I appreciate disagreement. However, the immediate shift from the issue of aerial hunting into a defense of Sarah Palin took me by surprise - almost as if she were running for President. McCain isn't mentioned once.
It makes me concerned about the very narrow criteria and the 'presumptions' some people may use for discussing voting republican. I am also concerned by the quick turn by CCCCC to personal attack. I trust that this is unusual for McCain supporters. I tend to doubt that all McCain supporters see disagreement on a single, non-campaign issue as an attack. I hope not. Why so nervous?
After the final email from CCCCC, today, it's clear that the issue of Aerial Hunting was never on his mind at all. That final email is, I believe you'll be able to see, a repetition of most of the McCain campaign team's media releases. This posting is not the place to debate it. This is about Aerial Hunting. (to which CCCCC has still not provided an answer.)
So I think it is important to present this publicly - of course, with all names, email addresses, etc. deleted. The sequence has each email numbered at the left.
I have added comments for clarity and question in red.
Feel free to comment, argue, etc. - about aerial hunting hopefully.
Here is the whole sequence (without names):
1) Original Message -----
forwarded From: BBBBB
To:Group 1
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 7:21 AM
Subject: FW: To my animal loving friends
From: AAAAA To: BBBBB
Subject: To my animal loving friends
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2008 18:10:28 -0700
A disturbing video
Hi,
Have you ever heard of aerial hunting? It's a brutal practice. Wolves are shot from low-flying aircraft or chased to exhaustion, then killed at point-blank range.
Governor Sarah Palin, the Republican nominee for Vice President, promotes this barbaric practice, exploiting a loophole in the Federal Airborne Hunting Act to allow private wolf killers to shoot down wolves using aircraft. We have to get the word out about this!
Please watch this powerful video by Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund, and then share it with every wildlife lover you know:
http://actionfund.defenders.org/palinvideo
2) On Mon, 9/8/08, CCCCC wrote:
From: CCCCC
To: Group1
Subject: Re: To my animal loving friends
Date: Monday, September 8, 2008, 11:19 AM
Before everyone gets upset wit the in humane killing of wolves with a rifle, [the first email was about aerial hunting, not rifles.] you need to see how wolves hunt and kill in packs.
3) My Response
From: ME
To: CCCCC and Group1
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 1:58 PM
Subject: Re: To my animal loving friends
Wolves hunt for food, not just to kill. They do it from the ground. They don't get paid for it. They don't wear lipstick. God made them that way. That's why THEY do it.
What about you.
4) From CCCCC
Re: To my animal loving friends
Tuesday, September 9, 2008 11:16 AM
From: CCCCC
To: ME
I think most of the foods you eat are also killed for food. As to me yes sadly enough I do kill for food. If you are suggesting that man kind should stop killing for food well then. [Where did this come from?] I would like to hear your plan. Include plant life in your plan. I am sure the corn and beans would like to hear from you as well.
Back to the wolves. I am sure there is a reason why these animals were hunted from the air and with rifles. [conjecture] It probably goes to some impact they were having on other animals or man kind. [probably?] I doubt that it was just senseless killing. [alot of assumptions here]
If you want to have a conversation about man kind trying to manage various sectors of animal populations i.e. the DNR go ahead. I believe that this is always done in the best interest of people.
Wolves are fine. Agreed they were nearly hunted to extinction, they are back and will probably inherit all of this. [the subject is not wolves, it's aerial hunting]
5) CCCCC also sent an immediate follow-up as follows:
From: CCCCC
To: ME
One other question I have ? You mention GOD. That is how GOD made the wolves. Is that casual or do you believe in GOD ?
6) my reply
To: CCCCC
From: Me
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 12:30 PM
Subject: Re: To my animal loving friends
First of all, be careful not to generalize a person's entire philosphy, gestalt and world-view from one situation - all food is always killed - there is no argument with that. Hunting and then using what you kill is not a bad thing. It is what Nature has been about since... forever!? I love steak!
The reference to "God", in this case, is for people who use 'God's will' [and "Godly-ness"] as a justification for the specific activity and will be different depending on which of the dozen or so religions you subscribe to, but it is the same as a reference to "Nature."
By Nature (by God) - when Wolves, wild cats, crocodiles, etc. hunt and kill for food, it is not 'pretty.' It is gorey and bloody. If they didn't hunt in packs or prides, etc, they would not be able to bring down enough to eat. We humans have evolved. When we hunt for food, we can kill it quickly. We dress it and the intent is to eat it.
When You hunt... do you make sure it's done quickly, or do you let the animal just bleed to death?
When people hunt for 'bounty' [as in the case of wolves] they don't worry about how things die. If we 'hit' it, it will die sometime, so who who cares if it takes an hour or a week. Who cares if it's still alive when we cut off the leg or ears for bounty? As long as I get paid and a pat on the back for being so civic-minded.
