Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

MSNBC host: Why isn’t Carlson calling for Palin’s execution?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 12:47 PM
Original message
MSNBC host: Why isn’t Carlson calling for Palin’s execution?
MSNBC host: Why isn’t Carlson calling for Palin’s execution?

By David Edwards
Thursday, December 30th, 2010 -- 12:30 pm


MSNBC's Cenk Uygur wondered Wednesday why Fox News' Tucker Carlson didn't call for Sarah Palin to be executed after she killed a defenseless caribou.

After all, Carlson had proclaimed Tuesday that NFL quarterback Michael Vick should have been given the death penalty for killing dogs.

"Now, I'm a Christian," Carlson announced, while filling in for Fox News' Republican commentator Sean Hannity. "I've made mistakes myself. I believe fervently in second chances but Michael Vick killed dogs and he did it in a heartless and cruel way and I think, personally, he should have been executed for that."

Carlson had become outraged because President Barack Obama praised Eagles owner Jeffrey Lurie for giving Vick a second chance.

more (plus video):
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/msnbc-host-carlson-calling-palins-execution/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
meegbear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 12:50 PM
Response to Original message
1. Oh SNAP!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fleshdancer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 12:55 PM
Response to Original message
2. I don't like equating hunting with torture...
What Vick did pales in comparison with Palin hunting her own food...assuming she does eat what she shoots of course. The footage of her beating the fish may be a better comparison.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Motown_Johnny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 01:00 PM
Response to Original message
3. false equivalency strikes again, hunting isn't illegal
not that I am defending Palin or hunting, just pointing out how this argument doesn't make any sense at all
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snappyturtle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. I saw the sesgment and think that Cenk's common link between the two
examples, is that the animals in both cases were defenseless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Motown_Johnny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. I am not defending hunting, nor do I defend calling for someone's death
but the laws are different therefore the outrage is different



change the laws and then we can talk about an equivalence
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluerthanblue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. not sure the dogs OR the caribou really care about man's laws-
and just because something is 'legal' doesn't mean it's moral.

Fred Phelps is a good example of the truth of this.

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phleshdef Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #3
10. No. Animal cruelty is not legally punishable by death either.
So in that sense, its not a false equivalency. We don't impose the death penalty on people for animal cruelty just like and we don't impose any sentence on people for hunting because, its, well, legal. In both cases, there is a commonality that the act isn't punishable by death. Tucker Carlson is saying that one cruel act against animals should merit the death penalty while being completely silent this other cruel act against animals, legal or not legal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
closeupready Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. Bingo. Many parts of our legal code do NOT reflect common values; rather,
Edited on Thu Dec-30-10 02:52 PM by closeupready
many laws are nothing more than, for example, favors to special interests. Violating such a law could not always be said to be outrageous if it's a cruel one, or if it's one that is contrary to bigger constitutional values.

Similarly, hunting may be perfectly legal, but that doesn't mean the animal doesn't experience pain and suffering, and it doesn't mean that it's not outrageous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bandit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 05:16 PM
Response to Reply #10
23. Hell we don't even find anything wrong with torturing people.
:shrug: there is no longer any lines to be drawn IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UTUSN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 01:12 PM
Response to Original message
7. K&R #7 for, bwah-ha-HAH !1 n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 01:26 PM
Response to Original message
8. Many people in Alaska hunt game for meat ...
Here in north Florida deer and feral hog hunting are very common.

In my opinion, I like the taste of wild game better than the crappy meat that's loaded with chemicals that you buy at the supermarket.

I understand that many people who go to the grocery store have little or no understanding of the process that created the nice clean plastic wrapped package of meat that they place into their shopping cart. I understand that some of these people view hunting as the murder of poor defenseless creatures.

To submit that a hunter commits a crime when he shoots a caribou, a deer or a feral hog leads me to wonder if perhaps Governor Rendell of Pennsylvania was right when he suggested that "We've become a nation of wusses."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kctim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. There is no 'perhaps' about it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sonoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #8
13. That cow was baited.
No doubt.

That woman is no shot, either. And the caribou never even flinched.

That woman wasn't hunting, she was shooting. And doing a piss-poor job of it at that.

What a fucking joke. She might as well have been shooting at a Holstein in a pen. While it was feeding.

Sonoman
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 02:46 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. If I remember the episode ...
it appeared that the rifle was not sighted in correctly.

