[True to form, the Huffington Post failed to even mention what Palin and the DD quacks have most in common--they're all serial killers of animals.]
Sarah Palin believes the backlash over “Duck Dynasty” star Phil Robertson’s anti-gay comments is a threat to freedom of speech.
The 67-year-old duck hunter made headlines when GQ published an interview in which he discussed morality and sin, and juxtaposed homosexuality with bestiality.
“It seems like, to me, a vagina — as a man — would be more desirable than a man’s anus,” he told the magazine. “That’s just me. I’m just thinking: There’s more there! She’s got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes! You know what I’m saying? But hey, sin: It’s not logical, my man. It’s just not logical.”
After the quotes were published, GLAAD spoke out against Robertson’s comments, calling them vile and misinformed. A&E ultimately suspended him from “Duck Dynasty” with an indefinite hiatus, saying his views do not align with those of the network.
Some are coming out in defense of Robertson, like Palin, who believes he is being persecuted for merely practicing his First Amendment right.
She took to Facebook to voice her opinion Wednesday, Dec. 18.
The Chick-fil-A-loving Republican has long been a fan of the “Duck Dynasty” brood and has commended them for promoting conservative values. (Phil Robertson is staunchly antiabortion, and Salon suggested the cast’s long beards act as “symbolic reaffirmation of traditional values” for Americans opposed to social change.)
In August, Palin even recommended Washington emulate the “Duck Dynasty” family, CNN noted.
“To our GOP leaders in Washington, especially – this is what Americans desire and deserve; we’re not rooting for your social truces,” she wrote on Facebook at the time. “Kudos to these Duck dudes for speaking their minds, and for their boldness in living the American dream of LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness – reminding us all that it’s only with freedom that anything is possible.”
In a statement obtained by The Huffington Post, Robertson defended himself against the controversy, saying he is only sharing God’s word.
“My mission today is to go forth and tell people about why I follow Christ and also what the bible teaches, and part of that teaching is that women and men are meant to be together,” he said, in part. “However, I would never treat anyone with disrespect just because they are different from me.”
Clarification: The headline of this article has been amended to specify that Sarah Palin defended Phil Robertson’s freedom of speech.
- Petitioning Jeff Paro
This petition will be delivered to:
Regarding your upcoming show “Amazing America with Sarah Palin”—America has already been “amazed” by Sarah Palin and her lack of compassion, and her complete relish of the animals she kills with unabashed fevor!
Palin has taken advantage of her half-governesship, by glamorizing the killing of iconic wolves from aircraft. As half-governor she offed a bounty for every left, front wolf paw surrendered—the wolf is a necessary predator for a healthy ecosystem; she lobbied for years to get the endangered polar bear kicked off of the Endangered Species List — despite the impossible challenges facing the polar bear to even survive — loss of habitat, starvation, and drownings. She failed at her attempts to doom the polar bear in the USA, so she continues to trophy hunt in Canada.
Her last attempt at exploiting animals with a show on TLC, “Sarah Palin’s Alaska”, evoked criticism from many including distinquished writer Aaron Sorkin, who labeled her actions, “jaw-dropping mean”. The show was not renewed after just one season — so why are you at InterMedia Outdoors, going to repeat history and subject the public to more of the offensive, cavalier disregard for animals and viewers, by allowing this callous woman air time?
We the signed, will boycott all of the sponsors of “Amazing America with Sarah Palin”, and we will give them all written notification of our intent.
Please sign petition here: http://www.change.org/petitions/cancel-the-upcoming-show-amazing-america-with-sarah-palin?share_id=wQTGUAUBMD&utm_campaign=friend_inviter_chat&utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=share_petition&utm_term=permissions_dialog_false
Here’s a clever little article which appeared on a site called “Ammoland.com” over a year ago, on Monday, May 14, 2012. Entitled, “7 Reasons the Left Should Be Pro-Hunting,” it was meant to spur on the passage of a “Sportsmen’s” Heritage Act [the senate version of which must be stopped in its tracks this summer]. My comments are injected within [brackets]…
Columbus, OH –(Ammoland.com)- The last 30 days have been chock full of key events that have a tremendous impact on the future of hunting, fishing and recreational shooting in America – events that are leading many sportsmen and women to draw conclusions about (or further cement their conclusions about) Democratic decision makers.