When people hunt for sport and for trophies - we only worry about 2 things - don't damage any parts that will show and all my friends will think I'm really cool.
However... the killing of wolves from the air is not done for food, nor is it done for the benefit of people, or anything else. It's done for convenience and profit. People like Ms. Palin who advocate this type of activity, are the same kind of people [my conclusion from reading and media] who gut-shoot wild horses from planes and leave them to die. The same people who use their SUV's to run down wild colts in the Southwest and leave them in the desert with broken legs. [these actually are documented as happening] They are the same people who 'turn down the bridge to no-where' ... but keep the money anyway. [my reference to questioning Palin's sincerity]
Both types of killing are for convenience.
So - Last week a 'Poor' football player was intentionally taken out in a targeted tackle. Broken bones and out for the season. What would have happened if everyone had left that 'poor' kid laying on the field to fend for himself with broken legs when the game was over?
It's ok. We have too many over-paid, under-educated football players as it is. One or two (or 20 or 30) dead ones will not impact the quality of Monday nights.
Go ahead, say it. "That's stupid, inhuman and serves no purpose!" Really? Maybe- and maybe that would put an end to the NFL drug problem? Maybe it would stop the 'team boys' getting away with one crime after another? Well, most people would be appalled at that approach. I would [be appalled]. But they use the same logic when they think wild animals are going to infringe on the 'property' they 'own.' A few less animals and that'll be the end of it - they won't be missed.
Let's stir up the mob, let's offer them MONEY [bounty for each confirmed kill]! Great - maybe they'll kill 5 or 10 sports figures over the quota, but hey, there are too many of them anyway. [ I'm obviously pushing the point of the illustration]
Wait a minute... weren't we talking about wild animals? [wolves]
Well, yeah, but we're not going to eat either one [wolves or football players] anyway so does it matter?
So - what do I tell my kids about the right and wrong reasons, and the right and wrong ways to hunt and kill?
7) From: CCCCC
To: ME
Well ABCDE [he addresses me], I am impressed. its always amazing to me those who feel they have the right,privileged and particularly knowledge to get up on the soap box.
You have known Sarah Palin for all of about 5 days as she was nominated or came to the publics attention on the 3rd of September. given you prose and assumed knowledge you have probably know her for the better part of your life. Or those institutive skills you possess for knowing and being all knowledgeable all you to be able with clarity tell us what she believes in. you jump to so many conclusions it should be embarrassing [the first complete set of 'classic' personal attacks from the first sentence on - which have nothing to do with the concepts in aerial hunting - and the beginning of an extensive defense of Palin. Why?]
Tell you what before you go running off to these people you have on you email address [note that my initial responses were sent only to the people on the list CCCCC had addressed. Subsequent emails I sent were to CCCCC only. I don't know what he did with them!] telling them what others believe in, I would do a very careful search of your soul and person, looking for what you believe in. You need some help and time spent on you I suspect. You don't and do few others have any deal what Sarah Palin believe in or support. [more classic personal attacks, this time on my, spirituality, morality - and yes, we DO know Palin's position on aerial hunting.] Time is being spent trying To figure that out.
Unfortunately if we are moving into the arena of politics here its is too back that equal time is not spent trying to figure out what other candidates believe in. Excuse me perhaps you already have..so tell me. [another attack?] What are the core principles of Obamaha and biden ? [on the issues? that's already published on the internet. However, this is another jump off of the aerial hunting issue again.]
Do they hunt ? Have they ever killed for sport and where do they stand on maintaining predatory animal populations like wolves. By the way lots of animals who are hunted are maimed for in the sport.
On to the caribou in anwar as you pay $4.00 for gas. How's that feel ?
[Now that was confusing, but appeared to be the beginning of a sermon to put me in my place!
I responded and, according to CCCCC, the response didn't go through. (I will include my response at the end here, but still in sequence of delivery.) CCCCC sent the following]
8) From: CCCCC
To: ME
I did not not get your last email. Windows scrubbed the content for some reason. So don't have any idea what you may have said.
Let me tell you that I am obviously a Palin/McCain believer. For some fundamental reasons. You have touched on a few. I believe in God. I don't mix God with Nature , only that he made it. This is is creation as are you. He made you to honor him. He put the flowers birds, bees, heavens, wolves and caribou to delight him, and for our enjoyment and responsibility to take care of and enjoy. The planet our environment all are there for us to respect, and take care of or destroy and with this destruction bring about our own.
