April 28, 2017

We Must Stop Protecting Snowflakes

I was reading this morning of how a Maine legislator had proposed a seat belt law for dogs in passenger cars. The snowflake who proposed the law said he did it at the request of a constituent and removed the proposal at the request of the constituent…WINK-WINK!

Evidently there were two basic reasons for thinking of something so stupid. One was, of course, for the protection of the animal. Big deal. The second was to prohibit dogs from sitting on the laps of drivers as they cruise down the highway at 95 miles an hour, or attempt to manipulate around city traffic when the drivers are so inept at driving they can’t do it safely without a dog sitting on their lap. Perhaps the dog is a better driver. I know they are smarter.

But consider the truth in the matter. Dogs are but an animal…never intended to be as a person, living with a person and doing all person things – let me repeat that – doing all person things. Certainly dogs are not an endangered species. As a matter of fact, 99% of them should be killed and clean up the stinking, rotten messes they leave behind, along with their diseases. So, certainly we don’t need to protect the dogs.

On the other hand, there are the creatures that would choose to have a dog in their car and sitting on their lap. Aside from the risk involved with innocent people being caught up in the dog perversion of an owner not capable of separation anxiety by leaving the nasty thing home, let the dog and owner crash and burn. The man species is in danger of breeding itself into oblivion.

Cruel? Yes, but perhaps – but I doubt it – people might begin to understand how sick and perverted they are when it comes to their pets. Naw! What am I thinking. All they will think is how terrible I am to suggest such a thing and that I die from a million dog bites.

I walk alone.

More Fascistic Wildlife “Management” Rooted in Environmentalism

Here’s but one more glaring example of how wildlife biologists and managers of today are representing their “EnvironMENTALism” mind controled and manipulated educations.

Maine stupidly introduced Canada geese to Maine for various reasons (at a time when the world was overrun by Canada geese), including to provide more geese hunting opportunities for both of the goose hunters. Did you catch that? Now, the geese are nasty nuisances but few understand that. Many people feed them as pets – an extension of our perverted, mentally deranged society of animal lovers.

But not everyone wants the nasty things around and on their property. There’s very little that they can do about it, because, evidently, they are king’s geese on the king’s land. Sorry, you thought that was your land? You thought you had rights to protect your property and preserve your health? Think again.

Consider what George Smith wrote in the Kennebec Journal today. He was explaining how difficult it has become to do what was once a very simple thing – get the damned geese off your property, or any other unwanted nuisance critter of destruction and disease.

“USDA biologist Ben Nugent said that you can’t shoot problem geese until you get a depredation permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and they would require you to take many other steps before giving you a chance to shoot the nuisance geese. “It takes years before we give permission to shoot them,” said Ben, in response to one of my questions.

We were told at that seminar: “Response must be planned, consistent, persistent, and utilize multiple techniques including habitat modification to have any lasting effect.” Yes, they are talking about ripping out your lawn and planting shrubs that will discourage geese from coming ashore.

You might question why all of this is necessary to shoot a goose in June, while we can shoot 10 of them a day in September. Good question!”

This is but a clear example of misappropriated reasoning – or perhaps an absence thereof. The Government forces itself onto people, often disguised as something that will benefit the people. Since when did the Government ever do anything for the benefit of the people?

As is typical of fascist government, once the people have been forced to accept their “GI” geese (wolves, coyotes, lions, bears, delta smelt, piping plovers, bats, loons, Canada lynx, etc.) the people have no recourse in solving the problems the Government created. Is any of this coming through as new information to you?

Now, with geese shitting all over your property, creating safety and health issues, your only recourse is to add more shackles and chains to the ones you have already agreed to wear, and pay out the money to erect props, mirrors and smoker machines, designed and perpetuated by the EnvironMENTALists to protect THEIR animals (at your expense), when in the end, there will always be a goose turd problem, a coyote problem, a lynx problem, a bat problem, etc.

So, keep voting in these mentally deranged, corrupted, officials and nothing will every change. All that ever changes is the rhetoric of promises. BUT YOU BELIEVE! YOU WANT TO BELIEVE! YOU MUST BECOME A TRUE BELIEVER!

It’s a simple solution to a government-caused problem, but because the Government is control by EnvironMENTALism, because wildlife managers are controlled by EnvironMENTALism, because governments hate people, because governments hate your freedom, because governments hate your independence, because governments must always be in control, screw your safety and health, screw your loss of property, screw your loss of income, screw it all because ANIMALS MATTER more than you do.

You created this mess, now you got to fix it. The insanity comes from using the same rigged and faulty system that got you into the mess to begin with, thinking this time it can be corrected.

And of course I must end this in the best way I know how:

BUT DON’T GO LOOK!

Reducing bison population key to saving Yellowstone’s Northern Range

*Editor’s Note* – Gee, I thought Nature balanced itself out? Somebody must be wrong and then again, maybe not. Is there any such thing anymore of approaching “sustainability” as what benefits man, or is it now all about what benefits everything but man? According to ignorant-of-history environmentalists, bison, elk, deer, moose, lions, bears and representatives of Black Lives Matter roamed the West in numbers too big to ignore. Evidently, when convenient, these Nirvanic populations of wild animals didn’t eat nor did they “overgraze” the Northern Range of what would become America’s idealistic zoo. DON’T GO LOOK! at what historically took place back then. There’s more money and emotional clap-trap fun to make shit up.

Wolf lovers, all of whom are ignorant environmentalists, say that wolves kill, thin, chase away – whatever is a convenient narrative – elk and provide a Disneyesque landscape of regenerated vegetation where all animals of the forest can gather and sing Kumbaya. And for god’s sake, let’s not forget that wolves change the paths of streams, cured polio…and, and, and…if there were enough wolves, and now bison, we could toss Trump out of the White House before he gets in there. All adds up to the same amount of nonsense.

According to the environmentalist, man should be removed from the equation of our fake “ecosystems.” Well, until it fits one of their convenient narratives – say some place like Isle Royale, where environmentalists don’t want humans going on that island, keeping it a “wilderness”…with the exception, of course, of the environmentalists who want it as their private sex-with-animals, playground, in which mentally deficient animal perverts like the head of the Humane Society of the United States says, it changed him forever. KUMBAYA! KUMBAYA! KUMBAYA!

So, which will it be? Are we going to rid the landscape of those over-grazers or let the predator animals create the same kind of landscape environmentalists want for their fellow man…of which they, somehow, magically think they are exempt from. I’ve never quite figured that out.

Man could just step away from wildlife management but nobody would like the outcome, unless you’re a bear or wolf, until such time as you must eat your own family to survive.

Why not solve the so-perceived wildlife management problems by striking a sensible (nobody in this world, any longer knows what that means) man-created “balance” that first, is in the best interest to sustain a population of men, and secondly, is beneficial to wild animals by doing reasonably, responsible things for the animal and not things detrimental to man’s rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of sovereignty (happiness).

I didn’t think so!

There is no end to the madness. I always thought that environmentalists want their cake and eat it too. It has taken a few years, but now I get it. They are too stupid to even recognize a cake. They just want.

“George Wuerthner’s recent (Dec. 20) guest column “Save Yellowstone bison from slaughter,” complaining about population control of Yellowstone National Park bison, fails to recognize one of the most significant conservation issues in the West – overgrazing of Yellowstone’s magnificent Northern Range. Severe, prolonged overgrazing of the Northern Range in Yellowstone National Park by elk since the 1920s and now by bison has, and is still, significantly degrading the land. Bison conservation and recovery of free-ranging populations are very important, but no single species’ needs outweigh the obligation to protect the land (soil-water-vegetation), the basic units of conservation for all life on our planet.”<<<Read More>>>

INSANITY: Far Beyond Being Responsible for Animal Welfare

“The panelists praise wolves for their adaptability: Their plump paws are perfect snowshoes in winter, and their lean, aerodynamic bodies help them run as fast as 40 mph and cover hundreds of miles across a variety of terrain. Suzanne Stone, a biologist with Defenders of Wildlife, points to the audience and asks, “Can I use you as guinea pigs?” She arranges volunteers into a pack structure. A zoo staff member in a khaki shirt holds his hand up high, like the pack’s strong alpha male holds his tail, while a woman with dyed purple hair hunches and folds her arms inward—a vulnerable pup. A woman in a brown cardigan takes the role of a beta female, which Stone likens to “middle management,” helping baby-sit pups while other adults seek food. As the pups grow, they branch out, going through a lone wolf period before eventually forming new packs.”<<<Read More>>>