•In the nation’s capitol, Congress debated sportsmen’s access to public land, whether EPA could regulate ammunition and fishing tackle, whether recreational shooting should be permissible on national monument land where compatible, and last whether the United States should allow the importation of legally hunted trophies.
•In California, the Senate debated whether to ban hunting black bears and bobcats using hounds.
•In Ohio, lawmakers protested colleagues holding clay bird shooting events as political fundraisers in the wake of a school shooting that occurred in February 250 miles away from the proposed event.
In each of these cases, it was Democrats who led the charge opposing hunting rights, restricting target shooting or decrying the use of firearms for recreational purposes.
•In Congress, HR, 4089, the Sportsmen’s Heritage Act passed by an overwhelming 274-146 vote. Of the no votes, 144 were Democrats. (79% of the Democrats in the U.S. House)
•In California, SB 1221 passed the Senate Natural Resources Committee 5-3; followed by a 5-2 vote before the Appropriations Committee. All yes votes were Democrats. Not a single democrat voted to protect hunting.
•And as one might expect, the howls of protest over the shooting event fundraiser in Ohio were by Democratic lawmakers; while the shoot was held by a Republican.
There are so many reasons why the left-wing should love American hunters.
Here are seven:
[Why only 7—was that as high as they could count?]
•We’re a minority. There are roughly 20 million hunters in the United States, making us less than seven percent of the population. Democrats purport to be the champions of the under-represented. Here we are!
[Hunters are underrepresented? Whoa, hold on there a minute pardner—I gotta call bull on that one— if anything they’re overrepresented, I’d say. No other group that size enjoys near as much representation!]
•We eat free range / organic food. Democrats decry large livestock farms, and the use of hormones in meat. Whether deer or duck, game is the ultimate healthy choice. What’s the difference between free-range chicken and free-range pheasant?
[Far from health-food, wild ducks and geese are rife with lead-poisoning, fish with mercury, while deer and elk carry chronic wasting disease acquired by eating contaminated feed meant for livestock. You’d have to have a serious case of mad-cow disease to call that “organic.”]
•We preserve green space. No single group of Americans puts more money into habitat acquisition and preservation than hunters…billions upon billions of our license dollars and taxes on firearms and ammunition for land that everyone else can use for free. I thought Democrats love free stuff!
[Billions? That’s a bit of an exaggeration, I’m sure—unless someone’s spending a shitload on ammo. And besides, the “green space” they speak of is a war zone for much of the year. Most people don’t want to have to watch out for land-mines in the form of traps and dodge stray bullets to recreate in their green spaces.]
•We feed the hungry. Each year, hunters donate thousands of pounds of venison to local food pantries. One would think the party of the Great Society would welcome our contribution to the safety net.
[Not if they love deer in addition to people. Giving the flesh of their victims away is just a feel-good excuse for their favorite sport—killing]
•We support women’s rights. There are few things that make a sportsman happier than successfully hooking a woman on hunting. We’re even okay that they outshoot us many times.
[Great, that’s all we need are more Sarah Palin-types getting hooked on hunting by someone who thinks women’s rights include the equal right to become a deadly and destructive “sportsman.”]
•We’re just regular folks. For every African big-game hunter, there are thousands of hunters making a blue-collar living, and driving our American made trucks.
[Gas-guzzling, carbon-spewing American made trucks with mondo brush-crushing tires, displaying bumper stickers like: “Fish Slayer” and “Ditch the Bitch, let’s go huntin’”]
•We’re animal lovers. Hunters are the ones who pay for endangered species rehabilitation, not Hollywood actors or fashion models. And don’t even get me started on our dogs. No one loves and is more obsessed with dogs than hunters. And we don’t keep our dogs caged in purses where they can’t even turn around or stretch their legs.
[Oh sure, I’ve seen how you treat your hounds and “bird-dogs.” The only time they get out of their crate or kennel is during hunting season.]
My hope is that our left-leaning law makers will read this article, and realize that we really do have so much in common. And that they will join the minority of Democratic legislators who do vote pro-hunting and put an end to the discrimination that we have endured over the last thirty plus years. I’m hoping their position on hunting is evolving.