I believe in the miracle of life and sanctity of life. I do not believe in abortion. Given your -views of killing wolves from an airplane, I wonder how you feel about sticking a needle into a developed human being (baby) and putting a vacuum device flipping a switch and sucking out the brain ? [another stretch away from aerial hunting, but a legitimate question]
How about botched abortions that leave the the baby to die in a storage facility. Just to mention a few. [like the botched wild horses in the southwest?] ABCDE [me], my problem with folks that generally take positions like yours can at the same time justify these acts. [another assumption] Obama claims that questions like does life begin at conception are above his pay grade. It is at the root issue of his beliefs and where he lines up with God [another assumption]. You cannot believe in God and at the same time destroy the very life he made in his image. Get off the wolves.
Today's news has Palin being attacked on her religion, mother hood, whether she was involved in dismissing an employee, how much pork barrel money she was involved with vs. others.
She is a good gal. She lives her life along Godly principles. [assumption] Those defined in the Bible and I think she has this countries best interest as she had the best interest of her constituencies in Alaska. [so her known push for earmarks were ok at that point? double standard?]
When you don't know where to turn or what to think, ask your self what would Jesus or God do. Don't ever vote against God. He has blessed this nation as our for fathers turned to him and included him in the basic founding principles of this country. [but not religion in the composition of our government. They were Very clear about that separation!]
[the concern I see here is that many people similar to CCCCC will base their vote for a president or vice president, solely on a claim of being 'Godly.'
How many 'Godly people' did it take to cause September 11?
How many 'Godly people' did it take to conduct the Crusades and commit the atrocities there? How about the 'Godly' Jim Jones, the Bakers, and the list goes on.
In or pluralistic country of several recognized, legitimate religions, several views of God exist. Why not include all of them too?
MORE importantly, what has all this to do with aerial hunting? CCCCC has gotten way off of aerial hunting and still has not said if he supports it! He now appears to be creating a Palin commercial.]
9) My Final email to CCCCC with the text of the attached response.
To: CCCCC
Message with attachment
Hi CCCCC, I think it stopped because it was a 'reply' and had all the past stuff embedded. Too much stuff so I copied and pasted my actual response into a Word doc here. Only because I believe you deserved an answer to the questions you raised.
Remember, my response was to your initial email to everyone [on CCCCC's list] about aerial hunting. [not about Palin]
Does Palin live according to any religious ethics or God? I haven't seen anything one way or another. Lots of talk, some upsetting contradictions, but that's common. I worry about her. She's a small fish netted and thrown into a big pond by the Republican Party for election reasons. Seems that McCain wanted Lieberman, but he was basically told who his partner would be. That's scary. For citizens, for all of us.
A few more weeks and what's real should start to show.
Thanks again,
Me
----------------
TEXT OF ATTACHMENT:
I cut and pasted my last email.
From: ME
Subject: Re: To my animal loving friends
To: CCCCC
Date: Tuesday, September 9, 2008, 4:54 PM
Hey CCCCC, I love good didactic! And I apologize for not having given you the opportunity, but I noticed that nowhere in the messages you've sent do you say whether or not you support the aerial 'culling' of wolves. So - do you? If so, you have every right to your opinion - and if anyone tries to shut you up - call me and I'll be with you!
As for 'Soap-boxing' - you make it appear that you equate having an opinion with a radical version of 'soap-box' preaching. A little bit of a stretch. I do have the right to express my opinion. So do you. It has nothing to do with being “privileged.” If more people would actually engage in public discussion - AND disagreement - we might actually be better at finding common ground, convincing one or the other, or at finding workable solutions. So - I really do appreciate this!
I'm surprised you made the jump from this one issue - aerial hunting that is supported by more people than just Palin (with whom I would also disagree) - you make the assumption that I have some sort of overall opinion of Palin herself. You'll note that I haven't once mentioned Palin as a ‘target’ for this issue. Just her particular aerial hunting position. Nor have I made any claim to have any extensive knowledge about Palin. Nor have I tied her candidacy to my comments. More importantly, I haven't known Palin for 5 days. I (we) don't know her at all! We've only seen a tiny bit. The next month will tell.
What is known is that she did, in fact, hire a lobbyist to go after earmark money. It is known that she was in favor of the 'bridge'. It is a fact that after alot of uproar, she then said she was against the bridge. It is a fact that she did not return the money. That's all I know as documented fact.
Other issues-based opinions I may have, or may develop, are/will be based on the individual issues, researched fact and documented evidence. [not emotional reaction, or religious fervor.]
Now for $4.00/Gallon gas? I don't like it. It is likely going to go to $5.00 within 9 months and will probably wind up at $6.00 before 2010 - regardless of what the current administration does. That's not going to be fixed by opening ANWR or off-shore to drilling. Even the Bush Administration knows that. The US does not control all the factors.
Drilling in ANWR? Well - I have questions about that, and we'll leave nature, animals, the environment, global warming and all the tree hugging out of it for a minute. It is a fact that the oil companies have leases and drilling rights to almost 70 million acres of US land and they haven't begun drilling in any one of them yet. Why not? Why do they fight so hard for only ANWR and off-shore? Why not start drilling in what they've got? (Yes, I said drill!)