Getting Your Face Ate Off

*Editor’s Note* – I have always referred to the American culture, when it comes to animals, as perverse, for surely it is. Yesterday, I spotted, what has become a common expression of animal perversion within our culture, a woman walking down the street pushing her dog, dressed like a little girl, in a child’s stroller. I remember the first time I saw such a thing. I, and others, thought it very strange. However, today, it’s just a common thing. I turned to my brother and said, “I’m willing to wager that if that woman had children, they didn’t get treated so well.” Perhaps I was being a bit unfair, but hopefully you get my point.
I think Jonah Goldberg hits the perversion nail on the head in his recent article about bear propaganda…as his wife calls it. I might add to his observation that the nonsense isn’t relegated to movies. It’s become an ingrained part of our everyday and it’s sick. Yes, it does tell those of us willing to make an honest evaluation, a great deal about ourselves. But, then again, there are none so blind as he who will not see.
I’m also reminded of a book I read some time ago about Thomas Jefferson – The Young Jefferson – 1743 – 1789, by Claude G. Bowers, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston – 1945. Jefferson spent a great deal of time in Paris, France. His purpose was to find trading partners, as many of those in Great Britain, after the war, were no longer interested in trading with the United States. It was written that Jefferson often employed a certain routine prior to making personal contacts within a village he might be seeking trade with. He would climb to the highest point overlooking the town – often a church steeple. After attempting to get a “sense” of what was before him, he would stroll around the village getting an even greater sense of what the village and the people were about. It is written that if he observed many people about with their dogs,  perhaps not pushing them in strollers, but something equivalent for the period, he refused to enter into business with any representative of the town, declaring them to be of “unreliable character.” Perhaps Jefferson was a more brilliant man than we thought. Certainly an expert on human behavior.
“Many of these movies treat humans as the enemy — cruel, careless despoilers of the environment — while at the same time telling us that the highest compliment we can pay to animals is to assume they’re just like us. These movies tell us virtually nothing about animals but a great deal about ourselves.”<<<Read More>>>

obamaridingpolarbear

Doggie Hocus-Pocus: They Use Their Brains “Just Like Humans”

*Editor’s Note* – I picked the below “teaser” to prove just one point about the utter nonsense of what is written in the article linked to. First, tell me that a dog can be “trained” to lay in an MRI machine for 7 minutes, without moving, and listen to their “master” say words to them in order to measure brain waves. Okay. But the real kicker here is that this study, “has not been analyzed this way elsewhere.” New Science Scientism. They took John Kerry’s and the Aspen Institute’s advice and “created new knowledge.”

This B.S. is nothing more than a perpetuation of a sickness, inflicting Americans mostly, of animal perversion – the notion that animals have rights and should be treated equal to, or better than, man. It’s insanity! 

Dogs can be lots of fun and great companions, as well as a tool. They are not created in the image of God nor where they given the gift of salvation. Christ did not die on the Cross for a dog, especially one that can lay in an MRI machine for 7 minutes….without moving.

And they do it in a way that is similar to how it is done in the human brain,” he said, adding that the research was unique because how animals process human speech has not been analyzed this way elsewhere. (emboldening added)<<<Read More>>>

DogToSchool

Animal Perversion Prevalent Everywhere

I know I anger a lot of people when I expose their perversion toward animals. It’s one thing to have a pet, and yet it’s quite another when animal worship rises to a level of placing the welfare of ANY animal above, or equal to, that of man. Here’s two more examples.

Some time ago, New Jersey reported on a black bear that, due to some kind of malformation, has adjusted and has learned to walk on his rear legs. The bear has been nicknamed, Pedals. As would probably be expected, people got a kick out of seeing the bear getting about walking upright.

However, this seemingly has set off a firestorm from the animal perverts, demanding the bear be moved to a “wildlife sanctuary” and cared for – likening the event to that of a person in a wheelchair needing special attention. In addition, a petition has been circulated, supposedly collecting over 300,000 signatures to move the bear to a sanctuary “before it gets hurt” by a “human with a gun.”

Wildlife officials have repeatedly attempted to tell the brain deficient public that the bear is healthy and has adjusted to his handicap fine. But that never satisfies an animal pervert. The perverts have raised $25,000 for a “new enclosure” insisting the bear be institutionalized.

These kinds of people are quick to raise money for something this perverse and are first in line to throw the humans out, stealing their livelihoods and running them off their own property.

