Hired by “Sportsmen” for Fish and Wildlife
Could Larry Craig be a closet wolf lover? This one doesn't seem to be pleased by his advances 😉
Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife, a group who is turning out to be more for livestock than for wildlife, has hired former Senator Larry Craig to lobby for legislation which would remove protections from all wolves nationwide. This would leave the doors open for states like Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming to eradicate as many wolves as they please.
It amazes me that this manly man hunting group would hire a coward who is too scared to admit that he is gay. It highlights the hypocrisy of these groups who use hyperbole and fear against wolves and any other predator that they fear.
Maybe a little hyperbole and satire is in order 😉
Clarification and a note about the danger of satire: Larry Craig feeds the homophobia present in this society by hiding his sexual preference. While homophobia is no laughing matter, it should be noted that Larry proudly fought against the rights of people to love who they choose to love. I find that particularly disgusting and in particular need of satire of the ruthless variety.
-Ken
Larry Craig lobbies on wolf legislation.
By John Miller – Associated Press
The Wildlife News 
February 25, 2011 at 10:45 AM
To paraphrase a friend of mine who yelled at Larry toward the end of his press conference said, “Come on Larry, Be [a wolf lover]! It’s okay to be [a wolf lover]!”
February 25, 2011 at 10:46 AM
Am I digging myself in deeper yet?
February 25, 2011 at 11:01 AM
I do find it disturbing that you would stoop to the same lame tactics that the anti wolf side has…
February 25, 2011 at 11:54 AM
I see SB is still the same holier-than-thou- know it all.
February 25, 2011 at 11:54 AM
Yes, I know you do. You do see that I labeled this very clearly as satire and hyperbole don’t you? At least I had the decency to do that while I think that many of the anti-wolf sites are motivated out of pure hatred.
There is a difference and I think that the sanctimonious nature of these issues gets in the way of pointing out the absurdity of it all.
Really, why is this such a big issue? In reality all of the fear and hatred isn’t about what wolves actually do, it’s about what people have been led to believe they do. This issue isn’t about wolves as much as it is about a hatred for the federal government and what people have been led to believe.
Larry Craig has been peddling his shit for years yet he is a disgusting hypocrite because he wants the money from federal taxes to come to our rural states without the federal power that entails. Idaho receives $1.21 for every dollar that it pays in federal taxes but he wants Idahoans to hate the federal government.
February 25, 2011 at 12:02 PM
Timz,
Where did I claim to be know it all, I don’t condone the BS from either side, I know Craig has been peddling his Bullshit of years, but why do we need to stoop to the same level? Why is it being a know it all, when you don’t like to see the crap from either side? It is just stupid…you know how the anti wolf side is, and believe me, this will pop up other areas on the web….
Childish tactics often times end up with childish results…
February 25, 2011 at 12:04 PM
Ken, I did say it was a big deal, I simply said I found it disturbing, of course now a days stating your opinion is considered a sin…especially if those your commenting to, don’t agree with it..
February 25, 2011 at 12:28 PM
Funny post ken. That must be a male wolf running out of the bathroom. lol
February 25, 2011 at 12:59 PM
Well SB,
I don’t see it as “stooping” to their level. I see it as using satire to make a point. I don’t claim to be a Stephen Colbert or John Stewart but there is a very long history of doing this over the millennia.
The absurdity of this issue and the distraction it causes needs to be pointed out. I just put an exclamation point on it.
February 25, 2011 at 1:17 PM
The wolf needs its tail between its legs.
February 25, 2011 at 1:54 PM
Does anyone have independent proof of Craig’s alleged sexual preference other than the questionable police sting that caused his downfall?
I am not looking for a skirmish. Just facts.
February 25, 2011 at 2:06 PM
The Statesman did a lot of coverage about this. There are some interviews done with people who made allegations and rumors have been swirling around since the ’80’s. Nothing has been confirmed but things like this are hard to prove. He did give me some creepy looks back when I was eating dinner with my girlfriend in the mid 80’s.
http://www.idahostatesman.com/larrycraig/index.html
If it’s true he shouldn’t be afraid to admit it. It seems that if it is true though, that he is victimized by his own self hatred.
