Posted by: shannynmoore | July 29, 2009

Palin’s Last Shot On Wolves & Ashley Judd; Congress Shoots Back

Several days have passed since Sarah Palin’s final stop on the “Quitstock” Tour.  I feel like I’ve awoken from a strange, surreal dream. I can’t yet tell if it was real or not.

I listened closely to Palin’s final speech as governor.  Her classic “word salad” style is no less confusing in print.  What Palin was supposed to read off the teleprompter—what was released as the transcript, and what she actually said, are two different things.  AKM at The Mudflats blog transcribed the actual speech and deserves the “Golden Comma Award” for her efforts.

Palin’s politicization of the troops was vulgar.  Her right-wing claim to the second amendment was offensive.  Her verbal spanking of the “media” was laughable–the same media she was so grateful for covering her “exit strategy” from the governorship of Alaska.

With such a large national audience, Palin didn’t talk about the plethora of issues facing Alaska. Why would she?  She has much bigger fish to fry. She decided to slam Ashley Judd instead.  Yes, really.

I don’t know Ashley Judd,  but I like her.  I know this must shock the Palinistas; they think I dislike Sarah because she’s pretty.  According to Palin, she is some sort of Hollywood pixie; a “delicate, tiny, very talented celebrity starlet.”  I don’t judge Ms. Judd on her stunning appearance; but on the criteria of her politics…just like Palin.

“…you’re going to see anti-hunting, anti-second amendment circuses from Hollywood and here’s how they do it.  They use these delicate, tiny, very talented celebrity starlets, they use Alaska as a fundraising tool for their anti-second amendment causes.  Stand strong, and remind them patriots will protect our guaranteed, individual right to bear arms, and by the way, Hollywood needs to know, we eat, therefore we hunt.”

The second amendment doesn’t afford citizens the right to shoot wolves and bears out of airplanes.  I know. Why the founding fathers didn’t think of that is puzzling…oh, wait, the Wright Brothers weren’t born yet.   I don’t remember Palin mentioning that the only president to suspend the right to bear arms was George W. Bush during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

Sarah brought up a fight she lost.  Ashley Judd’s ads fighting Palin’s policy on aerial hunting and the gassing of wolf pups still in their den, were effective.  While governor, Palin dedicated $400,000 to fight against the citizen initiative to ban the practice.  Her faith based science included bear in the aerial program.  As incendiary as the topic is, bringing it up in her final speech was more telling.  Mean-girl, high school, vindictive Palin had to get another shot across the bow of the SS Ashley Judd.

The late Charlton Heston, president of the NRA, was from Hollywood.  The lionized President Reagan was from Hollywood.

As an Alaskan who has trapped and hunted, the aerial killing of animals is to hunting what hiring a hooker is to dating.  A sure thing, with no work.  No wonder it appealed to former governor Palin.

Just this week, Congressman George Miller and Senator Dianne Feinstein have introduced the Protect America’s Wildlife (PAW) Act, federal legislation to end the controversial practice of using aircraft and gunmen to chase and kill wolves in Alaska.   Please contact your legislators and tell them to support the PAW Act.

Make it stop.


Responses

  1. Regardless of ideology, we should not be supporting the federal government coming into our state and attacking our sovereignty.

    With Alaskan urban communities spreading, the wildlife population has a smaller area for their habitat. This puts wolves and moose in a smaller area, and puts the moose at a disadvantage.

    This puts rural communities, most of whom rely on these moose for their subsistence lifestyles in serious danger. It’s a sad reality that we need to use a minimal amount of aerial hunting to keep the moose population stable. However, it is a reality, one we cannot ignore. We cannot leave our native people high and dry as you propose. … Read More

    Please write to your representatives in Washington and tell them NEVER to support giving our state sovereignty away to those in California. Let state issues remain state issues.

    • Something funny happened in the bush last year…some young men wantonly killed 100+ caribou, babies tried to suckle off the moms for up to 2 wks…not one wolf touched any of the carcasses.
      If the wolf problem is so bad why is that none of them was touched?
      Also too,
      Alaska voted against aerial killing twice. And what is this not giving State sovereignty to California? Some of these wolves are on Federal…*FEDERAL* lands meaning MY wolves too!!!
      Sorry AIP’r.
      Sent my YES opinion on the PAW act Yesterday!

      • Agreed – wolves on FEDERAL land (MY land not Alaskas) need protection from individuals who believe their guns represent the strength of their penis and they must hunt to prove they are “manly”. Now I have no objection to hunting if it is does as a HUNT. This does not include flying around over their heads and hitting them with assault rifles at 40 feet. It takes NO balls. That is not hunting, it is simply the slaughter of wildlife and so far I’ve never heard any reason why that makes someone feel like a hunter.

        Ms. P’s excuse was “we eat therefore we hunt”. Now last time I looked, none of you manly individuals put “wolf” on their menu so that excuse is nuts.

        Don’t even try to kid us that you CARE about the poor moose and caribou. Like most people who would even consider shooting an animal from a chopper, you are simply looking for a simplistic excuse to slaughter an animal.

        No one objects to hunting animals for food, but no one will convince me (and I hope many others) that hunting from HELICOPTERS is a sport. And don’t even try the “we’re doing it to protect the moose” argument.

        I’ve seen photo ops of $arah absolutely DROOLING over shooting an animal and dragging her SMALL child into the photo op. This is NOT hunting for subsistence.

        Your argument is silly, stupid and destructive to the NATIONAL wildlife. The animals on federal land do not belong to Alaska – they belong to ALL of us. I say keep your helicopter hunting to your own family – better yet, let your dog go and take pot shots at him.

        Make sense to you?

    • Neither Alaska or any of the 50 states in the union posses “sovereignty”.

      Absoluteness
      An important attribute of sovereignty is its degree of absoluteness. A sovereign power has absolute sovereignty if it has the unlimited right to control everything and every kind of activity in its territory. This means that it is not restricted by a constitution, by the laws of its predecessors, or by custom, and no areas of law or behavior are reserved as being outside its control. For example, parents are not guaranteed the right to decide some matters in the upbringing of their children independently of the sovereign power, municipalities are not guaranteed freedom from its interference in some local matters, etc. Theorists have diverged over the necessity or desirability of absoluteness. Historically, it is doubtful whether a sovereign power has ever claimed complete absoluteness, let alone had the power to actually enforce it.[

      De jure and de facto
      De jure, or legal, sovereignty is the theoretical right to exercise exclusive control over one’s subjects.
      De facto, or actual, sovereignty is concerned with whether control in fact exists. It can be approached in two ways:
      Does the governing power have sufficient strength (police, etc.) to compel its subjects to obey it? (If so, a type of de facto sovereignty called coercive sovereignty exists.)
      Are the subjects of the governing power in the habit of obeying it?
      It is generally held that sovereignty requires not only the legal right to exercise power, but the actual exercise of such power. That is, “No de jure sovereignty without de facto sovereignty.” In other words, neither claiming/being proclaimed Sovereign, nor merely exercising the power of a Sovereign is sufficient; sovereignty requires both elements

      Internal
      Internal sovereignty is the relationship between a sovereign power and its own subjects. A central concern is legitimacy: by what right does a political body (or individual) exercise authority over its subjects? Possible answers include: by the divine right of kings or by social contract (popular sovereignty).
      [edit]External
      See also: Constitutive theory of statehood, Declarative theory of statehood, and Montevideo Convention
      External sovereignty concerns the relationship between a sovereign power and other states. The United Kingdom uses the following criteria when deciding under what conditions other states recognise a political entity as having sovereignty over some territory, as an example of typical criteria used by state when deciding this:
      “ “Sovereignty.” A government which exercises de facto administrative control over a country and is not subordinate to any other government in that country is a foreign sovereign state. ”

      — (The Arantzazu Mendi, [1939] A.C. 256), Strouds Judicial Dictionary

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereignty

      The United Sates of America does. Mind you it IS a popular Palin/AIP talking point , but that is ALL it is.

      You think if you say it enough that it is true AND speak of your federal government as the enemy “attacking” Alaska.

      Both you and Sarah Palin engage in traitorous speech. Think about what you just “put to paper”. Accusing the federal government of attacking something that Alaska really does not possess.

      The following statement from Palin is absolutely treasonous:

      “So much success, and Alaska there is much good in store further down the road, but to reach it we must value and live the optimistic pioneering spirit that made this state proud and free, and we can resist enslavement to big central government that crushes hope and opportunity. Be wary of accepting government largess. It doesn’t come free and often, accepting it takes away everything that is free, melting into Washington’s powerful “care-taking” arms will just suck incentive to work hard and chart our own course right out of us, and that not only contributes to an unstable economy and dizzying national debt, but it does make us less free.”

      And this:

      “I resisted the stimulus package. I resisted the stimulus package and we have championed earmark reform, slashing earmark requests by 85% to break the cycle of dependency on a stifling, unsustainable federal agenda, and other states should follow this for their and for America’s stability. We don’t have to feel that we must beg an allowance from Washington, except to beg the allowance to be self-determined. See, to be self-sufficient, Alaska must be allowed to develop – to drill and build and climb, to fulfill statehood’s promise. At statehood we knew this. At statehood we knew this, that we are responsible for ourselves and our families and our future”

      First of all “slashing earmark requests by 85%”, my a$$!

      With out the federal governments “largess”, Alaska cannot function. THAT is why they joined the United Sates in the first place.

      Ted Stevens more than understood this.

      The amounts of money given to the state of Alaska over the years is true socialism.

      I think it’s a good thing. That is the purpose of the union of the United States.

      Considering the taxes that Californians have paid to support Alaska all these years, you should be thinking about helping THEM in their time of need, instead of spitting in their face.

      Governor Perry in Texas, after threatening to secede (which is impossible, see below) is now asking to borrow MORE than the stimulus Texas was offered from “the feds”.

      He and Palin are soul mates, both without brains.

      Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1869) was a significant case argued before the United States Supreme Court in 1869. The case involved a claim by the reconstruction government of Texas that United States bonds owned by Texas since 1850 had been illegally sold by the Confederate state legislature during the American Civil War.

      The state filed suit directly with the United States Supreme Court, which, under the United States Constitution, retains original jurisdiction on cases in which a state is a party.

      In accepting jurisdiction, the court ruled that Texas had remained a state ever since it first joined the Union, despite its joining the Confederate States of America and its being under military rule at the time of the decision in the case.