[Good fuckin’ luck, buddy. Not unless they are all too preoccupied by news of which celebrity died that day or who is having a babies to notice that the last of our public lands are being opened up for hunting and that our roadless wilderness areas are about to be exploited by the Senate version of the “Sportsmens” Heritage Act coming up for a vote this summer.]
The other night I watched the HBO movie Game Change, about John McCain’s selection of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his presidential running mate in 2008. After Tina Fey’s hilarious portrayal of Palin on Saturday Night Live I was half expecting a comedy, but this fact-based film stayed so close historical reality it should have been billed a horror flick. The thought of Sarah Palin a heartbeat away from the red button that could launch our 7,000+ nukes on a president’s whim is beyond scary.
While Julianne Moore usually doesn’t do anything for me, her depiction of Palin at her highest, lowest and airheaded-est was spot on. It was almost painful watching a potential American VP be so clueless about foreign policy, domestic policy, or any other policy for that matter. Ed Harris as Senator John McCain was a bit of a stretch, but Woody Harrelson did a great job as McCain’s strategist, Steve Schmidt, who was partly responsible for suggesting Palin in the first place—and who spent the rest of the movie regretting it and desperately trying to coach her. After she goes catatonic during a Q&A session and later tries to seize power from her running mate, someone asks Schmidt, “Have you ever considered that she might be mentally unstable?
Well I consider it every time I see her. To me she’s little more than a female Ted Nugent—especially when she dons her hunting garb.
Near the story’s end, Harrelson’s Schmidt asks Rick Davis, his co-conspirator in picking Palin, “Still think she’s fit for office?” to which Davis answers, “Aw, who cares. In forty-eight hours no one will even remember who she is.” Unfortunately, Davis’ hopeful prediction did not come to pass.
The film leaves you wondering how the hell someone like Palin ever got tapped for VP and how she thinks she has any credibility left after monumental blunders like her interview with Katie Couric. Well, apparently Sarah Palin has found her niche as a mouthpiece for the National Rifle Association—a group clearly unconcerned with credibility (and collectively as mentally unstable as Palin herself).
Sporting a t-shirt making the simplistic yet inexplicable statement “Women Hunt” (including an obscenely suggestive line-drawing that probably went over her head), she called the NRA crowd she spoke to Friday her “brothers and sisters” during her 12-minute speech in which she told the crowd that Trigger is her son Trigg’s nickname and that Remington is her nephew’s middle name.
The creepy thing is, she received standing ovation.
Although Sarah Palin came off in the movie as a power-tripping right-wing extremist bordering on evil, if anything, Game Change was too nice in its representation of her. What sort of woman hunts? A woman like Sarah Palin.
Yesterday I asked the question, “Who is the creeping cancer?” The choice was between the bison—a species nearly hunted off the face of the Earth that is still extinct over practically all its former range—or humans.
The answer is so ridiculously obvious it’s hardly worth asking; while the human species increases by over one million infants a day (1,000 were born just in the past minute), almost every other life form is on its way out of existence.
Thus, when the Seattle Times recently ran a piece by one of their columnists, Sharon Pian Chan, titled “Why I am not having kids,” I felt it was my duty to share the link here. Chan brings up many good reasons not to breed, but the benefit to the environment was only mentioned once: “…not having a child is the most important thing I could do to reduce my carbon footprint, according to a 2009 study by Oregon State University statisticians. (Of course, like all parents, I believe my theoretical child would have grown up to become a brilliant physicist and saved the world from global warming, so this is a moot point.)”
Possibly…on the other hand it could have grown up to become the next Sarah Palin, Dick Cheney, Ted Bundy or terrible Ted Nugent.
Chan goes on to point out that by not having kids… “I will have a lot more attention and money to shower on real-life nieces, nephews, mentees and philanthropic causes.” Causes like educating the masses on just how many ways human overpopulation is ruining the planet, perhaps?
Those contemplating childbirth could always benefit from a bit of trivia, such as the fact that though it’s taken all of human history to until around the year 1800 for the world human population to reach one billion, the second billion was achieved in only 130 years (1930), the third billion in less than 30 years (1959), the fourth billion in 15 years (1974), and the fifth billion in only 13 years (1987). During the 20th century alone, the population in the world has grown from 1.65 billion to 6 billion.
The world population clock estimates that by 2025 the eight-billionth will be born and in 2045 the planet will be expected to feed and provide for nine billion hungry human beings. All the while the world will continue to see its biodiversity vanish.
