Aaron Sorkin: "The snotty quote was posted by Sarah Palin on (like all the great frontier women who've come before her) her Facebook page to respond to the criticism she knew and hoped would be coming after she hunted, killed and carved up a Caribou during a segment of her truly awful reality show, Sarah Palin's Alaska, broadcast on The-Now-Hilariously-Titled Learning Channel."
Sarah Palin poses with a caribou she killed on 'Sarah Palin's Alaska', 11/14/10. (photo: TLC)
I'm Sure The Moose Had It Coming
09 December 10
In Her Defense, I'm Sure the Moose Had It Coming
"
nless you've never worn leather shoes, sat upon a leather chair or eaten meat, save your condemnation."
You're right, Sarah, we'll all just go fuck ourselves now.
The snotty quote was posted by Sarah Palin on (like all the great frontier women who've come before her) her Facebook page to respond to the criticism she knew and hoped would be coming after she hunted, killed and carved up a Caribou during a segment of her truly awful reality show, Sarah Palin's Alaska, broadcast on The-Now-Hilariously-Titled Learning Channel.
I eat meat, chicken and fish, have shoes and furniture made of leather, and PETA is not ever going to put me on the cover of their brochure and for these reasons. Palin thinks it's hypocritical of me to find what she did heart-stoppingly disgusting. I don't think it is, and here's why.
Like 95% of the people I know, I don't have a visceral (look it up) problem eating meat or wearing a belt. But like absolutely everybody I know, I don't relish the idea of torturing animals. I don't enjoy the fact that they're dead and I certainly don't want to volunteer to be the one to kill them and if I were picked to be the one to kill them in some kind of Lottery-from-Hell, I wouldn't do a little dance of joy while I was slicing the animal apart.
I'm able to make a distinction between you and me without feeling the least bit hypocritical. I don't watch snuff films and you make them. You weren't killing that animal for food or shelter or even fashion, you were killing it for fun. You enjoy killing animals. I can make the distinction between the two of us but I've tried and tried and for the life of me, I can't make a distinction between what you get paid to do and what Michael Vick went to prison for doing. I'm able to make the distinction with no pangs of hypocrisy even though I get happy every time one of you faux-macho shitheads accidentally shoots another one of you in the face.
So I don't think I will save my condemnation, you phony pioneer girl. (I'm in film and television, Cruella, and there was an insert close-up of your manicure while you were roughing it in God's country. I know exactly how many feet off camera your hair and make-up trailer was.)
And you didn't just do it for fun and you didn't just do it for money. That was the first moose ever murdered for political gain. You knew there'd be a protest from PETA and you knew that would be an opportunity to hate on some people, you witless bully. What a uniter you'd be - bringing the right together with the far right.
(Let me be the first to say that I abused cocaine and was arrested for it in April 2001. I want to be the first to say it so that when Palin's Army of Arrogant Assholes, bereft of any reasonable rebuttal, write it all over the internet tomorrow they will at best be the second.)
I eat meat, there are leather chairs in my office, Sarah Palin is deranged and The Learning Channel should be ashamed of itself.
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
 19 May 2012
|
 18 May 2012
|
 18 May 2012
|
 19 May 2012
|
 19 May 2012
|
 19 May 2012
|
 20 May 2012
|
 20 May 2012
|
 20 May 2012
|
Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
I don't know whether humor is the Heart of God or whether it is compassion, in any case they are #l & #2 and in the case of the Dear Moose, who clearly sacrificed in hopes you or Chris Rock or Robin Williams would respond, I say:thanks, Dear Moose. I am restored for the good kill/fight/strength to email the L.Channel.... Rachel
"even though I get happy every time one of you faux-macho shitheads accidentally shoots another one of you in the face."
Really contributes to the dialog, doesn't it?
I work in an ER and everytime one of those cruel assholes shoots himself (more common than shooting someone else), or falls out of a treestand, they are the biggest, whiniest crybabies you have ever seen!
"Oh, the pain, the pain! Give me drugs! No one has ever felt the pain that I'm feeling"
Really? Cause the animals you shot and left to die feel pain too, asshole. And they don't get morphine.
So Palin is contributing to 'dialog'? What dialog? And Sorkin is the one who shuts it down? Rock, do you live in a glass house?
"If I'm going to say anything about John Edwards in the future, I'll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot."
"We need to execute people like (John Walker Lindh) in order to physically intimidate liberals."
"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity."
"My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building."
"I think the government should be spying on all Arabs, engaging in torture as a televised spectator sport, dropping daisy cutters wantonly throughout the Middle East and sending liberals to Guantanamo."