February 25, 2011 at 10:45 AM
He will be the next hero over on the PPP blog in a day or so
February 25, 2011 at 10:49 AM
Love this picture……If I didn’t have a healthy sense of humor from time to time even with serious issues, I fear that I would become bitter!
February 25, 2011 at 12:31 PM
That picture made my day.
February 25, 2011 at 2:17 PM
Ken,
Hillarious!
SB,
Lighten up. Do you really think this could make things worse?
February 25, 2011 at 3:38 PM
Yes,
I do.
February 25, 2011 at 3:49 PM
If one is pro-wolf, in these times, we must take the high road. Though the satire is poignant, it will only serve to widen the gap. Go after somebody that means something, keep the focus on the fabricators, and the poachers.
February 25, 2011 at 5:52 PM
“If one is pro-wolf, in these times, we must take the high road.”
In a word BULLSHIT. The high road, and Mr. Nice Guy has gotten wolf advocated nothing. It’s dog eat dog in this war.
February 25, 2011 at 9:40 PM
Timz,
I’m not saying be Mr. Nice guy. Go to some of the sites out there, if you haven’t already. It’s safe here to argue amongst your/ourselves, but as I have already said you are preaching to the choir. Go get onto some of the other sites and argue your points. Go to some of the other sites and don’t get sucked into the vortex of name calling. Support some of the other posters who get buried in the anti-wolf crap.
Go out and make contacts and spread the word about wolves and wildlife. Educate people. Larry Craig is trying to crawl back into grace. He can’t. Make impact where you can.
The high road has gotten the wolves back. Let’s do what we can to keep the gains made. Picking on a chump isn’t going to help. Stoop to the lowest common denominator puts you on the same level as Rockholm, Bridges, Hemmings…. and my own favorite who a couple of you might be familiar with from other sites.
Yeah, I’ll take the High Road because it’s the right thing to do!
February 25, 2011 at 4:13 PM
Sexual preference is of no concern to me, but severe hypocrisy is something I always hated — just like those anti-wolf elk poachers or the anti-wolf, self proclaimed defenders of the West who were not from the West.
Lately in Congress it seems like it has gotten worse. One example is the anti-government health insurance folks crying how they haven’t received their government health insurance fast enough. How about those family values folks caught cheating on their spouse?
Craig was humiliated. After that sometimes people change their ways, but here he comes again back with the same old sentiments, now lobbying for the anti-wildlife group, Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife.
February 26, 2011 at 5:27 PM
Yep, another conflicted, self-loathing, closeted, gay republican. Man, it must be eating him up inside. Larry Craig is the poster child for hypocrisy. I love when he was chiding Bill Clinton during the Lewinsky scandal. I remember Craig calling Clinton a very “naughty naughty naughty boy” or something to that effect, almost with a lusting gleam in his eye. Or, after the “wide stance” incident at the Minneapolis airport, when he denied being gay in public; it was priceless, to paraphrase: “I am not gay. I have never been gay. I love my wife……and the subordinate omega ranked male wolf.”
February 25, 2011 at 4:21 PM
Great stuff, Ken.
Thanks
February 25, 2011 at 5:22 PM
As an Idaho Senator, Larry Craig caused a lot of grief to those who opposed him. The best Forest Supervisor that we ever had in Central Idaho was forced to leave by Craig, the bully.
February 25, 2011 at 5:29 PM
Very Funny 🙂
February 25, 2011 at 5:43 PM
Funny. One person calls it satire, another stooping. Bill clinton didn’t call it sex, but what would your wife/girlfriend/and or boyfriend have called it if you had come home with lipsticck ring around your flagpole. Its just that kind of so called “justification” that pits one against the other and ok for you to make satire until someone elses satire offends you and then its hurtful to you. Its hippocrasy no matter how you cut. Other than the articles content was his sexual misbehavior relevent.
February 25, 2011 at 7:32 PM
I have nothing to say about this forum except that the photo is hilarious.