      In deciding the merits of the bond issue, the court further held that:

      the Constitution did not permit states to secede from the United States, and that the ordinances of secession, and all the acts of the legislatures within seceding states intended to give effect to such ordinances, were “absolutely null”

      The federal government is needed in Alaska because of the atrocities your state allows to continue, I’ll point out the two most recent:

      Thank GOD “the feds” stepped in to stop this in Palin’s own back yard:

      So for years, residents of Wasilla and the surrounding area have unknowingly been breathing a toxic blend of cancer-causing dioxins, and heavy metal contaminants including mercury, cadmium, lead and other pollutants. It was determined that this home-based facility committed 7,336 violations of the Clean Air Act, and the place has now been closed down. As of July 1, the air got a little cleaner over Wasilla, courtesy of “the feds.”

      http://www.themudflats.net/2009/07/17/wasillas-toxic-cloud-and-why-we-need-the-feds/

      The following is in every sense of the word “criminal”:

      Today, Lisa Demer of the Anchorage Daily News has broken a story that adds another scandal to the growing list of scandals that have plagued this administration, and shines the light on Alaska’s very own health care crisis. Demer’s story centers on the horrendous condition of the Alaska’s state programs that are designed to help its most vulnerable citizens, the elderly and disabled.

      The situation is so bad the federal government has forbidden the state to sign up new people until the state makes necessary improvements. [snip]

      The moratorium is expected to last four or five months. State officials estimate about 1,000 Alaskans will be affected.

      A particularly alarming finding concerns deaths of adults in the programs. In one 2 1/2 year stretch, 227 adults already getting services died while waiting for a nurse to reassess their needs. Another 27 died waiting for their initial assessment, to see if they qualified for help.

      No other state in the nation is under such a moratorium, according to a spokeswoman for the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

      http://www.themudflats.net/2009/07/15/palins-health-care-priorities-and-alaskas-daughters/

      It is difficult to believe that in 2 1/2 years…………254…………..Alaskans have died of neglect by the State of Alaska and all you can do is speak like a traitor to the federal government who FINALLY put a stop to it!

      Obviously Alaskan people need the federal government more than ever, just to stay alive!

    • sovereignty?

      Yer either a part of the US, Mike, or yer not.

      Make up my mind.

      Plus, where’s the hunter’s skill in hunting wolves in deep snow from an airplane? No courage there at all. Not a fair fight, either.

  2. Shannyn,

    Thank You, I am all over the PAW act. Off to my legislators’ web sites now.

    How many times do we have to vote on this???? It seems like I have been voting against this practice forever.

  3. I do not know Mike Dingman.
    Seems to me the federal gov wants to give to subsistance and the state wants to give to guide buisness. Strange turn on that!!
    Not sure i see that Yukon Kuskokwim sprall as yet.
    Anyone ever think of asking that only state subsistance users can hunt?

    You might want to lookup Leo keeler? (sp) as he was well versed in this.

  4. Subsistence is pretty worthless when there are no moose or Caribou to hunt because the wolves have killed them all.

    Telling Native Alaskans that they don’t get to eat, because we want to feel good about ourselves by letting wolves run wild killing moose and caribou throughout the Bush is arrogant.

    • Please read this and check out the links…
      https://shannynmoore.wordpress.com/2008/09/23/wolf-in-governors-clothing/

    • http://www.wolfsongnews.org/news/Alaska_current_events_3129.html
      “What human hunters and legislators are attempting to do, with the ‘help’ of cooperative biologists, is to create an artificially inflated, consistently high and geographically stable number of prey animals for consumptive users (hunters) without regard to ecological drawbacks (over-foraging, overpopulation, weakening of the herds, etc.) They do this primarily through cutting down the competition; that is, though the reckless slaughter of nature’s supreme original game managers, wolves and bears.

      Finally, Dr. Haber offers these remedies:
      * Proponents regularly claim that the objective of the wolf- and bear-killing programs is consistent with a requirement in the Alaska Constitution to manage the state’s natural resources for maximum sustained yields. As indicated, for wildlife this is usually described as managing for abundance; it is also commonly referred to as “intensive management.” But that is not what the Alaska Constitution mandates. It requires management of the state’s resources on the “sustained yield principle,” “for the maximum benefit of the people.”

      (Note: The benefit of the people is NOT solely about game for the taking. It includes extremely lucrative and popular industries such as eco-tourism, photography, wildlife watching and collateral activities like vacation and real estate — Author.)

      “This provides an opportunity for a constitutional challenge of Alaska’s intensive management statutes from at least two standpoints. The state relies on these statutes in defending the regulations that enable the killing programs:

      (a) Maximum sustained yield is not the same as sustained yield, and the difference is much more than just in degree (March 15, 2008 blog entry). True sustained yield management requires a heavy focus on the resilience of systems, which means recognizing the importance of exploitation policies that adapt to natural variations rather than attempting to replace them with high stability.

      (b) “For the maximum benefit of the people” implies much more than just producing moose and caribou for consumption by hunters. Hunters are a minority of Alaska’s people, and the rest of the population embraces a more diverse vision of what the benefit should be.

      In closing, it seems that the goals of the Alaska government (not to be confused with the wishes of residents) is to intensively manage the Alaska wilderness as a huge game-farm for the pleasure of hunters, rather than for the majority of residents, as the dynamic natural wonder that it is: the last, unspoiled, pristine wildland area left in the US. To throw away such an irreplaceable biological treasure for the sake of human sport seems the height of arrogance and . . . dare I say it? Stupidity.”