"The only issue is whether to impeach or assassinate."
-THOSE WERE JUST COULTER. WANNA DO O'REILLY NOW?
You set yourself up for that like a straight man. Are you really a liberal?
Yes rock...it actually does contribute to the dialog. That was a perfectly appropriate comment in light of the subject matter. Really. Honestly. It obviously offended you but Sarah's little stunt was oh so much more offending to so, so many. So again, I think the comment is not only just fine...it is entirely appropriate for the occasion.
Billyboob did manage to demonstrate one thing - Ann Coulter is just as bad as Aaron Sorkin. Doesn't win many people over, though.
Sometimes, politics isn't about pleasing your enemies.
Calling me "Billyboob" doesn't "win me over", though.
I guess the problem with the lack of "civility" in this country is that some members of the right, commenting on this thread have a policy of being able to dish it out, without being able to take it.
Sorry, I'm not like most of the other left wingers on this thread. I'm willing to come down to your level. Sorry if you're not used to that.
Care to prove me wrong on that?
You're having a hard time with this because you set yourself up.
Do you think openly "joking" about murdering doctors, assasinating an American President, and suggesting targets for future domestic terrorists, qualifies as "less crude"? I don't understand the logic. Is a threat to a President's life less offensive if it doesn't use the "f" word?
I wasn't "saving" these up either. Just like you, I have internet access. I do remember when these quotes happened, so I can guarantee you ALL of them are valid, including the Presidential death threat that was in one of her own books.
If you wanted, we could have also discussed similar language used by Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, or Glenn Beck. This isn't an anomaly among right-wing pundits. In fact, it's becoming pretty common. I'm surprised that you were unaware of this trend. Do you know that, according to the Secret Service, President Obama recieves 30 death threat A DAY.
THIS ISN'T A JOKE.
AND I'M NOT LAUGHING.
cont.
This is not only REPULSIVELY OFFENSIVE AND CRUDE, BUT PROFOUNDLY UNAMERICAN.
The most offensive thing about this is the fact that right-wingers have the NERVE to try lecturing the rest of us about "patriotism". If you've never heard of Beck, O'Reilly or Limbaugh, there's a web site called Google. I encourage you to check it out.
—Glenn Beck, on why people who lost their homes in forest fires in California had it coming, 'The Glenn Beck Program,' Oct. 22, 2007
''You got to have an enemy to fight. And when you have an enemy to fight, then you can unite the entire world behind you, and you seize power. That was Hitler's plan. His enemy: the Jew. Al Gore's enemy, the U.N.'s enemy: global warming. Then you get the scientists — eugenics. You get the scientists — global warming. Then you have to discredit the scientists who say, 'That's not right.' And you must silence all dissenting voices. That's what Hitler did.''
—Glenn Beck, linking Al Gore's campaign against global warming to Hitler's campaign against the Jews, 'The Glenn Beck Program,' April 30, 2007
cont.
''Roosevelt...Am I wrong by saying there was a good portion of people that thought, 'Holy cow, I'm glad he's dead. He was turning into a dictator.'''
—Glenn Beck, on FDR, who was wildly popular after being elected four times, bringing America back from economic collapse, and leading the Allied powers to victory in World War II (May 21, 2010)
”I'm thinking about killing Michael Moore, and I'm wondering if I could kill him myself, or if I would need to hire somebody to do it. ... No, I think I could. I think he could be looking me in the eye, you know, and I could just be choking the life out. Is this wrong?''
—Glenn Beck, responding to the question 'What would people do for $50 million?', 'The Glenn Beck Program,' May 17, 2005
Do we really need to lower ourselves to this level/
aww... come on... what did "white trash" do to deserve that?
I'm SURE, however, she killed it for the food*.
*a complete lie
The comical part of watching the killing scene was the entourage, (looked somewhat like a whale sex event) arranging the piles of knapsacks so she had a brace to get a good shot. Just before that you see her taking wild aim with the rifle in mid-air. If no one had told her any different, she would not have known better.
Yeah, she hunts all the time..
If he HAD been, the left would be getting a lecture about being mamby-pamby-limp-wristed-wusses for caring about the dogs. He'd be a real folk hero for all those other regular hard-work joe sixpacks running dog fighting rings, who are misrepresented by Hollywood elites and ivory tower elites and aliens who want to take away our jobs while collecting unemployment and partial birth welfare moms and big government anarchists and peta activist intellectuals and gay nazi recruitment centers and gray aliens with communist tendencies.