February 25, 2011 at 8:39 PM
Well, we can chat about the obvious hypocrisy of Craig; but, what about the Browning company and Don Peay and the SFW boys and the dominant kulture of Utah that connects all of them? Is anything acceptable, from Rex Rammell’s stunts followed by his claim that he is only fulfilling prophesy to Craig’s antics to SFW’s preaching of veiled treason and sedition against the US government, is it all acceptable as long as the perpetrator is the right kind of WASP?
February 25, 2011 at 9:46 PM
Apparently so.
February 26, 2011 at 8:52 AM
FYI,
When a Country Goes Insane
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/02/21-5
My favorite part of this essay:
“Hate is stronger than logic and more than anything else, Republicans love their hate. It’s the only thing that gives them power. The more vicious, the more loony they are, the more they are treated like savants, like prophets channeling some higher wisdom, come though it may from the self-loathing gutter of political prostitution. They pull stuff out of their ass and brazenly pass it off as stone tablets. And people swoon.”
Larry is a pro at this stuff, without question. I’ve seen him in action and this essay is spot on about this poison political climate, on all fronts.
February 26, 2011 at 9:11 AM
“My favorite part of this essay:
“Hate is stronger than logic and more than anything else, Republicans love their hate. It’s the only thing that gives them power. The more vicious, the more loony they are, the more they are treated like savants, like prophets channeling some higher wisdom, come though it may from the self-loathing gutter of political prostitution. They pull stuff out of their ass and brazenly pass it off as stone tablets. And people swoon.”
Sounds like this person is full of hate and jealousy to me. Maybe he/she should look in the mirror…
February 26, 2011 at 9:12 AM
YES! “The more vicious, the more loony they are, the more they are treated like savants, like prophets channeling some higher wisdom, come though it may from the self-loathing gutter of political prostitution. They pull stuff out of their ass and brazenly pass it off as stone tablets. And people swoon.” That’s it.
February 26, 2011 at 9:16 AM
Same old stuff from “wolf moderate.” We already have his number.
February 26, 2011 at 9:19 AM
Well if the American people’s gene pool is so diluted w/ morons and followers, perhaps we need an upper clash or a Koch to lead us. Seems like a bunch of people that can’t/won’t think for themselves or seek out the truth. They’d rather pop a few xanex (sp) and text on there Iphone, play video games, or eat fast food.
We’re on the downward slide in this country, best to get used to it. Don’t fight it just let it happen (It will be easier that way). Truth hurts. We can’t compete w/ the rest of the world when it comes to production of goods/services (we have em’ beat on the consumerism front lol). Start building a bunker in the mountains!
February 26, 2011 at 9:22 AM
It’s “Wolf moderate” not wolf loon…Like many on either side of the issue.
February 26, 2011 at 9:38 AM
Yep, I rest my case.
February 26, 2011 at 9:41 AM
Ditto lol…
February 26, 2011 at 3:47 AM
Over the years, observing the behavior (politics) of Larry Craig, I have come to appreciate him for the sly silver haired fox he represents. When it comes to trust level of any fish or wildlife issue that Larry sides up with, I will be sleeping with one eye open.
February 26, 2011 at 9:14 AM
“When it comes to trust level of any fish or wildlife issue that Larry sides up with, I will be sleeping with one eye open.” Yes, that also applies to any person, group, or organization he might side with.
February 26, 2011 at 3:36 PM
I used to think I would visit this site to learn a thing or two. Anymore it’s become a source of entertainment. You guys/gals are funny. You spew your own brand of hate and call it satire – all the while criticizing anyone who doesn’t see from your narrow perspective as a hate monger. Not hard to see why we’re spinning our wheels. Seems everyone is consumed with calling names and pointing fingers.
February 26, 2011 at 4:50 PM
The former senator is a slimeball, has been all of his political life… All he cares about is perks and payback, period. Anyone who trusts him is a fool at best.