    • No Mr.Dingman:
      The fact is, the moose and caribou populations have decreased for many reasons (including partly the pipeline intrusion that has divided their migratory lands) – the wolves do not decimate entire herds, however you obviously want to.

      You are the arrogant one here. The wolves are on Federal Land – Alaska has voted down AERIAL hunting already. Get over it ok? You no more care about subsistent hunting than the man in the moon. You simply want to kill wolves – admit it. The fact that you don’t have the balls to actually HUNT them says volumes about you.

      You don’t give a damn about the Native Alaskans. You simply want to go shoot an animal on NATIONAL FOREST LAND because you think it makes you a big tough man.

      In the early 1900’s, there was a bounty placed on coyotes and it is guesstimated that over 20,000,000 coyotes were slaughtered. Now like many predators, coyotes breed in order to attempt to maintain balance. It is estimated that since coyotes were almost wiped out – they have since bred over 70,000,000 to REPLACE those coyotes and maintain their numbers. Coyotes are now found all over many urban areas – including the center of Los Angeles. There are now 4 times MORE coyotes than there were before the slaughter. And they are surviving beautifully and very successful in spite of human interference.

      Your argument does not hold water – the issue is hunting from helicopters. A coward’s way – to kill animals indiscriminately.

  5. the aerial wolf slaughter is disgusting.
    the alaska board of game is known for making poor decisions. i have been watching them for several years, so i don’t expect any change from them.

    i support the paw act and will be writing letters.

  6. also too- thanks shannyn

  7. It’s years later now and there is still no evidence that aerial wolf hunting is needed.

  8. Most people aren’t aware that Natives have only been able to survive in Alaska for the past several thousand years because they have been allowed to shoot wolves from planes. Once this bloody tradition is taken away, then the natural order will be disrupted and people will starve because the moose will all get eaten by evil wolves who are really liberals reincarnated to make life difficult for the average Joe Eskimo. If only Alaska wasn’t so overpopulated then we could all live in peace and eat moose jerky daily.

    • Excellent, Chris. You deserve a beer.

      • Thanks sauerkraut, I think I’ll poor a glass now. Yum, Mooses Tooth.

  9. I sent letters to all my Legislators to support the PAW Act.

    If the Alaska Board of Game would outlaw out-of-state, wealthy, trophy hunters instead of giving them top priority for AK’s game, there wouldn’t be a problem with abundance. Humans, not wolves, are destroying the wildlife and doing it in the cruelest manner.

    • You are absolutely correct.

      • I absolutely 2nd that ! ! !

  10. Kat, reality doesn’t matter to these republican anarchists who just can’t stand laws restricting their cruelty. They want to be able to beat their kids, drive tanks and kill anything that moves.

  11. I view the Ashley Judd comment as a very deliberate exploitation of the “sex issue.” Palin’s big appeal (inexplicable to me as it is) is as this robust, fecund, “good old gal” with the guns and the hip waders and the comments about “thrashing” her thighs. It is a carefully cultivated image of fertility and the language and clothes all play into it. By the denigrating use of terms like “tiny” and “delicate” Palin is drawing a distinction between her image and that of the weaker, flimsier, “lesser” woman. It’s all a giant crock but it works with a certain segment of the population.

    • Hi Donna – Disagree … the comment “delicate” implied to me with flashing red lights that Robust Palin is JEALOUS of Ashley Judd.

  12. http://www.twobabiesnovel.com/aboutbook.htm

    CHECK IT OUT. i think Audrey wrote her book

  13. Donna, interesting; I hadn’t thought of her use of the words “tiny” and “delicate” as an insult until you pointed it out. So that means that Ashley Judd isn’t a “real woman” like Sarah, I suppose. Wow. I hate her more every day.

    • I look at it the opposite way. In her own nasty verbage, $lutty$arah thinks Ms. Judd is more of a woman than she is.

      She envies anyone who has what she doesn’t, a viable career and the ability to speak in a full sentence.

  14. FYI Sarah – Ashley Judd is 5’7″ you’d have to really whip out your tallest Naughty Monkeys to look her in the eye.

    -ravenstrick

  15. I’m starting to see a pattern here. Seems like mean girl Palin has a problem with women who are smarter, better looking, and more talented than her.

    • Gosh Chris – Why do you think they call her “Mean Girl”?

      She detests women unless they lick her shoes. She has other ideas on what to do with every guy she meets.

      I’m still waiting for a story to come out that she had an affair – it’s there somewhere. Her ethics on pretty much everything are pretty questionable – so why not that too?

      • I haven’t been wanting to say anything, because this is total gossip; however, I was in line behind a couple of ‘Slopers’ boarding a flight North a few months back.

        They were idly chatting. Seems they were coworkers of Todd and the subject of his absence from the Slope came up and thus the topic of the Governor. One of them started telling the other about a mutual acquaintance who had had an affair with the Governor. The first guy gave out a little laugh and replied with “Yeah, well she’s had a couple of those hasn’t she?”

        Just sayin’……

      • She probably had all her high school peers scared of her so now in the real world she can’t handle it when not everyone is willing to lick her shoes.

        My other theory for the reason she is nasty because someone dropped a house on her sister.

        • I believe Chris owes an apology to witches everywhere…right?

  16. What bugs Sarah and Palinista gang more than the real issue, is that Judd is way prettier than Palin. Shouldn’t matter -doesn’t to me, like you Shannyn I judge a person by what they DO – but oh the fit her thugs had over this one!