Instead, he’s just an ass.
Make millions of stinking dollars and buy yourself a farm
Starve and torture dogs then wager, which one will do most harm
Hang up the loser by the legs and electrocute with stick
Two years later you're a pro-bowl player introducing Michael Vick
Kill nearly three thousand of your countrymen in "false flag" operation
Then promote your book and pompously pretend you love your nation
Slashed taxes for your highbrow friends whilst you gave the terrorists lumps
How many kids in your manufactured war are dead or walking on stumps?
Lipstick on an ice cold pig has never looked or tasted sweet
Renounce your job you rapacious slob then go and shoot some meat
Stuff your face with the debauched waste that America has become
Fame and riches await thee, all you need is a layer of scum
Infamy and Dignity they now wear the same face
We've lost all sense of pride, here, inside these United States
All that glitters is not gold;
Often have you heard that told:
Many a man his life hath sold
But my outside to behold:
Gilded tombs do worms enfold.
Had you been as wise as bold,
Young in limbs, in judgment old,
Your answer had not been inscroll'd:
Fare you well; your suit is cold.
However, there's also a SONG that says all that glitters IS Gold!
I guess what I'm trying to say is that, my instinct tells me there's a light at the end of the tunnel and we're just beginning to see it. The fact is, that palin is roundly hated by a solid majority of the United States - even more than george jr. was. She's become the kitchy candidate who it's fun to make fun of. If she ever won the presidency the joke would be over of course, but I honestly think the right is painting itself into a corner and, bit by bit, becoming obsolete. Her credibility is the canary in the coalmine for karl roves hopes of attaining permanent control over the U.S.
Seriously, though, right now the Democrats are greedy and amoral, and the Republicans are more OPENLY greedy and amoral.
As to Palin, are we really seeing HER, or are we mentally superimposing Tina Fey's performance of her everytime we see her?
Normally, I'd agree that Republicans TREND toward stealing from the Middle Class to feed the rich, and Democrats TREND toward robbing the Middle Class to feed the poor. Both basically buy votes with the Middle Class's money, BUT lately, the Democrats have broken with trend:
Remember, DEMOCRATS, led by Obama as "just" a Senator, got the TARP Bill passed, CLINTON, an alleged Democrat, started "forcing" banks to make loans to people who didn't deserve it, so that they HAD to be bailed out later.
Clinton also passed NAFTA and gave China Most Favored Nation trading status. As such, BOTH parties are against the American people.
Several posters on other threads have also figured out that Obama is playing by Republican rules, or IS a Trojan Republican.
That's why we need to break away from the two abusers, and get a strong Third Party candidate.
The "forced" loans is a misnomer. What actually happened was repugs demanded (and conservative democrats like Clinton went along with it), that we stopped REGULATING what banks did with loans. Banks weren't "required" to make those loans. They were ALLOWED to make loans, then SELL the fake equity as though it was REAL MONEY. That was good-ole conservative de-regulation in action.
I don't have a problem with a third party candidate. Too bad we have a two party system. The system makes third parties unviable. What we need is to get rid of the primary process and allow everyone to run for president against everyone else. The top two vote getters compete two weeks later in an automatic run-off.
The bad guys with the paint brushes you think are "painting themselves into a corner" have virtually all the money, the media and, apparently, our current President. Palin is just being used right now. They'll shitcan her when necessary. Soon would be better.
-Yeah, there's that too.
Scratch what I said. We're screwed.
No, seriously, there's no void on the right. What I mean is that, no matter how wildly unpopular their ideas are, there is ALWAYS some current willing standard bearer ready to go to the mat for them, at any cost. My explanation for that is that, what we call the right is really just the hashing out of nixon's southern strategy, with many of the very same people who were angry at the left for letting the '60s happen back in the '60s. They can't keep fighting the '60s forever.
cont.
The left, on the other hand has a HUGE VOID. Right now, President Obama is the poster child for that void. It's an almost complete unwillingness to fight for anything. The more glass jawed Obama and Reid get, the ANGRIER the actual voters are getting. This can't go on forever either. Someone, SOMEONE who's willing to fight back will eventually be in a position of power. I don't think Howard Dean would just take it on the chin, but then, I didn't think Obama would either.
I agree completely with the rest of your analysis, though, liberals seem to forgive those who attack them IN LIEU OF punishment. This extends far beyond politics, though, from parenting to warfare. Liberals make excuse for people who do the wrong thing, apparently expecting them to quit spontaneously, while Conservatives PUNISH their enemies, THEN expect them to quit.