Why would Dick Cheney spend so much recent time in Georgia quietly meeting with oil company executives? A guess [my conjecture based on the trustworthiness he's shown over more than 30 years.] - Cheney's out of office soon, and so are Bush and several others who have very heavy interests in oil companies. It is a concern [for Americans] that their [the administration's] interests may be proding them to work out ways to keep the money flowing? Would they lie about that? Well, look at their records and decide for yourself. Why do the current administration and the current republican candidates never discuss the existing leases?
Why does approximately 90% of the oil we currently do bring up out of US ground go to China, India and the Middle East to be refined and sold back to us as gas? [by our oil companies]
Why is it that, when Administration officials, researchers and economists (private and government) say that additional drilling won't produce additional gas resources for 10 years, [if at all measurable] there is such a push by the administration and candidates for ANWR and off-shore drilling?
I believe that in 10 years, we will be buying hybrids and electric cars from Japan (and others who are way ahead of us) at a more feverish pace than we are even today. 10 years of drilling is 10 years of time (and money) we could be spending developing our own technology, taking the lead away from foreign countries, building manufacturing plants and making top-notch American vehicles.
But back to the aerial culling issue - You've said you hunt. I have friends who are avid hunters (rifle and bow.) They are adamant about the quality of hunting and would never use a plane just for the adrenaline of killing. They are proud of their skill and of the food they bring home to share with their families and friends. I'm guessing you have the same pride and value about your hunting. I am impressed by, and respect, the attitude they have for hunting. None of my hunting friends believe it [aerial hunting] should be used as quick population control or even that it is really hunting.
-------------
Population Control? A documented and acknowledged fact - the whole world has a population problem (too many humans.) Food supplies aren't sufficient already today. What do we do?
China has forced abortions to enforce the 'one child' law. What do we do?
Oil and coal fired Energy? Europe is a decade ahead of us in successful alternative electricity production. What do we do?
Texas is building its second wind farm (world's largest) because the first, in Plano, was so successful! What do we do?
Social security? Education? Our economy? Jobs? Abortion? Personal choice and rights and responsibilities? Government legislating religion, ethics and morality? The ethics of war for right versus war for money? The campaigns?
But those are different topics altogether. This was all about aerial hunting.
Thanks for responding CCCCC, and I really do appreciate the discussion. It adds to what I, my friends, neighbors and family talk about.
Me
(end of text)
--------------------------
10) Re: Last email
Wednesday, September 10, 2008 11:09 AM
From: CCCCC
To: ME
Hi ABCDE- I don't think in Sarah Palins wildest dreams she ever thought that she would be on a National stage. So let's assume that. If it is a valid assumption then every thing she has done up to this point has been because she thought it was the right thing to do. Including educing the wolf population in the most effective way. (Including cost effectiveness.) I do think she is a Christian woman and believes in God and tries to lead a God focused life.
Obama on the other hand has had a very very short time in politics. Never sponsored or wrote a bill in Congress. Very young very in experienced. I don't think that office is a training program. [the same arguments used against some of our greatest, most productive presidents. Lincoln, Eisenhower, Kennedy, etc.] Not given the issues we face. By the way if our enemies want Obama, not a good sign. [Which enemies]
Tell you what I think we know what we are getting to a large degree with McCain/Palin. The other guys are posters of public opinion, and the masses are asses. People are very wish washy. Most public opinion in this country today is lead by the media. The media is very biased. Very left wing. [Where did CCCCC's opinion come from? I venture quite probably the media presentations. It appears his negative view of the masses and the media only apply to Obama. Aren't they the same media and masses when we talk about McCain? There are many who would say the media is very right wing. Of course it would depend on which segments of the media you follow.]
I will make you a bet. If Obama and company get in, their entire cry will be that we can't change anything because we inherrited all these problems from Bush. Want to bet ? [Sorry sport, I don't 'gamble' with the future of my country just to prove how right I am. Especially not with a member of the 'public'... you remember them, the ones you called "wishy washy" ... "masses of asses."]
CCCCC
-------------------------------
This has to be the last in the email sequence about Aerial Hunting. It has been an interesting glimpse into the mind-set of a small part of the American electorate. I do have other things to do.
-------------------------------
Although the discussion on Aerial Hunting appears to have become one sided, I suggest that CCCCC is basically a decent person, a concerned citizen and has the best intentions. I would suggest that he, and all citizens, take the time (as I have and continue to do) to go to the candidate web sites, compare the positions on the election issues facing the next administration, look at the real qualifications and real national and international implications, and make their own decisions.
Aerial hunting? I'm still against it.
No comments:
Post a Comment