Paul R. Ehrlich, author of the 1960s bestseller, The Population Bomb, foresaw peril in the ongoing disappearance of all other life forms except ours: “It isn’t a question of people or animals–it’s got to be both of us or we’re finished. We can’t get along without them. They could get along without us.”
Those who watched Late Night with Conan O’Brien (that goofy red-haired guy who was going to take over the Tonight Show when Jay Leno moved to the 10:30 time-slot and then found out he wasn’t making enough money there and stole the show back from Conan—who is much funnier and who would have put him to shame in the ratings) remember a bit he did called “If They Mated.” Using the latest computer technology formerly known only to NASA to explore worlds beyond our galaxy, they were able to show us what certain celebrities’ (who’ve been rumored to be going out together) babies would look like…if they mated.
Upon learning that turrible Ted Nugent (bow hunting enthusiast, outspoken NRA supporter and wanna-be musician) was caught by the camera with his arm around former VP candidate and fellow bloodthirsty Republican animal assassin, Sarah Palin (aka: “Caribou Barbie”),…
…I borrowed the technology from Conan (who, as you know, borrowed it from NASA) to find out what their baby would look like…IF THEY MATED:
If I a flag to hang outside my house, it would be flying at half-mast today.
Today should be officially declared a day of mourning for wolves, in honor of Washington’s Wedge pack—brutally killed last week to appease an intolerant cattle rancher—and also a day of remembrance for all of the wolves across the country and throughout our history who were hunted to extinction in order to make room for modern humans and their chosen food species.
This whole thing brings to mind the first time I beheld the sight of wolves. Due to repeated persecution by residents of a nearby, decrepit mining-town-turned-tourist-trap on the Alaska panhandle, wolves hadn’t been seen around there for decades. Their surprise return that year was greeted with generous appreciation by an assembly of bear watchers and photographers who shared in my elation.
But the spectacle lasted only one short season; by late fall a couple of local tyrants—under the patrician delusion that it‘s all here for them—had trapped, shot and otherwise driven off every member of the pack. These days, the only sign of wolves to be found is a hand-painted plywood sign advertising “Wolf Hides for Sale” in front of a detestable trinket shop on a muddy back road of the wretched little town.
Wolves in Alaska can legally be killed by anyone, virtually anytime and by any means imaginable (former Governor Sarah Palin‘s apparent personal favorite: strafing from low-flying aircraft).
I never thought I’d see the day that Washington wolves would suffer that same fate; when wolves here would be relentlessly pursued from the air and gunned down like escaped convicts as they fled for the Canadian border; when a radio tracking device would be used not for furthering scientific understanding, but to aid in the massacre of an entire family; when wolves in one of the most progressive states would be sacrificed on the altar of the T-bone and the cheeseburger.
As in Alaska, a few local tyrants here think they can dictate whether a wild wolf pack should live or die. Clearly, bigotry against wolves is alive and well in Washington State. It’s just tragic that the wolves of the Wedge pack had to be the first to find out. __________________________________________
A portion of this post was excerpted from the book, Exposing the Big Game: Living Targets of a Dying Sport
Comparatively speaking, the body of hunters in America is withered and shrunken, only a wee fraction of its former self. Today there are six times as many photographers, bird watchers and others who enjoy seeing animals alive as those compelled to make them lie down and die. Like the KKK and the SLA, the NRA has seen its day and will rightfully fade away. Literally, figuratively and statistically, hunting is a dying sport.
But non-hunters should not be lulled into a false sense of security for wildlife. Sportsmen, though a skeletal minority, are a shrill and voluble 5 (or 6) percent when it comes to forcibly interjecting themselves into animal issues; they‘re reluctant, to say the least, to kiss their blood-sport goodbye and join the civilized world.
The NRA and other heavily-funded hunting groups are pushing to pass laws such as the odious “Hunting Heritage Protection“ acts (already shoved on several states), aiming to enshrine their perceived “birthright“ to shoot and kill nonhumans recreationally.
Worse yet are the unconstitutional Hunter Harassment laws, which essentially punish residents and land-owners for trying to protect animals and keep hunters off their properties. In direct answer to the drop in sportsmen’s numbers, meddlesome state game departments are encouraging young kids to get a taste for killing (perverting their natural affinity for animals).