That's why parents have out-of-control brats, and America's international standing has changed from "Fuck with us and my best to your next of kin" to "Fuck with us and we'll make excuses for your behavior"!
The usual excuse of liberals for not punishing bad behavior is either "It Hurts Their FEELINGS", or "They Don't Know Any Better"--and if you don't punish, how will they LEARN any better?
There's an Internet Chain-Letter that lists the main differences between Liberals and Conservatives, but two lines of it sum up the entire thing:
If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A liberal wonders who will take care of him.
We need to deprogram ourselves of this "Can't We All Just Get Along" mentality.
Remember, a thug adopted that mentality only AFTER being beaten by cops. Without punishment, criminals will keep on keeping on, because it's fun and profitable!
I'm angry at the betrayal of law-abiding working Americans, since forgiveness of crimes and bailouts of failures make the honest people look like Grand-Scale CHUMPS. But if even the people on this Site can't agree to that--and most think I'm too eager to punish criminals and terrorists--then the bad guys WILL win!
If you punish bad behavior, it MIGHT not change, but there's a better chance of at least temporary behavior modification. If you want a guarantee in life, try this: If you do nothing about bad behavior, or worse, keep making excuses for bad behavior, I GUARANTEE it won't change.
bush knew we were going to be attacked and did nothing to stop it. Then, after the attack happened, he chose to start a war with people who had nothing to do with it, while PROTECTED the people who did.
SPARE US THE LECTURE ABOUT "COURAGE" AND "PATRIOTISM" HYPOCRITE.
In other words, I didn't vote for her because I thought she was being honest and I didn't like what she had to say. She WAS being honest and I STILL wouldn't vote for her.
cont.
I voted for Obama in the primaries because I "hoped" he was lying to get elected, and was at least slightly more liberal than he was letting on. In addition, he did make some campaign promises that were TRULY liberal - like that we should stop torturing people. When I hoped he was lying about his conservative views, he was telling the truth. When I MORE THAN hoped he was telling the truth about his liberal views (especially when no one else had the courage to say them out loud), he was lying.
As far as I'm concerned, he COULD still turn it around and make me want to vote for him again. He'd have to turn HARD LEFT AND IMMEDIATELY. Right now, I don't see that happening. The lunatic tea-baggers got into office because people like me were taken for granted by our elected officials and chose to stay home in this election to punish them. I was one of them. Most of the Democrats who were replaced were right-wingers being replaced by nut-job right-wingers. Very few honest representatives of the left (Russ Feingold being the exception) were defeated from the right.
cont.
I guess my point is this: As a rule, American "voters" (if they bother to show up) are moving further left even though the Democratic Party (the one that's supposed to represent the interests of the left) is veering right. The repuglican party is moving EVEN FURTHER right to represent it's shrinking base. A void is being created where no one is representing the left at the exact time that left-wing sympathies are growing at the fastest rate since the Depression. Eventually, something's going to give. Either the Democratic Party will come around, or the Republican Party will start representing the left (it's possible afterall, Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt were left-wingers for their time), or the left is going to get unruly. The right has become unruly because it's reacting against broad social trends that it really has no control over. A lot of the right's "anger" is directed at something it can't quite put into words, but has something to do with American culture... The left will become unruly, but for SPECIFIC REASONS that it CAN articulate - probably better than most politicians.
cont.
It's going to be interesting to see how this plays out. However, I don't think we'll be seeing a president palin, or another version of bush ever again in this country - no matter HOW angry we get at Obama. If Obama is going to lose his re-election campaign it will be because someone has tapped into the droves of left-wingers in this country who don't bother to vote any more. It'll be a tough sell. Obama suckered these same people in 2008, and they've become EVEN MORE cynical.
Was that intentional? If so, BRILLIANT. It's a great analogy of what he's ALREADY been doing with the repuglican elephant for the past 2 years.
However, I would point out that though the deer population is exploding--with the weaker genes--so is the human population, especially with America's ever-rising introdus of people from other countries, so humans spread into what used to be "deer land". With that in mind, reintroducing wolves is literally suicidally stupid, as the wolves "might" choose a prey that runs slower than the slowest deer--the humans!
With massive battery farming nowadays, though, hunting seems an outmoded cruelty EXCEPT to control the population and range of the other species, i.e., to keep them away from humans.
Remember, in our "Free Range" past, when a sheep or cow was killed by a wolf, farmers would hunt down and kill a whole FAMILY of wolves, to make sure that their livestock would be safe?