February 26, 2011 at 9:10 PM
Why is it that you folks on the neo-Nazi side can spew anything you want, pull any vicious stunt at your whim, and, according to you, you’re just standing up for your rights; but, when the tables are turned, we’re being hateful and unwilling to compromise? For example, we’ve supposedly been unwilling to compromise and let the states handle wolf management without federal interference. The reason we have been so reluctant has been that we knew damn well what the states would do; but, you slithering filth on the neo-Nazi side played it up like we were, again, being hateful and unwilling to compromise. Well, Idaho has revealed its draft legislation for wolf management and guess what, bosco? It has a bounty on wolves in it. Eat me raw, bosco.
February 26, 2011 at 9:23 PM
What is wrong w/ bounties, so long as long as the minimum # of wolves is met? How else are the states supposed to “manage” the wolf population? Personally I’d rather see bounties over paying WS to do it. Obviously WS would still be needed from time to time, but not as much as they currently are.
Bounties were going to be a “management” tool from the start…IMO and they will be a very effective and cost efficient tool at that. It was obvious from the 09′ wolf hunt that hunting seasons alone will not be enough to keep wolf #’s in check. The more wolves are hunted the harder they will be to hunt. As they get harder to hunt, the larger the bounty will be. Seems like a plan to me.
For instance, if there are to be 600 wolves in Idaho, then any wolves above the 600 mark would have a bounty over there head. Much better then gassing pups or paying WS to do it.
February 26, 2011 at 9:37 PM
Obviously you don’t understand anything about wolf behavior other than what the misinformation machine feeds you, WoMo.
Understand this, those who insist that wolves “need” to be managed don’t have a clue about the animal. If you don’t know anything about something, in the neo-con world of non-reason, it’s all about destroying that which is unknown… because it might be something that contradicts what you believe. Zealotry for any purpose is stupid and unwarranted, if you don’t like wolves, too bad… most Americans do. Get over it… that’s what the wolf-hating crowd says when they win an argument. If you can’t take the equality thing, maybe you should go someplace where they don’t have it and then you can have something to whine about. May I suggest Sudan or China.
February 26, 2011 at 9:55 PM
So, one minute the mantra is how the ethical and sportsmanlike hunting community deserves a chance to take wolf trophies and the next minute the rednecks want to get paid to do it. That’s pretty transparent and pretty weak, WoMo. Look, I hunt; I’ve hunted all my life, shot a few coyotes when they made themselves a nuisance around the place, and I am perfectly aware that, at some point, wolves will need to be hunted to adjust the population and distribution from time to time. The problem is that bounties are unnecessary, appeal to the very worst trash out there, and encourage opportunistic poaching when and in areas where wolves are not supposed to be taken just to have a backlog that can be used to claim bounties when the miscreants happen to need beer money. The case against bounties is very well documented, WoMo.
February 26, 2011 at 9:56 PM
OK Salle. Fair enough, I do not know as much as you in regards to wolf behavior, but I do know that wolves WILL be hunted sooner than later and ya better get used to it…OR move to Sweden or Norway. You’d probably enjoy the people over there more. If you didn’t know I’m for wolves but only at acceptable numbers. Sorry, but I live in reality. Wolves are going to die, get used to it ; ) Continue w/ the yes magazine stuff. That is certainty an accurate depiction of where the world is heading…
We are all still free to give our opinions. My opinion is probably more likely to take place thanyours, but that’s ok if your views are implemented. I won’t take it personally 🙂
PS: Our country is due for a serious standard of living correction and our GDP is going to continue to decrease. How do you suppose that we as a country continue reparations, entitlements, bloated military, 2 wars, AND environmental protection? One of the first cuts will be the environment…
February 26, 2011 at 9:59 PM
One of the first cuts will be this ridiculous bounty, WoMo.
February 26, 2011 at 10:00 PM
wolf moderate, bounties are ineffective when trying to control a population. Look at coyotes for instance. Some places have bounties on them and they still can’t control the coyote population. Even the most knowledgable wildlife biologists will tell you bounties are ineffective. This is 2011, not the 1930s. It sickens me how some wildlife is treated nowadays at the hands of us humans.