    Their FAVORITE line to everyone is, you don’t like Sarah because she’s pretty. Since they are all basically stupid and brainwashed, this makes sense. They do not know that beauty is truly in the eye of the beholder – and Palin is Medusa as far as I’m concerned. My entire set of girlfriends are each far more beautiful from the inside out!

    Go Ashley, go Congress!

  17. A couple things:

    Palin says she eats therefore she hunts. Does that mean that she eats wolves?

    Also, I have seen Ashley Judd in person, and she is nowhere near 5’7″. She’s maybe 5’2″, on tiptoes.

    • Supposedly Palin’s dad shot the big bear she had in pictures of the anchorage governor’s office. Don’t know if dad ate the bear or not.

  18. why does fish and game allow the shooting of female ‘anterless’ moose if we’re so hard up for meat? i support paw and thank you for calling attention to the cause.

    …a sure thing, with no work.. no shit. that girl makes me crazy. i can not wait until she gets down off her alaska-as-pulpit platform and moves on. then i can smile when she’s stupid and not cringe and feel as though our people and issues in ak are being used.

  19. Sorry for being OT, but I thought you all would enjoy this………..ESPECIALLY SHANNYN ….

    Here is an “update’ to Palin radio head, “sportscaster”, “journalist”…LMHO!

    Sarah Palin, Radio Star? Ex-Governor May Be Seeking Radio Deal

    Update: Broadcasting & Cable’s Paige Albiniak casts doubt on Sarah Palin’s radio prospects, and says that her sources claim Clear Channel has already turned Palin down out of fears that she can’t sustain a regular three-hour radio show:

    While you might assume Palin would be a better fit for conservative radio than the less partisan world of syndicated broadcast TV, my sources say the country’s biggest radio conglomerate, Clear Channel, has already passed on her.

    The main objection to Palin as radio talk-show host is that she would have to hold forth for three hours a day.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/28/sarah-palin-radio-star-ex_n_246525.html

  20. According to the Fbks newspaper Palin landed in the village Tanana AK with her family, right after the spring flood, this took place while the children of the village were evacuated. It is interesting that the residents had their kids evacuated, while Palin made a stop with her children and they walked around the contaminated areas. Either she didn’t believe that the residence were protecting their children, or she was unaware of the seriousness of the situation.

  21. A very big thanks to Senator Feinstein and Rep. Miller for this bill!! Thanks too Shannyn for re-posting your blog from last September right after the big announcement.

    This is important legislation not only for Alaska but for other states as well according to Defenders of Wildlife: “Senator Feinstein and Representative Miller have created carefully crafted, responsible legislation that will restore science to its rightful place in wildlife management practices. Without the PAW Act, Alaska, and potentially other states, will continue to flout the intent of Congress to curb this practice, putting at risk the biological integrity of our nation’s last frontier”.

    It is also interesting to note that nine former members of the Alaska Board of Game have written to Feinstein and Miller in support of the PAW Act. The entire letter can be found on the Defenders website, but this quote, to me is very telling: “We also note that the long, detailed history of predator control in Alaska and elsewhere clearly demonstrates that control is often poorly supported by sound science, ignores other options, and often becomes institutionalized and perpetual. The Protect America’s Wildlife Act would help curb these problems by restricting lethal control programs to those that are well justified and truly necessary. We are aware that other control options are available and effective including non-lethal control and habitat management.”

    So Mr. Dingman you can stop pretending you are concerned about subsistence hunting. As was pointed out earlier, all you and your ilk want to do is kill wolves.

    • I thought there was already a Federal Law against this on the Federal Lands?

  22. “lethal control program”, “culling”, “management” – all euphemisms for KILLING. Maybe if they “pretty it up”, none of us will realize they are killing FEDERAL wildlife on FEDERAL lands.

    Yes I agree with management, and I don’t object to hunting for subsistence especially for Native Alaskans. That’s not what this is about.

    This is about COWARDS going up in a helicopter with high powered wolves, running them down, and shooting them for fun. Because these COWARDS get their little bitty rocks off KILLING THINGS.

    This isn’t management – true responsible hunters do not decimate herds. And true responsible hunters do not shoot BEARS from helicopters and then kill the cubs as collateral damage because they say they CARE since the cubs will die.

    If you can’t see a sow is a sow with cubs, you shouldn’t be shooting.

    Alaska has a Big Game industry – it’s not about subsistence hunting, it’s about allowing people to pay lots of dollars to hunt and shoot animals. That is kind of it in a nutshell.

    Look at all the bearskins that PutridPalin has and loves to drape over furniture. Oh that’s right, TADD and the menagerie she claims were hungry … ya betcha?

  23. sorry – paragraph about cowards – meant “going up in a helicopter with high powered rifles” … oops.

  24. Basheert–you raise an interesting point (the jealousy). Certainly, Palin is likely envious of a woman who is far more attractive, intelligent, and articulate than she is. But I do think there’s a calculated attempt to portray herself as, for lack of a better term, the Redneck’s Sex Object. So, maybe it’s a combination of both?

    What I look forward to is the next few years, during which Palin’s looks will fade. There’s no inner beauty at all there and the exterior is starting to sag (that neck….). At that point, she’s just another middle-aged woman (and I’m older than that so it’s not a pejorative statement) with a shrill voice and not much to say.