As for wolves attacking humans, that is a ridiculous statement. Over the course of American history, attacks by wolves on man are extremely rare. Given the choice, when confronted by humans, the wolf chooses to run away. They are much more intelligent than you realize, they know who their mortal enemy is, and they know that they have no chance to win that battle.
Bottom line: Given the choice between living with the wolf, or living with white supremacists, I choose the wolf. So should you.
BUT you overlook that some creatures deserve PUNISHMENT, not pity!
Liberals forgive murderers, terrorists, even child-molesters because they "Don't Know Any Better"--but without punishment, how will they LEARN any better?
You know, I recently hired an exterminator to deal with termites...should I have hired a diplomat instead?
Prison--or "warehousing scum", as it's colloquially called--is hugely profitable, but American prisons are rightfully called the softest in the world. Sending a kid to their room is a punishment--unless that "room" has free Cable TV, free exercise rooms, free healthcare better than honest people, etc., it stops being punishment and starts being a country-club for queers!
Compare that with prison in ANY other country, where prison is such an unpleasant place, they try to AVOID it.
The Death Penalty IS a deterrent, but only to that ONE criminal, because instead of being a public spectacle, we respect criminals' "right" to privacy, and it's a quiet somber ceremony in a remote corner of the jail. Some people aren't even aware that Criminal X is executed! If executions were public again, it would pose the implicit question: "Do you want to end up like HIM? If not, change your ways!"
Keeping fewer criminals would also cut costs!
I think we need to stop worrying so much about the "rights" of the criminal, and start protecting the victims.
So, it sounds like all your tough talk runs into a major snag - YOUR OWN IDIOLOGY ABOUT TAXES.
What do you feel should be done about the "... plague upon this earth ...those blind, ego-maniacal white supremacists, whose greed has plundered, and polluted this good earth ..." that you described above?
Personally, I think we should deal a strict PUNISHMENT to bush jr. and all of his cronies. Would you rather "negotiate" with them?
Really?
Then why has Congress (aren't there a couple of white women in there too?) and the President (a black man, as I recall) extended tax cuts to the wealthy (healthy) and eliminated help (Cost of Living Adjustment) to seniors (sick and old)?
When despair for the world grows in me and I wake in the night at the least sound,
in fear of what my life and my children's lives may be,
I go and lie down where the wood drake
rests in his beauty on the water, and the great heron feeds.
I come into the peace of wild things who do not tax their lives with thoughts of grief.
I come into the presence of still water.
And I feel above me the day-blind stars
waiting with their light.
For a time I rest in the grace of the world, and I am free.
What bull! (And yes, I've heard of "Ducks Unlimited." It's a sort of Rotary Club that carries guns and kills defenseless animals.) America, humanity and the planet would benefit by the extinction of the species, "Great American Hunter."
http://malialitman.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/chuck-heath-animal-heads.jpg
That, in fact, is the reality of Sarah Palin and her beloved Alaska.
Sorry, I have to go vomit.)
You left out the part that she would award any hunter that brought her a foot from each of the wolves that they killed.
Don't serial killers start by taking pleasure in torturing and killing animals? Palin is a piece of trash pure and very simple!
I miss WEST WING with every fiber of my being. It was the only television show I watched weekly without fail.
However, I daresay it is a bit more complicated than on TV, even "West Wing", and playing President no more suits someone for the role than any of the ER actors would be suited to be a surgeon!
By the way, you left out ronnie ray-gun. Now THERE'S an actor! He couldn't act on the big screen, but that all changed once he got in the white house. He sure did a good job of acting like he wasn't screwing the neighbor's cat, not to mention that FINE bit of acting he nearly pulled off, acting like he had nothing to do with the Iran/Contra scandal.
I guess the point is that being an actor doesn't make you qualified to hold public office, however...
IT'S OK IF YOU'RE A REPUGLICAN.
Since elections have devolved into a popularity contest, it makes sense that actors would win, but not know what they're doing once they got in, from Reagan to Schwarzenegger.
Jesse Ventura recently quit politics and made his own talk-show about conspiracy theories, possibly because conspiracies of those more competent but less moral than himself kept him from being an effective leader. Would you rather have a stupid friend or a smart enemy in power?
HOWEVER, I think Obama is PART of the conspiracy, not BLOCKED by it!
Better?
THAT'S A REALLY GOOD ONE, BILLY! DONT KNOW WHICH IS FUNNIER, THAT JOHNSON, CARTER, CLINTON AND OBAMA NEVER TRIED LIBERALISM (Oh, maybe they didn't inhale?) or OSWALD WAS A "CONSERVATIVE?" Got to admit it, man, you got some sense of humor!