*****

Second is a story so bizarre, it can’t be made up. A woman driver in the Houston, Texas area, stopped her car in the middle of the multi-lane freeway, blocking traffic, endangering the lives of hundreds of other people, say nothing about risking her own life. She left her car, ended up crossing the center Jersey barrier, walking out into speeding traffic, during a busy rush time, in order to rescue a cat. She zigged and zagged in and out of traffic, not concerned if the traffic would run her over. Only intent on saving the cat.

Witnesses said the woman was completely oblivious to her surroundings and the danger and peril she was putting other people in. Her disturbed mind was intent on saving a damned cat while she and many others could have been killed or injured. But that would not have mattered to an animal pervert. If hundreds of people had died, saving the cat would have been worth.

Too many humans. Never enough animals.

SICK!

Is There Outrage? Man Kills Bear With a Spear

I realize the risk I am taking by even attempting to point out the obvious, emotional clap-trap and hypocrisy showing its ugly side from both “hunters” and “animal rights” people.

I found on Drudge, a link to an article about how both hunters and environmentalists are “outraged” over a person, whom they call a “hunter” who filmed his act of hunting a bear over a pile of bait, manipulating himself to get close enough to throw a spear (labeled “home made” in the article) at and kill a black bear. The hunt took place in Canada; legally I am presuming.

What of that so-called outrage?

First, let me write from a position of transparency. I have hunted for close to 55 years. I’ve never shot a bear. Never wanted to shoot a bear. Never hunted specifically for bear. I’ve never hunted over bait, but I understand when game management makes adjustments to hunting techniques in order to achieve game management goals. I’ve never hunted on a hunting ranch, behind fences, nor do I have any desire to do so. I hunt for the enjoyment and I kill to eat.

If we take a closer look at the nonsense of the article, with an open mind, perhaps rationality can make a bit more sense of what took place. The article epitomizes the emotional nonsense often associated with acts of hunting or killing animals. This is only understood when we examine that those who emote the so-called outrage, do so from the perspective that animals are like men in all senses of the definition, i.e. that it has feelings, understands and experiences human traits such as suffering, agony, pain, diminution of pride, experiences humiliation, understands respect, etc.

If this is a person’s mindset about animals, there is little hope that any sense of understanding can be gained or taught. And this is what the news article does. In addition, Drudge, obviously more interested in getting his website traffic higher, publishes this clap-trap nonsense hoping to embellish the event regardless of any truth.

It would only be right to take a look at the “hunter” in this case. From the article, we discover he was a former athlete – a javelin thrower in college. Presently he evidently owns a “fitness company” and is described in the article as a “bodybuilder” and “fitness fanatic.” Does this fact alone give understanding as to how a person of this background, an obvious narcissist, as I believe all bodybuilders must be, would go out of his way to film the event (mostly of himself) and then react the way he did. Perhaps his biggest wrong in this entire event was that he filmed it and put it up on YouTube before giving it much thought to his self-centered reactions, etc.

Upon examination of the article, obviously a one-sided diatribe of emotional, value-laced idiocy, it’s clear to see that no rational thought was put into it. Here’s a grocery list of the terms and adjectives used in this article to describe the hunt, the hunted, and the hunter:

Bloodthirsty; disturbing; sick; slaughtering; slow and painful; poor animal; intestines pour out of its stomach; fitness fanatic; cruel; cheap act; colossal beast; disgusting; mindless jackass; shameless stunt; demean the animal; shameful spectacle of pseudo bravado; pure selfish bloodlust; heartlessly slaughtered for fun; desire for a thrill; expense of innocent life.

Of course all descriptions of the event are value-weighted, which really means nothing to anyone except those offering their perspective of their ideology and theories about animals. Not that it matters to anyone else, but the first time I clicked on the news article, I had to sit through about 20 seconds of an advertisement about MTV. From my perspective, what goes on regularly on MTV is as disgusting, perhaps more so, than the killing of this bear and filming it. MTV, one of the great promoters of social decadence, immorality, violence, homosexuality, racism, bigotry, sexism, hatred, drug and alcohol use and abuse, introduces the article in which we are left to understand that what MTV promotes is acceptable behavior, at least by the newspaper, and what happens in a video of a bear hunt is not. It seems to me this society has things quite mixed up.

The article says, but provides no links to substantiate, that a “hunter” from a “popular” US hunting website finds the video “disgusting.” Supposedly, the hunter claims this act of spearing a bear “demeans” the bear and then he chastises the hunter demanding he “show some respect for the animal.” Seriously, with a straight face, can you “demean” a bear? And can a bear recognize the actions of this hunter as being disrespectful? This supposed same hunter is quoted as saying, “If you want to take an animal humanely (which you obviously could care less about) then shoot it with a rifle.” What I would like to know is how, specifically taking an animal with a rifle, is more humane than with a spear? But, first, define “humane.” Humane is of or pertaining to human traits. Humans have a brain that offers them the ability to place values on certain actions and reactions of persons. Animals do not. Sorry if I’ve startled anyone here.

This hunter, said to have left a comment on the hunting website, and other environmentalists, think it’s wrong that the hunter, shows happy and excitable emotions after killing the bear. If hunters want to think of this act, whether it’s the method of kill or the reactions of the hunter, as something we have trouble with, then is it because for so many years we have come to accept the televised hunting shows of killing wild game, and hunters showing excitement and happiness over their kill, and this is somehow different? Oh, yes. Lest I forget. Film editing has managed to remove the “disgusting” and “inhumane” events that go on during the filming of an “ethical” and “humane” hunt for enjoyment and a “trophy.”

We are left with making up our minds as to who is lying and who is not in the article. The author of the article says the guides went back the next day to locate the bear. The environmentalists say the bear “MIGHT” have suffered for 20 hours or more. The hunter said it was a clean, ethical kill, that the bear went 60 yards and dropped dead. Well, which was it and does it really matter?

Assuming the entire hunt was legal, then what’s the big deal. All animal worshipers react emotionally to hunting and trapping. It’s what they do! This is nothing new. I don’t understand the need to film every act that people do and plaster it all over the Internet; in this case a bear hunt. But, then again, I don’t understand the need of people who react the way they do to films of hunting, to watch the videos and agonize over them. Making the videos and watching them in agony – there is something quite perverse in both events.

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

 

Cecilmania, Madness, Perversion and Hypocrisy

This is all part of the insanity of the American Society. And what’s worse is nobody realizes what they are doing. After reading the Pope’s Encyclical on Climate Change, it is no wonder the world advocates more compassionately for the welfare of animals over the welfare of people. The Pope blames “human beings” for everything and claims the Bible mandates that we protect animals over the cost of the well-being of Mankind. Sick!

‘What lion?’ Zimbabweans ask, amid global Cecil circus

Gawker reports that Cecil the Lion’s brother was also a lion. Unbelievable isn’t it? Who would have guessed that a brother to a lion would have been another lion. However, the same report states, “…Cecil the lion’s brother Jericho, who is also a lion,” News for the author of this report. A lion is NOT a WHO. It’s an it.
Researcher Disputes CNN’s Report on Death of Cecil the Lion’s Brother

Cecil and Cecile: Humaneness, but Not for the Human

Who’s Really Responsible for the Killing of Zimbabwe’s Lions and Other Wildlife?

CecilFetuses

Candice Swanepoel blasts Cecil the lion’s killer Dr Walter Palmer – Limbaugh Weighs in

upsidebackwards2
 

Death threats have been sent to the American dentist who killed Cecil the lion in Zimbabwe earlier this month amid growing anger over the protected animal’s slaughter.

Tributes to the butchered lion have poured in thousands of miles away at Dr Walter Palmer’s office in Bloomington, Minnesota, where protesters dressed as ‘dentist hunters’ also threw stuffed lions at his house.

Source: Candice Swanepoel blasts Cecil the lion’s killer Dr Walter Palmer | Daily Mail Online

Limbaugh: We Cry Over the Death of Cecil the Lion, But Shrug Off Planned Parenthood?

But how in the world can you get teary-eyed and misty-eyed and sad over Cecil and, at the same time, participate in burying what’s happening at Planned Parenthood?

Readers must understand that Limbaugh is an animal pervert. He reveals that when he says, My own cat was disappointed when she found out Cecil was killed.  All animals are worried about this.  Understand that. “

Are you kidding me? Limbaugh, who has given generously in the past to The Humane Society of the United States, thinks that animals sit around and worry about events such as the killing of a lion. Anyone who actually thinks that has something seriously wrong in their head.

But we live in a society that is really screwed up. Everything is upside-down and backwards. Limbaugh’s point that it is considered routine to murder unborn babies and sell the parts, should be well-taken. But it is not.