  25. …and Donna, to continue your thought –

    $Palin is a very ugly human inside. She is rude, thoughtless, inconsiderate, stupid, insensitive….i could go on for hours. I also believe she is basically a miserable person. Her life is written on the lines of her face.

    People who are happy and content have smile that shine. True happiness is reflected in the facial expressions – joy and love are easy emotions to see.

    Anger, frustration, jealousy, hatred, nastiness – these things eat at the human face. They are visible signs of what is inside.

    Her snarky little “delicate and tiny” comment reflects how she feels she is perceived (as you said, a Redneck’s Sex Object, or WetDream if you prefer).

    She is, at her core, a hillbilly. She is uneducated, vapid, and basically a sociopath. She doesn’t care about anything or anyone but herself.

    Let the aging begin…I’m sure her photograph adorns all the best Winnebagos in Alaska.

  26. I don’t agree with Mr. Dingman, and it’s fine to set him straight, but it’s another thing to mock and ridicule him. There is also no need to assert — without evidence — that those who advocate aerial hunting of wolves either (a) take sadistic pleasure in killing or (b) are compensating for feelings of inadequacy concerning their masculinity. (If so, what is Sarah Palin compensating for?)

    Liberals, leftists, progressives, or whatever need to remember that we are all members of the same primate species and be alert to the insidious temptation of mob thinking, of labeling opponents and ultimately dehumanizing them instead of arguing. (I grew up thinking bigots were conservative by definition, and only learned otherwise when I dissented from the liberal consensus on a major issue.)

    Blogs offer a rare opportunity for people with differing views to engage in discussion, but too often they become a group of like-minded individuals talking to each other who assume that anyone worth listening to agrees with them. Now that Shannyn is becoming better known, people of differing views will be checking out her blog. Shannyn holds her ground, but is civil unless attacked, and we should act likewise. Pragmatically, in a democracy it’s more effective to make converts than enemies. Sorry for the sermon.

    • If heard some guy was going around town kicking dogs, I’d be convinced he is a sick and twisted individual who should be locked away from civilized society. Flying around shooting wolves is a hundred times worse.

    • Those that live, or have lived in a hunting/trapping community know better.

      (b)are compensating for feelings of inadequacy concerning their masculinity. (If so, what is Sarah Palin compensating for?)

      You MUST be joking! You don’t think that Palin knows how woefully inadequate she really is? Please.

      Palin could not win a debate with a 6 year old. Palin is vapid ,vacuous, airheaded, birdbrained, blank, drained, dull, dumb, emptied, foolish, half-baked, inane, lamebrained, shallow, silly, stupid, superficial, uncomprehending, unreasoning, vacant, and void

      Some folks become “kill crazy” , at term I have heard on occasion. Other respected hunters usually turn them in, as they kill out of season or area or sex of animal. They kill for the sake of killing and just leave the carcass in the bush, or just take antlers if applicable.

      There is no NEED whatsoever, to aerial kill for managements sake.

      There is no such thing as aerial hunting either, it IS simply aerial killing.

      You will note that it is done in the winter, so they can be easily spotted and the blood is so much more vivid on the snow. There ARE no “hunting” skills involved.

      There is no other explanation for aerial hunting of wolves, other than the people who do…………..ENJOY IT! what a sick thrill it must be for them.

      Hunting methods

      In all the types of hunting in the Wikipedia list aerial is not even listed:

      Historical, subsistence and sport hunting techniques can differ radically, with modern hunting regulations often addressing issues of where, when and how hunts are conducted. Techniques may vary depending on government regulations, a hunter’s personal ethics, local custom, firearms and the animal being hunted. Often a hunter will use a combination of more than one technique, and some are used primarily in poaching and wildlife management, explicitly forbidden to sport hunters.
      Baiting is the use of decoys, lures, scent.
      Beagling is the use of beagles in hunting rabbits and sometimes in hunting foxes.
      Blind or stand hunting is waiting for animals from a concealed or elevated position
      Calling is the use of animal noises to attract or drive animals
      Camouflage is the use of visual concealment (or scent) to blend with the environment
      Dogs may be used to course or to help flush, herd, drive, track, point at, pursue or retrieve prey
      Driving is the herding of animals in a particular direction, usually toward another hunter in the group
      Flushing is the practice of scaring animals from concealed areas
      Glassing is the use of optics (such as binoculars) to more easily locate animals
      Glue is an indiscriminate passive form to kill birds[23]
      Internet hunting is a method of hunting over the internet using webcams and remotely controlled guns
      Netting, including active netting with the use of cannon nets and rocket nets
      Persistence hunting is the use of running and tracking to pursue the prey to exhaustion. [24]
      Scouting includes a variety of tasks and techniques for finding animals to hunt
      Spotlighting or shining is the use of artificial light to find or blind animals before killing
      Stalking or still hunting is the practice of walking quietly, in search of animals or in pursuit of an individual animal
      Tracking is the practice of reading physical evidence in pursuing animals
      Trapping is the use of devices (snares, pits, deadfalls) to capture or kill an animal
      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      What is Aerial Hunting?

      Aerial hunting is a hunting technique used by hunters who hunt animals from aircraft. In some cases, aircraft are used only to find the animals, which may be a legal use in many jurisdictions. In other cases, the aircraft provides a more direct role in the hunting. These techniques are often illegal and considered poaching.

