Do they serve peanuts onboard the flights?

Subsistence hunting is one thing. I get it, I’m just glad I don’t have to do it. I might starve.

But this?

As if the “hunting” (if you can call shooting out of your airplane hunting) isn’t bad enough,  the refusal to  consider any science or data  behind arguments that run counter to her agenda is to reminiscent of George W.

And I’m curious-exactly what did Palin do with all those wolf feet?

From Salon:

In early 2007, Palin’s administration approved an initiative to pay a $150 bounty to hunters who killed a wolf from an airplane in certain areas, hacked off the left foreleg, and brought in the appendage. Ruling that the Palin administration didn’t have the authority to offer payments, a state judge quickly put a halt to them but not to the shooting of wolves from aircraft.




3 Responses to “Do they serve peanuts onboard the flights?”

  1. 1 Gawain September 9, 2008 at 3:15 am

    Ironically this is the most efficient and effective way to control overpopulation of carnivores in the northwest. Hunting these animals has become increasingly legal in those states where wolves have been reintroduced because the reintroductions have been so successful that predators are quickly dominating their environment and bringing caribou, moose, and deer populations to the brink of endangerment in some areas. It sounds terrible when it is presented in this fashion but in truth it is extremely difficult to hunt small carnivores like wolves and foxes from the ground. Simply legalizing this would probably not help to control the populations. Of course if more gun-hating pot-loving left wing radicals would sober up and go hunting once in a while, the helicopters might not be necessary. Then again, that’s the last thing any of us wants. Let’s just go with what’s working. This practice is limited in scope and highly regulated. It’s not going to become a sport, and its not going to be legalized in any sweeping manner. I supported Kerry last time but this kind of propaganda has proven to me that I need to go the other direction this time. I’m sure that many voters who can actually read will be right there with me.

  2. 2 tammy September 9, 2008 at 10:15 am

    That’s what Governor Palin said, but the science behind the practice does not entirely support the premise, or even the need for it. All some of us “left wingers” (sorry not a pot smoker here!) want is for someone to sit in the White House who will acknowledge that maybe just maybe the scientists might be a tad bit smarter than he/she on issues such as the environment, and stop to consider objective date before making executive decisions.

    And, science aside, the fact that hunting from the ground is “extremely difficult”-well, it should be, given that the humans are the ones “toting the guns.”

    Sorry to here that you feel the need to “go in the other direction” this year, particularly over what you call propaganda. I hope that you will take the time to look over all the propaganda, from both sides, dismiss it, and then take a good hard look at the facts. Determine what the issues are that are of importance to you, what the candidates have planned, and where you want this country to be four years from now. Then make an informed decision and go vote.

    Regardless of which side you come down on, make it an informed decision, not one based on anything other than your vision for our country.

    Thanks for your comment.

    PS-There are many of us on both sides of issues who can and cannot read! (There is never any need for the discourse to be insulting. When we reduce ourselves to that level it makes it very difficult for anyone to get the facts, to look at them objectively and then to make an informed decision. And informed decisions are what we need-especially when selecting a leader of the “free world”.)

  3. 3 Jeffrey Ellis September 14, 2008 at 6:16 am

    Dear Gawain,

    As I guess you wish to characterize those of us on the left as pot smoking, I suppose you would also characterize those “gun-toting” right-wingers as crystal meth shootin’ and alcohol besotted.

    If the government, supported by scientific research, needs to control animal populations, they should do so in a rigorous and humane manner. Many cities have problems with stray dogs and cats, but the last I heard, private citizens were not being paid a bounty for bringing in the severed foreleg of an alley cat or rottweiler mix.

    As a little FYI, Jewish law actually forbids hunting. Does that make all religious Jews subject to your scathing criticism?

    By the way, I don’t believe you voted for John Kerry. I have a close colleague who lives for his guns; he is still voting for Obama, even though he is uneasy about Obama’s gun ownership policies. But he also has young family, so has broader concerns about his children’s education and economic future, and McCain’s plan to tax his health insurance benefits. If you’re voting against Obama because some of his supporters may have overstated the issue of wolf hunting (in your humble opinion), I do question your honesty in reporting on your own political position. If you’re a through and through right-winger, say so proudly! Bring on Bush term #3!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

September 2008
    Oct »

Top Posts

site stats

%d bloggers like this: