Not only this, but she is pushing so hard to open up the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge to drilling for oil, as well as suing the Department of U.S. Fish and Wildlife to take the polar bear off of the endangered species list. What?Her policies on the environment, civil rights, and women’s reproductive rights are something every male member of the Taliban would be happy to support if she wasn’t a woman.
more about "Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund: Vi…", posted with vodpod
The bounty on wolves claim is political mis-information to try to smear Gov. Palin. No matter what your politics, it’s not fair to anyone to allow lies about either side to circulate on the net. I researched this claim on the Alaska Legislature site and submitted it to Snopes.com.
If you look at the official Alaska site, the bounty was proposed by the Alaska Dept of Fish & Game (not Gov. Palin) to be used within a certain remote area where the wolves were decimating the caribou and moose herds as a means to protect help protect the herds. The wolves in this area are overpopulated and each spring during calving season they are killing off most of the newborn calves, homing in on them by the scent of blood. The wolves not only endanger the prey species in the area, but are invested with lice due to overpopulation. Wolves are difficult and expensive to control in this part of Alaska, so the bounty was proposed to help offset some of the expense. The proposal was never implemented. Bounties were historically paid to entice people to help control Wolves but they were ended in the 1970’s. It is also notable that they do not issue “hunting licenses” for wolves only “control permits” because the sportsmen have no interest in them and they are not used for food. There are also some areas in Alaska where wolves cannot be killed at all because there is no threat to other wildlife.
While I am an avid animal lover and wildlife conservationist, I also realize there will always be hunting. Some areas of the country depend on hunting for a good portion of their food. Alaska has a long history of shooting wolves from low flying aircraft in the most remote areas (not everywhere). I am not advocating nor condemning this method because I understand the argument from both sides. Shooting from low flying aircraft is not something people do for “fun”. They must remove the door from the plane and fly in sub-zero temperatures during winter months when the wolves can be tracked. The wildlife management reports I read, indicated that “wound & injure rates were very low” and they reported wound & injure rates associated with other hunting methods as well. The report also states one of the main reasons for collecting the forelegs is to ensure that animals are actually killed not just wounded. I think law makers have a responsibility to make and enforce laws that require humane hunting practices. As I read the 144 pages of the report I was impressed at the amount of thoughtful study and detailed information that it contained and that they actually are concerned with “wound & injure” rates, lice etc. – and that they outlawed shooting of wolves in areas where they are not a threat. I’m not saying they are perfect or can’t be improved upon, but I don’t believe this is as big an issue as some are trying to “spin” it to be.
I’m not sure what Mr. Obama’s position on killing wolves (or any other wildlife) is. However I do know he is personally responsible for blocking a bill that would have allowed doctors to give medical treatment to babies born alive after botched abortions. He listened to personal testimony from nurses who were only allowed to hold these babies for their short lives and watch them inhumanly suffer and fade away which often takes hours. Obama personally blocked the state bill even after wording was changed be the same as the Federal Bill which passed the US Senate unopposed (Both Hillary & Kerry voted in favor of the bill). I cannot vote for someone who has that little regard for human life. I also cannot imagine that someone who is not concerned with the humane treatment of newborn babies would somehow be concerned with humane treatment of animals.
Here are links to the full congressional testimony of some of these nurses- no spin added.
http://nobamanews.blogspot.com/2008/07/jill-staneks-full-testimony_05.html
http://nobamanews.blogspot.com/2008/07/allison-bakers-full-testimony.html
the federal law – no spin added
http://www.nrlc.org/ObamaBAIPA/BAIPAFederal.pdf
Jill Stanek is the nurse who took this issue to her state legislature. This is the link to her full report in Citizen Link (non-partisan)
(Yes, she does have an agenda too – she is pro-life, however her objective in this case was only to fight for babies born alive – not to fight all abortion.)
http://www.citizenlink.org/content/A000007034.cfm#
Hi Animal Over-
You are totally entitled to your own ideals. Go for it, support what you support. My opinion on abortion is a cloudy one. I can’t really put my finger on how I feel about it. At first blush I would say it isn’t in my personal capacity, but I’ve never been impregnated by rape, a victim of incest or in a position of a major health risk due to pregnancy.
It really confuses me how one can decide it is not okay to perform abortion on a fetus that has not yet made an impact in the world beyond the small circle of its family, and then at the same time support a war that not only kills our own adult men and women who have long and short bios, but bios none-the-less, and also thousands and thousands of men women and children in other countries. Where is the rationality in that? Isn’t this the mentality of Sarah Palin?
Here are a few links a friend of mine sent me to help me understand why anyone in this day and age would support conflicted politics…
” I thought this was kind of interesting:
http://edge.org/3rd_culture/haidt08/haidt08_index.html
I found it while read this, which was scary:
http://warner.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/11/no-laughing-matter/?em “
Thanks for sharing the video here. It speaks for itself rather well.
I will note that the idea that taking out top predators is helpful to prey species has long been scientifically discredited. Taking out top predators disrupts the entire ecosystem, including the few particular species (some) people like to hunt.
That a blog called “noobamanews” is considered a useful information reference by the pro-Palin commentor “animallover2″ says more to me than anything in the long dubious run of words he uses.
I followed at one of those links, and found lots of classic, disorted, disturbing antiabortion material – but very little about aerial hunting of wolves…