We are a nation that is continually told we are "center right", but consistently agree with liberal opinions on almost every issue. So, no, I don't accept the fallacy that we are a "minority". Unless you're referring to the minority who notice that the liberal opinions they hold, actually add up to being a liberal.
The carrot would be getting people who normally don't bother, interested enough to actually stop sitting on the sidelines and vote.
The stick would be threatening not to vote at all if our will as voters isn't being respected by the people we elect to represent us.
Does that include alcohol and drug abuse and domestic violence (remember Aspen last new years)?
Me thinks J Deep would be more clever:-)
If a left winger balanced the budget, created PERMANENT world peace, solved our environmental crisis, and sent flowers to your mother on her birthday; the right would call him scum, if he also cheated on his wife, or WORSE YET, THE ANTICHRIST, because we all know the antichrist would seem too good to be true.
If a right-winger tortured people, caused multiple wars based on lies and for personal profit, went AWOL while serving in the military, did drugs, tortured small animals as a kid, intentionally allowed a terrorist attack, and set about attempting to destroy the Bill of Rights; the right would call him a great man because he never cheated on his wife - as far as we know.
Educated hunters do more for the ecosystem than NYT hypocrites. They go to the nature - undertand - love - protect.
Palin is idiot - not Alaskan - caricature of the hunter.
... killing of wolves and bears from low-flying aircraft .. is sick - but this is not hunting. It is as sick like US soldiers killing in Afganistan/Iraq from from low-flying aircraft.
The reason I knew of Sarah Palin when she was put up as vice-presidential candidate was because of the Defenders of Wildlife effort to stop her actions in Alaska relative to wolves. That entire elitist "sport" is disgusting and has little to do with reality or the environment. (Palin was a genuine nobody until the neo-cons snagged her.)
There is nothing wrong with hunting, however. It is the hunters that give it a bad name. The criticism here of Palin not needing food is correct, but many who do hunt respectfully do not need the food either. They simply prefer clean meat. Palin is definitely performing, though, not hunting.
Too bad so many other lower 48 hunters are also not actually hunting - they are baiting and shooting after setting up feed and cameras to learn the habits of deer, for instance. They then get out early and sit. Then shoot. No respect whatsoever. Just killing. The heroes of hunting are those who do care about habitat and populations.
What will they do? What will they do? Tune in next week to see our next show, 'See Dick and Sarah in the Assisted Living Home'.
*¬◊
Nothing wrong with being a democrat or hunting- you miss the point that this was all for show, not, presumably, as you and yours have caught, killed or hunted wild animals. Your thoughts and votes matter. Your 'take' on this issue, however, tells more truth than you wish: you somehow equate all killing of wild animals to be equal. They aren't and I'd take bets you know better.
THANK YOU FOR EXHIBITING MORE REALITY THAN WILL EVER BE DISPLAYED IN A "reality" SHOW!!!
IMHO billy bob, you could stand to lay off the bullying of others with your cuts that they haven't read the article or comments. You wield that club around here like a baby seal killer!
Just like you, I wield any club that is made available.
http://www.O-MAMA.com
Why do undermine your excellent questions by putting religion back into the equation ("Jesus knows who they really are and will act accordingly.") after stating that progress will be made once we take religion out of the debate ("We need to get "religion" out of it ...")?
Why are we sentencing thousands of AMERICAN children to death without a trial due to the fact that their parents can't afford a few necessary items?
By the way, I'm just glad that the death penalty never fries the wrong guy.
I'm also glad we can all agree that it's "a child" the morning after conception.
"But like absolutely everybody I know, I don't relish the idea of torturing animals."
And neither do most hunters. Hunters celebrate a clean kill where an animal does not suffer. Unlike your steak that is well aware for sometime that it is about to be slaughtered by a human being that put absolutely no effort into killing it. IMO killing an animal simply for the economics of it without any regard for fair chase, is actually on a morally lower plain.
Some hunters go entire seasons without putting something in their freezer. So if someone is happy and excited at this sense of achievement, that is to be expected as it is a difficult thing to do.
BTW I am not an avid hunter myself. But I respect the tradition and those that pass it on to their families. Oh and Sarah Palin is a hack and not worthy of much in the way of respect.