February 26, 2011 at 10:05 PM
Fair enough Mikarooni. I don’t care either way in regards to bounties. Personally I just think that it would be a very cheap way to keep the wolf population at the objective levels. I hate paying federal employees to do what citizens could/would do much cheaper.
The wolf hunt in 09′ showed that hunting alone is insufficient to keep wolf numbers in “check”. And the longer the wolves are hunted the smarter they will get and the harder they will be to hunt. All i’m saying is that wolves are going to be managed at a level at about 500 in Idaho I would guess and bounties would be cheaper and more humane than gassing pups or pay WS to reduce the wolf population.
February 27, 2011 at 9:23 AM
Once again, the greatest error is in thinking that the use of guns and human killing machines are the answer to any problem. It’s a mindset fomented into a cult by the military industrial complex… who needs humanity when you have a gun?
February 27, 2011 at 5:10 PM
“Once again, the greatest error is in thinking that the use of guns and human killing machines are the answer to any problem. It’s a mindset fomented into a cult by the military industrial complex… who needs humanity when you have a gun?”
It must be that “common sense” conservatives are always talking about. However, the fact that some people would rather resolve their grievances with violence seems to make a good argument for retaining the ability to defend yourself. You may not be able to avoid or talk your way out of a conflict with that type of zealot.
I’d rather it not come to that, but a certain other wildlife blog has made jokes about bag limits on wolf advocates, and frequently comments about individual posters on this specific blog. Given the amount of grammatical and spelling errors that go on over there, I think they may be stupid/drunk enough to act on that kind of sentiment. They tend to view the education system as government brainwashing and reject the legitimacy of the laws. If they’re not smart enough to beat us in the courtroom, they’ll sure as shit try to exercise their hegemony in the only way they know how – with the inarticulate frustrated scream of a retard with a rifle.
February 26, 2011 at 10:30 PM
Wolf Moderate, I don’t want to get into an argument with you, but it appears like you are hoping for massive killing of wolves, even with bounties, so long as you “win” your argument with the more “pro-wolf’ participants. I find it disturbing that you seem to be aligning yourself with people that have no interest in wildlife, wilderness, or habitat in general, just to win your point.
February 26, 2011 at 11:02 PM
No argument needed. Has nothing to do w/ anti/pro wolf. It comes down to money. It’s cheaper to manage wolves through citizens rather than government employees. WS is a huge waste of money and “management” of wolves could be done much cheaper through a bounty system…I WOULD THINK. I don’t know, just would make sense. I love to see wolves in the wild, but I also understand that they should be kept at an acceptable level, so as not to affect rural communities and elk herds.
W/ so many people and so little land, it’s imperative that we as responsible stewards of the land manage it to create as much profit as possible. Of course others see it much differently, and I respect that. It’s just with the massive budget cuts and ever decreasing discretionary spending, we need to make our wild lands and animals as lucrative and attractive as possible to Americans and politicians so they are not affected as much by budget cuts.
February 27, 2011 at 9:13 AM
I agree with most of what you just said, although I think a bounty system is a public relations nightmare, and cheapens the hunting of wolves. I also understand Idaho would like to class the wolf as a “predator,” and not as originally planned as a “big game” animal similar to cougars and bears.
I do feel, however, that most of the pro-wolf people are also those who promote and protect wilderness country, while “most” of the more strident anti-wolf people are also those who promote roading, heavy logging, mining, and other activities that are very detrimental to wildlife in the long run. That is why I feel the extreme anti-wolf side is not a side to align with, if you value wildlife and wilderness.
I do agree that wolves will have to be “managed” through hunting. But, where I part ways with the current administration in Idaho, is that I believe there should be a more reasonable, in my opinion, minimum number of wolves. More of a “middle of the road” number such as Senator Tester had in his previous bill of around 500. I see the 15 pack number, as currently advocated by Idaho government, as not a reasonable compromise.
I do realize they (Idaho government) could argue that the pro-wolf side has not acted in good faith either – constantly going to court. But, I don’t think Otter has, through his rhetoric and actions, given the pro-wolf reason to trust him
February 27, 2011 at 9:36 AM
“W/ so many people and so little land, it’s imperative that we as responsible stewards of the land manage it to create as much profit as possible.”
