Killing Animals For Political Gain
by Big Dog on Dec 8, 2010 at 21:45 Political
Producer and writer Aaron Sorkin has taken issue with Sarah Palin and her reality show all because Palin shot and killed a caribou in the latest episode. There were some folks who did not like the idea that she killed an animal (which, contrary to what Sorkin says, was for food) and Palin addressed that issue in a Facebook posting before the show ever aired. She said that if those who did not like it sat on leather furniture or wore leather clothing they were hypocrites. This apparently set Sorkin off.
In his piece Sorkin describes Palin’s episode as a snuff show in which she killed an animal for political gain. He claims the animal was not for food but only for her political future (even though Palin said it would provide for her family in the episode**). Sorkin also calls Palin all kinds of names and insults her intelligence (girlie men are always threatened by strong women). To top it off Sorkin calls her a phony pioneer girl.
Phony? As if this limp wristed moron could survive in the wilderness.
In any event, this is a typical unhinged moron from the left who sees everything Palin does through the spectrum of politics. Reading what this moron wrote one might get the idea that Palin had never hunted and only shot this animal to make her appear tough for when the 2012 election. Right.
Remember what the Big Dog said. This is all about the left’s hatred for Palin and nothing more. You see, if Sorkin were actually concerned about “snuff films” he would not be involved in films that have lots of killing in them. And if this moron were concerned about politicians who kill animals for political gain he would have spoken up when that dunderhead John Kerry put on his Elmer Fudd outfit and went goose hunting (and allegedly killed a goose) SPECIFICALLY FOR POLITICAL GAIN:
John Kerry brought his campaign for president to a duck blind here in far eastern Ohio Thursday morning, and while he did manage to clip one goose, he was really aiming for undecided voters in this battleground state.
Senior adviser Mike McCurry was quite direct this week in saying that the two-hour predawn hunting trip was another attempt to get voters to know Kerry, who has had some issues with his so-called likeability factor. Kerry also has been talking about his Catholic faith more, and on Sunday he will give a speech on values. Washington Post
Kerry was also concerned about his low rating with the NRA and how he was perceived in middle America so he went hunting. The goose was clearly killed to help Kerry politically. Since John Kerry is anti gun it is obvious that this was all a ruse.
With Palin it is nothing more than what she has done for years. She is a life member of the NRA and has hunted a lot. And, unlike Kerry at the time of his hunt, Palin is not involved in a campaign for office.
So where was Sorkin back in 2004? Where was this guy who is so outraged at his perception of killing an animal for political gain when John Kerry (allegedly) killed an animal for political gain?
You see, Sorkin is a typical liberal. He gets very upset when a Republican does something but completely ignores the same thing when done by a Democrat. He is also typical in that he is upset over the killing of an animal but has never shown outrage over a woman aborting a baby.
Sorkin also represents a growing number of liberals who are afraid of Palin. They wet their panties when her name is mentioned. She scares them immensely.
This is why they act so irrationally when she is involved in anything.
I also imagine it makes the liberals feel bad that “dumb” ole Sarah Palin, unlike their leader, knows which end of a weapon the round comes out.
I mean, Obama probably thinks gangsters hold handguns sideways because that is how they come out of the box.
**I did not see the episode but I saw the clip of the kill. Palin indicates the animal will provide for the family.
Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: aaron sorkin, alaska, caribou, fear, john kerry, sara palin
“With Palin it is nothing more than what she has done for years. She is a life member of the NRA and has hunted a lot.”
Apparently some have really started to doubt that idea after watching the video of the hunt. I’m no hunter but I think I know enough hunters to join that author in doubting that Palin has hunted in this capacity many times before that video. This author agrees too.
You said all we need to know in the pre-amble, Odam, “I’m no hunter.” After that, you can stop. We don’t want to hear you propound your ignorance and call it “thinking.”
As for the other yo-yo you cite as an author, let me point out
1. He claims he shot his first deer with a .30-.40 Krag carbine.” An elephant cannon. I don’t imagine he had to do much gutting after that, because one good shot with a monster like that will leave little but a hunk of hide and maybe a hoof or two.
Still, he shot the carcase with a pistol. Why? It wasn’t dead? Gee, he must be as bad a shot as Sarah!
2. Palin shot a Caribou, with her father’s help. So what’s the big deal? That’s what the men in her family do. “Her father kept talking to her as though she were a 12 year old…” and that sounds like the voice of experience! This auther talks to his wife the same way, no doubt. Or his B.F.