When animals are slaughtered in a slaughter house (I used to work at one), are killed it's nearly instantaneous - EVERY TIME. The animals that are given a "fair chase" are often being chased by a helicopter. Scare-a palin is in no position to make claims that she kills an animal quickly, cleanly, skillfully, respectfully, and because it's necessary. She's a true champion of whatever cause the far right and the extreme far right have in mind for her - and she's paid EXTREMELY well for being their spokesman - especially for someone who is less qualified to be president of the United States than most other college dropouts.
Killing "for the economics of it" is the ONLY moral reason to kill another animal. Anyone who wasn't, himself, a hypocrite would have figured that out.
For the record, I've also gone hunting several times. I've been surrounded by hunters most of my life, in fact. Hunting IS NOT about humanity, or even "resource management". It's, by and large, a hobby like golfing, performed by golfers.
In a packing house, the relative pain and fear inflicted are important ECONOMIC concerns, as the production line NEED$ to keep moving$$$$$. Obviously, the board of directors couldn't care less, but they WANT THE PRODUCTION LINE MOVING - EVEN IF IT MEAN$ HELPING ANIMAL$ REMAIN CALM AND UNAWARE OF WHAT'$ HAPPENING.
In hunting, many people RELISH the sense of power, the chase, watching dogs go after wounded, and finishing off wounded animals themselves.
Ask Dick Cheney, the traitor, what it's like to shoot birds placed in the hundreds on one side of a bush and then squeeze off a round that hits a hunter?
I'm serious. A fox news contributor wrote it on a bathroom wall, right under michelle bachman's home number. You heard it hear first. I'm sure of it. I consulted with nancy reagan's psychic and I am as certain of this as reagan was when he invaded Grenada on nancy's advice.
I'm sure they'll test market the idea first, but I guarantee she will marry balloon dad by Dec. 21, 2012. For some reason, that date sticks out to me... After a brief honeymoon period, the two of them will start a colony of moral refugees in Guyana, where the three to four hundred converts can live out the remaining day(s?) of their lives vying for camera angles and wondering why the History Channel only airs their daily broadcast during prime-time. Eventually, the mother ship will finally come and rapture them away, while the other 7 billion of us writhe in agony in an eternal lake of fire.
At that point, all the dreams of that wide-eyed young girl who attended 7 or 8 colleges in as many years in search of a meaning behind the many voices in her head, will finally be fulfilled.
Thank you for saying, so energetically and clearly, and with no false cant of politeness or pretended respect for her pretended credentials, what we all know to be true.
You, sir, rock, and the elegance, clarity, and liberalism of your prose make me happy.
We have really, really, extremely missed you. Please come back. We need you. The Learning Channel is but one place that has slid down so far it may not be allowed to return to an intelligent and thoughtful place.
My soul, intelligence and being are far better reading or watching you prose. Please help to counter the evil fair that permeates this crazy world.
Bullwinkle
Actually looking at the video it appears she did kill that animal quickly and cleanly
BTW that is not a moose.
I don't think you understand the term "fair chase" and no helicopters are a rare exception that I do not support.
Killing an animal for management of the resource, feeding your family is indeed better than buying meat wrapped in plastic and pretending you are morally superior to someone that actually does the killing
Hunting... my ass.
It adds fuel to their gaslighting.
A certain recent SCOTUS decision might qualify, since it just codifies as law what's "ALWAYS" been the case, de-facto?
Or read "Animal Farm" for a BEAUTIFUL example of long-con gaslighting. The way the animals in charge change the laws is uncomfortably familiar...
A lot of people have pointed out uncle dick's little hunting misshap where he nearly committed manslaughter and never even apologized of it. OOPS!
Does anyone else get a sense of cognitive dissonance from following the logic that, as the NRA has told us all time and time again, GUNS ARE SAFE and EVERYONE should carry one with them wherever they go. We've all heard MANY times that only the stupid hunters who don't really know what they're doing hurt themselves or others and really shouldn't call themselves hunters because they give the rest a bad name.
Now, think about the fact that the media jumped to uncle dick's side and, almost unanimously, agreed that shooting someone in the face while hunting is something that could happen to ANYBODY. The idea that the left would want to jump on this was considered an example of how out of touch the left truly was with "REAL" Americans who love to shoot each other in the face on weekends to show how much they have in common with our forefathers.
Like all those "RUGGED INDIVIDUALISTS" with night vision and a heated tree stand with a satellite dish.
But the media's claim is true, anyone who doesn't know what they're doing could shoot themselves or a "friend". IIRC, Darwin Awards had one about a guy with a gun that wouldn't fire, so he looked down the barrel to try to find an obstruction. The gun chose THAT moment to fire, so he died in a live-action Wile E. Coyote stunt.