How arrogant, self-serving, and myopic!“we as responsible stewards of the land “. The only place I ever hear this rationale is from religious zealots who see themselves as above all others as a kind of accepted – self appointed – sense of superiority over any other species. If you can’t see ten feet in front of you because such short-sighted (instant gratification-?) concepts of the here and now over-ride any concern for the future of us all, you’ve got some rude awakenings coming in your direction… I wonder how it will feel, for a non-believer in organized religion like me, when all those right-wing zealots discover that they were wrong. I can hardly wait to see that.
February 27, 2011 at 9:40 AM
Look, WoMo, you’ve been pretty slick for quite a while posing as something you’re not here; but, the data points are adding up and the mask is sliding off your ears and exposing too much of the face underneath.
Let’s look at some of your latest… “Well if the American people’s gene pool is so diluted w/ morons and followers, perhaps we need an upper clash or a Koch to lead us. Seems like a bunch of people that can’t/won’t think for themselves or seek out the truth. They’d rather pop a few xanex (sp) and text on there Iphone, play video games, or eat fast food… We’re on the downward slide in this country, best to get used to it. Don’t fight it just let it happen (It will be easier that way). Truth hurts. We can’t compete w/ the rest of the world when it comes to production of goods/services (we have em’ beat on the consumerism front lol). Start building a bunker in the mountains!” Let’s try another recent sample… “Our country is due for a serious standard of living correction and our GDP is going to continue to decrease. How do you suppose that we as a country continue reparations, entitlements, bloated military, 2 wars, AND environmental protection? One of the first cuts will be the environment…” …and the one above, where you opine that with “so many people and so little land, it’s imperative that we as responsible stewards of the land manage it to create as much profit as possible. Of course others see it much differently, and I respect that. It’s just with the massive budget cuts and ever decreasing discretionary spending, we need to make our wild lands and animals as lucrative and attractive as possible to Americans and politicians so they are not affected as much by budget cuts.”
WoMo, sugar, the stuff above is pure, pure, pure teabagger crap with racist overtones, plain and simple! The only way it could possible be any clearer would be if you started using direct excerpts from some of Josef Goebbels’ old speeches. Look, WoMo, there are lots of websites where we can get a good full dose of your kind of stuff. We really don’t need more of it here and we really don’t need your kind of troll slithering around, masquerading and posing as something you’re not, in some twisted effort to distract, demoralize, and disable the discussion here. IDhiker is correct on every point; he’s just being too polite in dealing with a feral dog.
February 27, 2011 at 9:44 AM
Here, here, mikarooni!!
February 27, 2011 at 9:45 AM
There are a number of individuals, who I have communicated with on other sites, who side with the anti-wolfers, who would be very content with the 500 wolf/ 1500 wolf+ or -, and big game status.
They just want fair management of wolves, but are being driven farther and farther toward the other side.
Wolf Mod, hunting will keep numbers in check, but will not drive the wolf numbers down, initially. Even Mech says this. Most of the wolf hunting would be incidental to elk/deer hunting. Folks just aren’t going to go out looking for wolves.
That said, I’m not in favor of a bounty system because it is more money coming out of state coffers. Any type of season must be centered around fur quality, because folks are not going to eat wolves, and ending when breeding season begins.
Bounties will increase conflict with both pro-wolf folks, and those in between. Some zealot who shoots or snares someone’s dog might have to start looking over their shoulder.
Some folks might disagree with me, but that is fine. I’ve worked, contributed and educated for wolves over the past twenty years.
February 27, 2011 at 10:22 AM
“How arrogant, self-serving, and myopic!“we as responsible stewards of the land “. The only place I ever hear this rationale is from religious zealots who see themselves as above all others as a kind of accepted – self appointed – sense of superiority over any other species. If you can’t see ten feet in front of you because such short-sighted (instant gratification-?”
Salle,
You are so wrong on so many levels and not living in reality. Who wouldn’t want the world to be run like your yes magazine suggests? I WOULD. Is it possible and would it EVER happen? NO. Whatever, you are too extreme and that’s why the country has shifted so far to the right in every way…You people are unable to think reasonably and rationally. That’s a bummer because I’m agnostic and really dislike organized religion. I’m probably more liberal than you on many issues. Only a conservative when it comes to spending and government entitlement programs.
Good day!
February 27, 2011 at 10:30 AM
Mikarooni, your 9:40 post is pretty much the way I’ve been feeling lately due to this bullchit in WI. I stand by everything I said, because it’s true. Also, my views align w/ the tea party on many issues, where we part ways is social issues. I’m for women’s right to choose, gay marriage, etc…
Anywho, you are correct in that I’ve been off topic too much. The crap that is happening is really starting to get to me. Gonna stop posting for a couple months and come back when things calm down lol.
Good Day Mikalooni : )
February 27, 2011 at 10:36 AM
WoMo, if you could actually trouble yourself to actually read AND comprehend some of the writings many of us have been pointing you toward, in order to help you “get it” we wouldn’t be having this argument. But you don’t/won’t/can’t, you just cling with death-grip-like certainty that you have the right idea and that we can’t know what the real world is about because you know better, (by what authority I can only guess at and by not troubling yourself to read anything outside FuxNewsCorp pratter and invective vitriol) then I would argue that you are the only able to face reality. Like my mom used to tell my brother and I when we didn’t want to go outside in the winter to give her some peace for a short spell… “Go outside and blow the stink off…!” Fresh air and acceptance of a different perspective is truly liberating…(oops I used one of those evil “L” words). Sorry you’re so entrenched in your opinions that you can’t even entertain the thought that there might be a more reasonable set of concepts other than your own… Your loss, I guess. I am not extreme, that is one of your sh^*baggers friends’ buzzwerds to try to discredit anyone with another point of view and you use it to the hilt, buddy. Your cover is irreparably blown.
February 27, 2011 at 10:40 AM
“then I would argue that you are the only able to face reality.” I meant: then I would argue that you are the only one unable to face reality. N’est ce pas?
February 27, 2011 at 10:47 AM
wolf moderate, here is a good website for you.
http://www.ehow.com/how_2064125_become-internet-troll.html
February 27, 2011 at 10:47 AM
“N’est ce pas”
Sorry, I do not speak surrender.;)
Good day.
February 27, 2011 at 9:44 AM
Salle, you beat me to the punch and you’re correct; however, it’s not just about religion with old WoMo; it’s a sick combination of religion and racism.
February 27, 2011 at 9:46 AM
I noticed that too. I was trying to confront the trash-talk with reasonable argument but I have discovered that the scales are permanently welded to their eyes, so to speak… and stay within the comment guidelines.
February 27, 2011 at 10:08 AM
This is the Fox News era where anything can be questioned or disproved as long as you can pay that person to say it.
February 27, 2011 at 10:12 AM
This has been a ploy of the far right for decades.
Read Merchants of Doubt by Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway
http://www.amazon.com/Merchants-Doubt-Handful-Scientists-Obscured/dp/1596916109
February 27, 2011 at 10:06 AM
I am still having a hard time figuring out what the SH&^baggers stand for. Your are right on many points- it’s about religion but don’t allow people that don’t have health care to have access to it. It’s about a bottom up movement that is financed by Dick Armey, the KOCHSUCKERS, and Americans for prosperity. It’s about fiscal restraint AFTER the tax cuts for the top 2%. And the kicker is it’s about freedom and limited government as they advocate to strip women of their right to health care services or for regular Americans to have access to clean air and water. The hypocrisy is stunning
February 27, 2011 at 10:23 AM
Check out those articles by Paul Krugman and Michael Parenti that I posted links to. They clarify the issue and what the sh*^baggers are all about and who is behind it all and why. Much shorter than Naomi Klein’s book but on the same topic with more recent proof. The Shock Doctrine was published in 2007 and at the end presents hopeful possibilities for American citizens for taking action… which didn’t happen and may not now that the hour is late and it’s getting cold and dark out there… I recommend the book still as it is the truest historical background for the current state of affairs in this country.