

"While many areas of the county will continue to rely on ground water to make up at least part of the difference, some areas have exhausted their supply."

Groundwater levels already have been stressed, after pumping accelerated during the dry winter in 2008 and 2009.

"The challenge is that in last drought we drew down groundwater resources and never allowed them to recover," said Heather Cooley, water program co-director for the Pacific Institute, a water policy think tank in Oakland.

"We're seeing long term, ongoing declining groundwater levels, and that's a major problem."

Yes, it's all the same "Blah,blah, blah" when every emergency takes place. Just a lot of lip service from politicians and agency heads and think-tanks that don't produce anything other that hot air.

Many towns and cities already have ordered severe cutbacks in water use.

And yes, if you hear someone say that some rivers are being reduced to a trickle and that fish populations also are being affected - no one is lying to you and pulling an Obama.

Fact is, eggs in salmon-spawning beds of the American River near Sacramento were sacrificed after upstream releases from Folsom Dam were severely cut back.

All in all, the drought highlight's the traditional tensions between groups that claim the state's limited water for their own priorities — farmers, city residents and conservationists.

But for me, more than anything else it throws a spotlight on the California Democrat Party in the State Capital in Sacramento who have complete control on the legislature - if they didn't owe their seats to the Environmentalist Groups who put them there, then maybe we would have more reservoirs for just such an emergency.

Sooner or later, even the bought and paid for Democrats in control of California are going to have to admit that the reservoirs water system today was built when the state only had half of its present population.

One would think that even Democrats are smart enough to figure out the common sense fact that since the population has doubled - we subsequently need more water storage.   
Maybe that's the reason a jackass is the symbol of their political party? As everyone knows, you can't fix stupid!


Story by Tom Correa

Horse Care & Feeding Questions and Answers - Advice from 1914

Can ear corn be fed to horses?

Ear corn is a satisfactory feed, assuming it is adequately dried and free from mold. It is good for greedy horses that bolt grain.

Are pelleted rations satisfactory?

Yes. pelleted rations have proven popular because they are convenient to handle, easily stored, and reduce dustiness. However, grinding and pelleting increase ration costs.

What causes wood chewing and how can it be minimized?

Wood chewing may be a result of boredom or of a deficiency in the diet.

Boredom may be reduced by feeding three times daily, increasing exercise, or offering some additional straw or coarse hay to the horse when feeding pellets.

Can silage be fed to horses?

The use of silage requires especially good management. However, good-quality silage free from mold and not frozen can be a good roughage during the winter.

If silage is fed, it is a good idea to also use 3 to 4 pounds of dry hay daily.

How many pounds of silage are equivalent to a pound of hay?

Corn silage is ensiled at 60 to 65 percent moisture. About 2.5 wet pounds of corn silage are equal to 1 pound of air-dry hay.

Grasses and legumes are usually ensiled at 40 to 50 percent moisture and are called haylage. About 1.6 pounds of wet haylage is equal to I pound of air-dry hay.

Of what value is molasses?

Wet or dry molasses are sometimes included in the ration to increase palatability and consumption.

To keep the ration from being too laxative, it should not include more than 4 to 5 percent molasses.

If legume bays analyze higher in crude protein, why do horsemen often prefer grass hay?

Grass hays often cure more easily and thus are considered to be cleaner and less apt to contain mold.

Is it advisable to limit feed hay?

Hay is often limited for race horses to insure an ingestion of more energy from grain.

Roughage is sometimes limited for show horses to avoid hay bellies.

Is it possible to feed rations that are too rich?

Yes. Overfeeding, or bringing to a heavy feed of grain too quickly without sufficient exercise, can result in colic, stocked legs, and puffy or swollen hocks.

How can greedy horses be prevented from bolting or eating their grain too quickly?

Put a few baseball-sized smooth stones in the grain box. Ear corn will also help.

What is founder?

Founder is a metabolic disorder resulting from overeating, drinking cold water when overheated, or other types of stress.

It can lead to separation of live and horny portions of the hoof, which causes severe lameness.

Immediately placing cold packs on the horse's legs or standing the front legs in cold water are good first aid measures.

Severe cases require the attention of a veterinarian.

What is colic?

Colic is simply a bellyache and can result from any number of causes.

Drenching with a pint of mineral oil or several quarts of water containing one half cup of salt or epsom salt may offer relief.

Colic should always be considered an emergency; consult a veterinarian.

Can horses use urea or other nonprotein nitrogen sources for protein?

Not efficiently because the cecum (a pouch of the large intestine where nonprotein nitrogen would be converted to useful protein) is located too far down the digestive tract.

Too much urea could be toxic to the horse so avoid using it.

Do antibiotics improve growth?

The feeding of 85 milligrams of aureomycin daily to foals up to 1 year old improves growth rates slightly.

When properly prescribed, antibiotics appear to be more desirable for therapeutic uses for diseases.

What should one look for on a feed tag or label when buying commercial horse feed?

Take special note of the percentages of total digestible nutrients (TDN) if provided, crude protein (CP), crude fiber (CF), and the feed ingredients.

Also be sure to read the feeding directions.

What is meant by percent T.D.N.?

The percent T.D.N. (total digestible nutrients) is that part of the ration that will be digested and retained in the horse's body as energy.

Of what significance is crude fiber (C.F.) in the ration?

Generally, the higher the percent crude fiber, the lower the percent T.D.N. in the ration.

Shelled corn analyzes about 3 percent crude fiber, oats 12 percent, and hays 24 to 30 percent.

Rations analyzing more than 8 to 12 percent crude fiber probably contain considerable roughage.

Can an orphan foal be raised on cow's milk?

Yes, but at the beginning it is desirable for the foal to receive some colostrum.

There are also milk replacers available on the market.

How should cow's milk be modified for a foal?

Mare's milk, as compared with cow's milk, is lower in protein and fat and higher in water and sugar.

Therefore, add one tablespoon of sugar and four tablespoons of water to a pint of cow's milk.

Warm to about 100' F. and feed 1/2 pint every two hours for the first few days.

After four weeks the foal can be gradually switched to undiluted cow's milk or skimmed milk.

Why furnish extra vitamin A in the ration if green feeds are a good source of carotene that can be converted to Vitamin A in the body?

Research has shown that high uptake of nitrogen in plants can interfere with carotene conversion to vitamin A.

Vitamin A is especially important for breeding horses. Supplemental vitamin A is inexpensive and good insurance for the horse's health.

Should salt be fed loose or in the block?

Salt can be fed either way, but consumption may be higher in the loose form.

Do mares need grain before foaling?

Mares fed good bay and in thrifty condition (healthy and neither fat nor thin) may not need extra grain.

Thin or old mares may need some grain. In late gestation, a light grain ration along with good roughage is acceptable, but the mare should not be overfed.

Heavy feeding can cause foaling trouble because the mare may become too fat.

How should mares be fed after foaling?

Feed only light grain with hay for 7 to 10 days after foaling.

Lactation that is too heavy can cause scouring. Increase grain slowly for the mare until the foal is old enough to take more milk.

Do horses need tooth care?  

Yes. Irregular wear may leave sharp jagged edges that can cause pain or poor mastication of feed.  

File with a float or guarded rasp.

Occasionally milk teeth that remain in too long need to be pulled; otherwise they may cause crooked permanent teeth.

All advise from 1914!