      One of the most common illegal techniques for aerial hunting involves using a helicopter or very lightweight and maneuverable plane to find the animals and then begin to herd them. This is often done by flying close to the target species to spook them into going a certain direction. The goal is to spook the targeted species into the area where hunters on the ground are waiting in ambush.

      This is a technique that is especially used in Africa to herd big-game animals into a certain area for hunters but this type of aerial hunting is also practiced in other places. In fact, prosecutions for aerial hunting are reported in the United States as well. In one recent case, hunters were using an experimental aircraft to spook deer into a ground ambush in Iowa. It led to prison time, the loss of a pilot’s license and all hunting licenses in the group.

      Aerial hunting can also take place nearly exclusively from the air. Hunters can be in a helicopter, for example, with a firearm and take aim and fire on the animal from the air. This also allows the aircraft to continue pursing the animal that is hit until it dies, thus allowing for a more efficient harvest. Once that hunter is dropped off at his kill, the aircraft and other hunters may continue pursuing other animals.

      Though some consider aerial hunting to be a form of recreation, most recreational hunters disagree. In fact, they see aerial hunting as one of the great evils in the sport. Hunting involves having the patience and the knowledge to anticipate when an animal will be at a certain location, and the skill to take it down when it is there. Aerial hunting renders most of these skills obsolete.

      Aerial hunting is mainly used by those who hunt animals for commercial trade. This provides an easy way to find the animals and kill as many as possible, thus increasing the profits for those engaged in the practice. Many countries have come to understand this is a dangerous form of hunting that can lead to the depletion of entire animal populations. Therefore, strict laws are in place and strict penalties are often imposed on those convicted of engaging in this type of poaching.

      http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-aerial-hunting.htm

  27. Ole Sarah is just jealous because Ashley Judd is young, beautiful and talented.

  28. Mr.Dingman implied that the HELICOPTER shooting of wolves was related to the necessity of subsistence hunting for Alaska natives. Supposedly the Native Alaskans are in favor of it because “they eat therefore they hunt”.

    I have no idea if Mr. Dingman considers himself manly because he shoots wolves from helicopters but I can pretty well guarantee that if you post on a blog in favor of that particular hunting practice, you’re going to get disagreement.

    The hunting of wolves by helicopter is a hot button issue. It is not simply debating whether Huckleberry Finn should be read by an 11th grader in a public library. Killing Federal wildlife on Federal lands is something many of us care deeply and passionately about. The fact that the wolf hunt is being portrayed as some kind of “protection” for moose and caribou deserves a rebuttal.

    The hunting of animals in general by helicopter is viewed by many as similar to those researchers who put electrodes into cat brains to determine if they feel pain before they die. It is quite simply the exploitation of animals by humans in as many ways as we can possibly imagine. Many of us love and respect animals and wildlife.

    I live in a part of our country where I have coyotes outside my door, javalina, rattlesnakes, gila monsters and scorpions in my house. I have had a rattlesnake under my refrigerator. Although many of our local restaurants serve rattlesnake, I chose to REMOVE it and put it back onto my preserve rather than serve it up as a hot lunch.

    Just because we CAN kill animals, doesn’t mean all of us choose to participate. Generally I tend to ignore individual hunting and not interfere in personal choice. But hunting from helicopters takes away the “hunt”.

    I understand what you are saying, but in my world, animals are a very touchy subject. We have chosen to exploit all the wildlife on this planet for our own use. In many cases it is done humanely and most of us do not voluntarily choose to kill.

    Hunting by helicopter borders on the obscene and so far no one has convinced me it is being done for an altruistic reason. If Mr. Dingman wants to SAVE caribou and moose, perhaps he should stop shooting them?

    I do understand some individuals need and lust to hunt. I don’t share it, and neither do many others. I’m not even asking them to NOT hunt. I’m saying level the playing field. Don’t excuse a desire to kill by saying “I’m protecting the moose and the caribou for the Alaska natives”.

    Hypocrisy is hypocrisy. I also eat, but I do not kill. (I admit I did kill the scorpion that nailed my ragdoll kitten below the eye – but that was self defense since it was running at me).

    All of us wrestle with the ethical issues of hunting. Most of us choose to ignore the casual hunter who eats what he kills and feeds his family. I’m sorry but in my personal opinion, I don’t agree or think it is humane to hunt from a helicopter. Aside from the abject terror it causes to be chased from the sky, the exhaustion from running yourself to death, it is quite simply, just one more unfair advantage humans choose to take in their war on wildlife.

    Just my opinion.

  29. Basheert–my late and sorely missed mother used to say something to the effect of “you’re born with the face God gives you and you end up with the face you earn.” There are so many people who look good until they hit adulthood and their souls start to reflect in their looks. Palin is so ugly on the inside and it’s starting to show. Her mother is not in the least attractive and you can see how Palin will end up–a lined, mean-faced, sour hag.

  30. Oh Donna I do so agree with what you say. It’s an example of rotting from the inside out.

    One of $arah’s problems appears to be that she telegraphs her feelings with her face. True politicians tend to try and look positive and upbeat. They may not be happy with what they are saying, but they give the appearance they are not mad at you.

    I have never seen $arah look anything but angry, or like a deer in the headlights.

    She has NO knowledge – evidently she hasn’t gained any knowledge from ALL those newspapers she reads daily. She has no self control, she shows all of her emotions.