3. Then he calls it a deer! “… The poor deer…blagh blagh blagh”
4. here is the double-standard kicker, though. This guy is such a case. He says, “Now, I don’t want you to misunderstand. (or DOES he?) It is perfectly all right with me if she doesn’t like killing animals. (sounds to me like that was his biggest gripe. Did I miss something?) Actually I would think better of her for that.”
WTF? He just ranted for 385,094 words about how she wasn’t a man, like Himself, the Deer Blasting Wood’s God who quite hunting at 20, and says he would think better of her if she…acted just as he claims she acted!
Just goes to show, liberalism is an illness. The ill don’t know they are ill.
No, I don’t hunt. I do know quite a lot about the subject though. But speaking of ignorance: you do know that a caribou is a type of deer? Just checking.
I cite two authors in fact if you didn’t catch that. I know, too many words for you to make sense of all at once. Read slowly. That helps. Still, I don’t know if I’d call either of those authors liberals but since “liberal” to your kind is usually just a label for whatever you oppose at that moment then I guess it works.
What I don’t understand is why you have to bring up homosexuality in almost every comment you make on this site. Perhaps you need to come to terms with something in your own life?
Caribou is a foraging ruminate mammal, but not a deer. Thsts why it is called a “Caribou,” Maybe you are confused with Reindeer, which are not deer either.
I refuted two authors. You may have missed that. Because you read too slowly, and move your mouth as you read. Try pointing at the words, that may help, too.
“Liberal” IS a label! Hey! Good one, Odom! There is hope for you. You caught on that rather quickly! There are names for things! Good boy!I will put a star by your name. Odom, with a star.
Maybe I bring up homosexuality because you need to stop being one? But true, it is one more thing you don’t understand, so why do you try? You are like a cabbage trying to understand horticulture; completely dependent on it yet unable to grasp even the rudimentary basics of it.
Take that thing from your mouth; it’s gay.
Just goes to show, liberalism is an illness. The ill don’t know they are ill.
But you are beginning to suspect, aren’t you.
A moose is a “type” of deer, as is an elk- so what, Adam?
Evenif this was her first hunt, this Sorkin dipwad has no basis to badmouth her as he does. Political gain? Where? Does this really solidify her “meat-eating base”? Or perhaps it would be the NRA, (as if they had doubts about her before).
No, this was not about politics, but about a TV program, part of which has some hunting and fishing involved- that is all.
And, if you were not aware of the conservation part of hunting, perhaps you should read up on how we need to cull the herd, just to keep the herd healthy.
Hmmmmmm- Perhaps that might work among liberals- you know, just to make sure that there is a vibrant liberal genetic pool, not the limp-wristed type we have to contend with now.
Just throwing the idea out there——
Well, neither I nor any of the cited authors were there. We do not know what happened when the cameras were off and we do not know what the distractions did to cause problems.
I will take the word of Palin and her father and husband that she hunts regularly and has done so most of her life and chalk any concerns people have about the episode up to performing for a camera and doing TV rather than concentrating on hunting.
Funny, when she was running as VP every liberal discussed how she was a brutal killer who shot animals out of helicopters and all this. Now, because of a TV show and a few opinions from people with questionable background and credentials, she has never hunted.
And it is further funny that Adam chooses this tact instead of addressing the real issue and point of the article, why is Sorkin so upset when Kerry killed (allegedly) an animal for nothing more than political gain.
It is a deflection because liberals cannot address that double standard.
And remember, no one saw Elmer Kerry shoot that goose but libs swore he was a great hunter…
“Funny, when she was running as VP every liberal discussed how she was a brutal killer who shot animals out of helicopters and all this.”
That is just her policy. We don’t know for sure because I agree with you about the cameras. Maybe the problem is it’s not that she made herself out to be a great hunter but maybe it’s more the failure of the mythology of her that your side has built up. She’s in support of hunting, presents herself as having hunted before, but maybe she’s just really that awkward with guns and aiming.
“And it is further funny that Adam chooses this tact instead of addressing the real issue…”
First of all Sorkin’s article is stupid but a little funny. What else is there to say? He grew up in an area where he probably never held a gun, much less went hunting or even knew hunters. He makes some good points about Palin but his audience is the same batch of liberals that also don’t know much about hunting so it’s rubbish. His article has gotten publicity just because he’s TV famous.
As far as the charge that he was upset at killing animals for political gain: that’s just what your source said and not really what he said. If you look at his article he simply says it “was the first moose ever murdered for political gain.” I don’t think you can take from it the idea that no one has ever hunted for political gain. Democrats do it all the time. Obama didn’t try to hunt but he did go bowling and looked like a moron. It’s all the same result in the end.