Check the Darwin Awards, or SNOPES for more hilarious of self-inflicted eugenics.
That aside, there's a different law for the rich than for the rest of us. Simpson got away with murder too, but got nailed for Armed Robbery, a Senator got his house searched by the cops, and no less a talking-head than Obama came out against the COPS, and lesser celebrities actions while drunk or drugged are legendary, but net them very low prison time!
My point about "rugged individualists" is that the idea itself is a lie. There is no such thing and there never has been, unless you count homeless people. The lie about "rugged individualism" comes from the right, but it is only selectively applied. The laws about letting only the strong survive don't seem to pass right-wing scrutiny when one of their own interests is in danger. By the logic of right-wing idiology, poor children, who happen to have been fully (not "partially") born, need to pull themselves up by their baby booty straps, while cletus can play the "rugged individualist" using tools that were created by other human beings with jobs that his own ideology is not necessarily willing to fight for.
cont.
In other words, to be a TRUE "rugged individualist" you need to ACTUALLY BE one, and not just play acting, because you have it in your head you'd like to be a "cowboy" on weekends. Personally, I'd like to be a PIRATE, but my wife says we can't afford a parrot, so I guess I'll have to come to terms with the fact that I live on THIS planet. Most "rugged individualists" aren't willing to make the same sacrifice to reality.
I LOVE that part! Then again, with our lives defined by our wealth, and ever more constricted by bizarre rules, who doesn't yearn for more than they are allowed?
You're right that the term "Rugged Individualist" is something of a misnomer, but the whole idea of the Frontier is that they had to do for themselves and each other because the Government couldn't be bothered helping them. (Yes, I realize the only frontiers left are underwater and/or space)
The only way to be a "Rugged Individualist" now would be to hunt criminals, but I think there are laws against that?
So I guess we DO have HALF the Frontier back again: The Government can't be bothered protecting us from the criminals, but does a wonderful job protecting criminals from DIY Justice...
Blaming Obama is trite and true! (Horrible pun intended)
I come from a long line of so called "frontiersmen" going back all the way to the 1600s, and I know enough about my family history to know that "rugged individualism" only exists in Louis L'amour books and repuglican conventions.
Too bad she was allowed to procreate--she should have had her genes weeded out of the gene pool.
Caribou is not a moose.
Most Alaskan's despise Palin, as I do.
Most Alaskan's would be very happy to get drawn for a hunting permit.
It is obvious that the hunt and filming was very calculated; but I suspect the hunt would have been conducted despite the cameras.
I guarantee that meat will be consumed by someone.
While I share the feelings of Palin - writings like these confuse me when there is so much that could be written of her hypocrisy - why drop to her standard?
In short, she is a stupid, vain, and money-grubbing media star.
Sorkin is trying to distinguish between people who kill animals with the "wrong" intention (for fun, polical gain, TV etc.) as opposed to every meat-eater who has conveniently "outsource" the killing and horrific conditions to a slaughter house, and then eat their steak at the Sunday bar-b-que without a smidgeon of guilt. Convenient.
If there were no alternative to eating meat, then I'd say Sorkin has a valid arguement. He could assert that because he "has" to eat meat, then his intention is more appropriate than hunting animals for mere sport. But since there are absolutely bonafide alternatives to eating meat (and the horrific treatment of farm animals), it's a smoke & mirror game to pretend that my outsourced killing is more justified than Palin's killing.
Killing animals for food is no more right than killing them for sport. It's simply been better rationalized. So take aim at Palin's actions. . . and make my burger medium rare.
Nonetheless, you're overlooking the violence inherent in the meat production industry. It's, I believe, a worse type of violence than Sarah portrayed.
Go to your nearest slaughterhouses -- one poultry, one cattle, one whatever, spend an hour watching your future food live and then die and tell me that you find Palin more repugnant than yourself -- who is so far removed from the reality of the violence you perpetrate on sentient creatures every day you live.
Wake Up - you are definitely an unknowing, unconscious hypocrite.
eat of your plate
Sarah Palin getting media attention is proof of it!
One day the animal kingdom will unite and hunt her down..... for the fun of it or for political exposure, Kharma!
no wait...... the animals are smarter and more compassionate than that!
In my opinion the Learning Channel disgraces us all by promoting Sarah Palin and this kind of sub- human behavior as entertainment.
We sure have a long road ahead of us to bring loving kindness back into our world.... let alone a dose of honesty and fairness.
RSS feed for comments to this post.