Alabama opens deer season two days early for children under the age of 16 (so they’ll have a better crack at “bagging“ one), and Maine holds a “Youth Deer Day,” allowing pre-season bow hunting for children ages 10 to 16. States like Illinois and Colorado are preying on women by offering hunting lessons for single mothers, while the private pro-hunting programs “Becoming an Outdoors-woman“ and the NRA’s “Women on Target” are seeking to enlist the future Sarah Palins of America.
Fouler still are the ongoing schemes to open more and more public lands to hunting…
The preceding was excerpted from the book, Exposing the Big Game: Living Targets of a Dying Sport
The days are getting shorter, leaves are starting to change colors and hunters are beginning to shoot one another—it would appear that hunting accident season is already upon us. With almost two weeks to go before fall officially begins, the guns of autumn are gearing up for another season of fatal mishaps.
According to the International Hunter Education Association, roughly 1,000 people in the US and Canada are accidentally shot by hunters each year; around a hundred of those victims are fatalities. Though the majority of unintentional targets are hunters themselves, innocent bystanders are also routinely injured or killed.
Hunting is one of the few outdoor activities that endangers the entire community (not just the willing participants), yet the perpetrators are almost never charged with manslaughter or any lesser crimes. As long as they are “lawfully” pursuing a recognized blood sport, the shooting of their fellow human is acceptable.
A case in point of a shooter hitting the wrong target (sent to me by an alert reader) happened just today in West Columbia, Texas, when a grandfather was aiming at a stray cat and accidentally shot his 3-year-old granddaughter in the leg.
The grandfather, Gary Van Ness, said some cats have been known to come inside his ratty trailer home uninvited. “The cat is brave enough to come in there and got him a couple of loaves of bread,” said Van Ness, adding, he’s already decided he’ll start trapping cats now, rather than shooting them. Granted, this one wasn’t a legitimate hunting accident, but he clearly had the same mindset, and armed response towards, “nuisance” animals as the typical nimrod…or game manager.
If that doesn’t fit your idea of a bona fide hunting accident, this other one that made headlines today surely will, as it was a clear cut case of one New Zealand deer hunter, Henry Worsp, mistaking his partner for prey. A local police commander called it, “another tragic reminder of the absolute necessity for hunters to properly identify their target before they shoot.” That’s no shit. But far too often hunters blast away at the sound of rustling in the bushes with a casual, shoot first, ask questions later attitude. I was shocked the first time I heard a hunter brag about getting off a “nice sound shot,” but now I know it’s just business as usual for some of them.
Today’s incident was New Zealand’s third hunting death so far this year. Cam McDonald, 29, was shot dead by another hunter in Aorangi Forest Park, on April 7. A few weeks earlier, 26-year-old Southlander Mark Richard Vanderley was killed by another man in his hunting group while spotlighting for deer. Of the 12 hunting-related deaths in NZ between 2002 and last year, 10 were caused by someone in the same hunting party.
And who can forget Dick Cheney’s world famous allegedly inadvertent peppering-in-the-face with birdshot pellets of Texas campaign contributor, Harry Whittington while at a Corpus Christi ranch, hunting quail? (No, not that other former Republican Vice President whose last name is Quayle; Cheney was out stalking small inoffensive birds this time.)
Whittington had just shot a quail and had dropped back to retrieve it and, upon rejoining the group, Mr. Cheney let him have it (apparently mistaking the tall, lanky fellow Republican for a small, inoffensive ground-dwelling bird, witnesses said). Though hit with pellets in the face and chest, to the 78 year old Whittington’s credit, he never lost consciousness. As though expecting trouble, an ambulance had been posted at the ranch while Cheney was hunting, and after debriefing, Whittington was taken to the hospital.
The owner of the ranch called the former Vice President “a very conscientious hunter,” adding “I would shoot with Dick Cheney everywhere, anywhere, and not think twice about it,” while at the same time cautioning, “The nature of quail shooting ensures that this will happen. It goes with the turf.”
Instead of perceiving the whole fiasco as a black eye for the Republican Party, it appears they see all the negative media attention Cheney received as a good thing (why else would they have chosen avid hunters Sarah Palin and Paul Ryan as Vice Presidential candidates?). In that way, the Republican camp is a lot like PETA.