How do we know it was the first moose killed for political gain? Teddy Roosevelt was an avid hunter. Perhaps he killed one to show his prowess…
It was nothing more than a hate filled article written by a moron who has no idea.
She did not seem uncomfortable with the weapons. She seemed to be rushing to make things good for the camera.
I will go with what her dad and husband say as well as the photos of her kills.
The issue with doing politically motivated stunts is that politicians who try to look like the regular folks end up looking foolish whether it is Elmer Kerry or Obama bowling.
Palin is actually a regular person who participates in hunting (and probably bowled in the past as well).
The left just has this hatred for her and it shows in the articles like Sorkin’s…
I bet Palin could out shoot Sorkin any day and could survive in the wilderness much better even though he called her a phony pioneer.
What is he other than a phony period?
“How do we know it was the first moose killed for political gain?”
I’m pretty sure it was a joke anyway and not meant to be taken literally. The entire portion of the show was done for political reasons and to both offend and amuse. It’s a ridiculous segment on a ridiculous show that is going to most likely peter out in ratings down the stretch. People were better off skipping it and watching Walking Dead but now that it’s gone for the season Palin’s show might help people get their zombie fix.
Or maybe zombies can attack Alaska. Let’s hope Palin’s father is there to work the gun for her.
“It was nothing more than a hate filled article written by a moron who has no idea.”
Pretty much, though I agree with some of his points.
“The left just has this hatred for her and it shows in the articles like Sorkin’s…”
Face it. More Americans hate her than love her. It has nothing to do with being a liberal.
Where was the outrage on the episode where Bristol is bashing in the noggin of a fish?
And if Sorkin had actually “watched” the episode, he would have seen the meat from the deer brought back, processed AND PUT IN THE FREEZER!
Just for that Sorkin, I hope my husband gets three more deer this year … grow a pair Sorkin …
Personally I don’t mind people fishing or hunting but I’ve never been one for hunting on TV no matter what the meat was used for afterward.
Unfortunately for my family members that live off deer meat most of the year this season has been very poor.
There are plenty of deer. Are your family members poor hunters? Can’t work the bolt? “Buck fervor?”
Too gay?
“Face it. More Americans hate her than love her. It has nothing to do with being a liberal.”
Proof?
Yes, she’s very popular in the GOP and very unpopular in the Democratic Party. The truth is liberals don’t make up a big enough chunk of the polling public to be the only people who dislike her.
Let’s look at those polls:
AP-GfK Poll Nov. 3-8, 2010:
* 46% favorable, 49% unfavorable
USA Today/Gallup Poll. Nov. 4-7, 2010:
* 40% favorable, 52% unfavorable
CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll. Oct. 27-30, 2010:
* 40% favorable, 49% unfavorable
ABC News/Washington Post Poll. Oct. 25-28, 2010:
* 39% favorable, 54% unfavorable
CBS News Poll. Oct. 1-5, 2010:
* 22% favorable, 48% unfavorable
Quinnipiac University Poll. Aug. 31-Sept. 7, 2010:
* 31% favorable, 50% unfavorable
Those polls only reflect the percentage of the people asked. What is the breakdown by reported party affiliation.
In the most recent poll they split it 39% Dem, 38% GOP.
As far as ideology goes the poll split it 19% liberal, 46% conservative, 33% moderate.
I’m not sure of your point.
The truth is that liberals don’t make up a big chunk of ANYTHING except potential stool for a meat eating predator.
Sad, really- such poor fare, almost no protein, poor musculature, but it is true that predators prey on the weak, and there’s none weaker than a full-blown liberal.
Frankly I think Palin is great, but I am not in favor of her being President of the USA.
I think she would do better than Obama, but I am not in favor of him, either.
If it weren’t for his his blue lips, like well-feed blood-suckers from Leech Lake…but anyway…
No, Palin is terrific, but not presidential material in my opinion.
If she were the only one the conservative party puts up, she will get my vote. She got it last time, with the old white-haired guy.
But I hope there is a better option.
Thomas Sowell, or someone brilliant and economic-minded.
And that is the point the polls DON’T make; we (the majority) WILL vote for Palin over another term of Obama.
Eoj Trahneir says: “Caribou is a foraging ruminate mammal, but not a deer. Maybe you are confused with Reindeer, which are not deer either.”
Let’s let science speak for us instead since you can’t get it right:
So about Reindeer?
Oh, woops. Wrong on both I see Science is hard, I know. Next time try looking it up.
Eoj Trahneir says: “Take that thing from your mouth; it’s gay.”
Wouldn’t insulting me go over so much better if you had facts on your side instead of just the things you make up as you go? Nice try though.