$1,095,101 Republican Farm Subsidy Hypocrite Labels Democrats as Parasites

Missouri man’s incendiary sign on U.S. 71 draws fire
By DONALD BRADLEY, The Kansas City Star

David Jungerman farms 6,800 acres of river bottom land in western Missouri. He’s not the kind of guy who posts on Twitter or has a Facebook profile. So when the 72-year-old Raytown man wanted to speak out politically, he used what he had handy: a 45-foot-long, semi-truck box trailer.

Are you a Producer or Parasite
Democrats - Party of the Parasites

He planted the trailer with its professionally painted message in his Bates County cornfield along heavily traveled U.S. 71 about an hour south of Kansas City. He wanted lots of people to see it. They did. Including at least one with a good case of outrage, matches and a can of gas.
....

(http://www.kansascity.com/2010/06/19/2029960/missouri-mans-incendiary-sign.html)

Case No. 05-0907-CV-W-ODS:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, vs. BABY-TENDA CORPORATION, Defendant
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF DECLARING DEFENDANT VIOLATED 18 U.S.C. § 1341

(page 10)
...
Plaintiff devotes much attention – and the Court has briefly addressed – the
confusion created by the Distributors’ reference to the Advisory Council. As stated
earlier, the Court believes the Advisory Council’s name was carefully crafted to “sound
like” the name of a government agency, specifically to create the false impression that
government endorsement exists. Adding to effort to mislead consumers is the fact that
the invitations are purportedly for “safety seminars” and purposely omit the fact that the
true purpose of the event is to sell Defendant’s products. The net effect is to create the
false impression that the seminar is sponsored by a governmental or other agency and
is devoted to baby safety. The Record demonstrates – and the Court finds – the effort
has been successful, as evidenced by the testimony of attendees who were surprised,
angry or disappointed that they had been lured to a sales meeting.
As deceitful and reprehensible as the Court finds this sales practice, it does not
form an independent basis for relief. The Amended Complaint narrowly focuses on
Defendant’s misrepresentations about a connection between its product and
government agencies. Even if the sales practice is deceptive or otherwise constitutes
an unfair trade practice under the FTC Act or some other law, it does not provide a
basis for granting Plaintiff relief in this case. These claims will have to be raised – if at
all – in another suit.
...

(http://www.justice.gov/civil/ocl/cases/Cases/BabyTenda/Baby_Tenda_Judgment.pdf)

Note: The over-arching document from the US Consumer Product Safety Commission may be found at http://www.cpsc.gov/businfo/babytenda.pdf.