    I think what bugged me most about her was that it took me back to Jr. High and the nasty cliques. The snobs, the kids who thought they were elite. The kids who tormented people just because they could. Those nasty girls who slept with EVERYONE and everyone knew. If you were not one of the clique, you didn’t want to be.

    This is the immaturity of not growing up emotionally. She is a very sad and pathetic person. She may think she is special, but to the majority (67% as of todays polls believe she should NEVER be Vice President or President), she is simply that sad pathetic ex-cheerleader who got pregnant, lives in a doublewide with 5 kids, and never ever really succeeded.

    Because I don’t believe $arah DID succeed in do anything but turning even 47% of the Republican Party against her. She is a has-been at 45.

    I don’t feel sorry for her – she is a product of her upbringing and genes. I just want her to go back to her bowling alley, her doublewide, and her beernut Saturday nights….where she excels.

  31. Palin turns out to be a bigger idiot than she seemed only a week or so ago…..

    Disliking Palin because she’s ‘pretty’ (she’s NOT!!) and having her ‘admin’ staff rag on you for that is a real waste of everybody’s time – especially yours because it’s all fluff. Disliking Palin because she’s STUPID is a valid discussion point because there are FACTS to back up the “Palin’s Stupid” case !!!

    This discussion will go on and on for months until Palin gets the message – nobody – anywhere thinks you are qualified for anything…deal with it.

  32. Sarah Palin’s beauty in only skin deep and beneath the beauty is one ugly warthog!

    • I’ve always said that her beauty is skin deep but the ugly goes straight to the bone with her.

  33. Speaking of the Devil–

    At approximately 4:32 Pacific daylight savings time, an announcement was sent out over Private Citizen Palin’s Facebook “Friends,” saying that she had NEVER committed to even attend the Simi Valley Republican Women’s event at the Reagan Library, let alone promise to speak there. In fact, Private Citizen Palin will NOT being speaking at the Reagan Library–because she is not attending:

    Private Palin RSVP Regrets to Reagan Library

    However, as the announcement makes clear: any confusion is NOT the fault of anyone on the former Governor’s State staff or anyone at SarahPAC. The fault lies with failing to confirm the even request with Meghan Stapleton. Finally, a moron says what?

    Okay–I made up that last part.

    La Belle Shannyn: here’s one more for the “It’s Not Sarah’s Fault: Just ASK HER” list……..

    I remain:
    Relieved, knowing I can still count of Private Citizen Palin.

    Bill Abendroth
    Samsara Samizdat

  34. I knew it! She always does this. It’s why she’s irrelevant to everyone that is not a Bot.

    By the way, love the new statistics in that 67% of ALL Americans do not want her to be President or Vice President. Most people think she should be a Homemaker (would that require taking care of Trig????).

    She’s history – toast …. friend. It’s a shame it isn’t edible.

  35. Gryphen’s blog has the following post:

    “Additionally, all invitations bearing the Governor’s name must be approved by her attorney before proceeding.” –Meghan Stapleton

    • That’s probably because she wants to profit from use of her name… surprised they did not also include “image” in the language.

  36. Here’s a thought: All of those “manly” folks who think it’s okay to shoot a wolf/wolves from an airplane and call it hunting, why don’t you all try this. Get your cowardly asses on the ground with only your teeth and fingernails to fight with and THEN take on a wolf. Shooting wolves from an airplane is not hunting, it is cowardly.

  37. Martha,

    Perhaps I misunderstood. I thought the aerial hunting was by government employees for purposes of game management, and so the focus should be on the game management policy, not the feelings of those who carry it out. If people are being licensed to do it for “sport,” that’s something else, and I agree that is a non-sport that should not be made available. BTW, I don’t have a gun, don’t hunt, and have never wanted to. And my point was that Sarah Palin, as a woman, can’t be accused of overcompensating for lacking virility. Lacking brains is something else entirely.

  38. I’m not quite sure how to take this information. The term hunting used to be considered how we as humans ‘hunted’ for food so we could survive. We used every part of the animal, whether it be the meat or the hide, the skull or the feet (or whatever the animal had). Then we came up with ‘thunder sticks’ where we could shoot something and almost always kill it. Sure, it was still for hunting purposes (gathering food), but that took the skill out of it. Made it safer for humans.
    Shooting an animal from a plane and calling it hunting is pathetic, to say the least. Not to mention cowardly and a waste of energy. Humans have this thought in their mind to ‘control’ the population of the other beings on this planet, whether they do it by hunting or by keeping them from reproducing.
    This remark will probably have me yelled at or at least thought of as some very nice metaphores. If we are going to start population control on animals, then maybe we should start population control on humans too. Is it okay if I decide I want a human trophy on my wall next to my gun collection and my collection of mounted animal body parts (I don’t have any such collection)? Humans need more population control then the animals ever did.
    The animals were doing fine before we came along and started to wipe them out.
    The fact that we are killing animal offspring is just sick and clearly makes me want to reconsider the people we have elected to hold office. Wolf pups are weak and killing the babies to keep the population at bay is just an excuse used by people who are so full of themselves they don’t have any other way to show it.
    As for Palin, I’d relish the idea of having a live debate with her. I’d like to see her try and take me on in a battle of ethics since it seems she is lacking in that department.

  39. dear men ,…no matter what …i can’t call nothing else than a person with mental problems,the guy who finds pleasure by shoothing animals…ok so some idiots may aprove this and let it be legal,…but still hunting wolves and bears…..somehow sadly


Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: