The biased nature of the media never fails to amaze me. Let's see, how bout doing a 15 minute piece on farm payments and have only one farmer profiled in the piece. Do you think John Phipps speaks for the majority of family farmers in America? Of course, he doesn't. Why hasn't he returned the payments in past years, if he despises them so much?The only voice for the majority of farmers in America in this piece is provided by a lobbyist, whom Dan Rather and crew knew would be villified by the American public because lobbyists are "evil" by nature, right? You know, commodity prices were high in 1996 when we wrote that farm bill and where were they four years later? In 2002, we had a budget surplus and low commodity prices so a farm-bill debate wasn't as controversial. Yes farm INCOMES are high right now but not necessarily farm PROFITS. Does Mr. Phipps actually believe that input costs are higher because of direct payments? Commodity prices may not stay at high levels forever, but you can be rest assured that oil and fertlizer prices are not going to retreat. What happens to the American farmer then, if farm payments are done away with? These are the questions that are never asked in pieces like these, and in newspaper articles across the country. Just more propaganda from EWG, Oxfam and the like. You should pat yourself on the back, Mr. Cook as the media has bought your cache of goods, hook, line, and sinker.