I personally believe that if you are hunting you should have taken the time to insure that your firearm is accurate. In order to do this, you should take the rifle to a range and spend some time practicing. It is possible that the rifle's sights were knocked way out of alignment on the way to the hunt.

I don't believe that the rifle was Sarah's personal weapon. I would find it difficult to trust a rifle sighted in for another person as accurate for my use. There's far too many variables such as difference in how one person holds the rifle compared to another person to allow me to try a shot that might injure and cause suffering to an animal rather than a clean kill.

The cow could have been baited. I wouldn't put that past a TV production crew looking to film an "exciting" episode. I understand that baiting is allowed in Alaska when hunting black bear. Still, assuming that baiting caribou is illegal, Palin would have taken a serious risk to her future political chances had she knowingly allowed this tactic to be employed.


Using bait to hunt black bears in Alaska has become a contentious issue, and this November voters statewide will weigh in on the debate. Some people believe that attracting black bears to bait stations is acceptable, sporting and fair, and allows hunters to be selective and humane. Others believe that attracting bears to bait stations is not appropriate and violates fair chase ethic.

***snip***

As a hunter education instructor, Payer is aware that the baiting issue is controversial, and has discussed bait hunting with many other hunters. “Some guys have questioned whether or not it is fair to attract bears to a food source, but think nothing of hunting over a wolf-killed moose carcass, or taking a 500-yard shot at a sheep. I think using bait is as fair as what they do.”
http://www.wildlifenews.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=wildlife_news.view_article&articles_id=85&issue_id=20


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sonoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #14
30. No real hunter would use someone else's rifle without...
sighting it in. Especially on camera, for goodness' sake.

She is a fake and a fool.

Sonoman
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HardWorkingDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #13
18. What gets me is....real hunters seem blank of her kill, too....
I would have thought many would have hammered her for her manufactured kill.

Hell, they laud a man who shoots another in the face, then stay silent on this and then ridicule when Kerry was photographed hunting while wearing his orange protective gear.

Makes no sense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 05:16 PM
Response to Reply #18
24. Most of the hunters I knew, thought Cheney was at fault ...
and were very critical of him.

The hunting episode on Palin's TV program was obviously manufactured but she may well have done a lot of hunting in the past with her father. Hunting is very common in Alaska.

To be honest, Sarah really didn't strike me as much of an experienced hunter. She just probably went hunting with her dad and took an occasional shot.

During a Christmas dinner in 2008, I was talking to a 14 year old girl who had just shot her first deer while hunting with her dad. This is probably similar to Sarah's experience. She took the shot, but the truly experienced hunter was right there to back her up.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
walldude Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #8
20. True, and they should.
But if you believe that that "made for TV kill" was "hunting for food" I have a bridge to nowhere to sell you. It wasn't a crime. But it wasn't hunting either. It was a fucking asshole showing off for her buddies down at the lodge.

And yes we are a nation of wussies, and the biggest ones are the ones who hunt for sport, who go out and pit their great hunting skills against a stupid deer so they can hang a trophy on their wall. Those people are wussies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #20
25. I believe the incident was "made for TV" hunting ...
Edited on Thu Dec-30-10 05:42 PM by spin
but I have no doubt that many people in Alaska hunt for food.

I also believe that Palin's father is a real hunter and shot game for his family while Sarah was growing up. She probably tagged along and occasionally shot an animal.

It did appear that the caribou ended up in a freezer. I'm sure the Palins can currently afford store bought meat but many people prefer the taste of wild game.

edited for spelling
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jeff47 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 04:57 PM
Response to Reply #8
22. Perhaps you should have your sarcasm meter checked
Clearly, the original post was about the hypocrisy where one famous person killing an animal should result in a death sentence, where another person killing an animal should be celebrated. The story is about Carlson, not hunting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #22
27. A few of the replies were anti-hunting ...
It always strikes me as hypocritical to oppose hunting for food if you eat meat produced for sale in grocery stores.

None of the posters who opposed hunting mentioned that they were vegetarian. I will give a vegetarian a break. Anyone else who enjoys store bought meat but despises hunting deserves a healthy dose of sarcasm.

Strangely enough, I am not a hunter.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
butterfly77 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 01:28 PM
Response to Original message
9. Lol...
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kctim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 01:41 PM
Response to Original message
12. Even bigger idiot than Carlson
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truebrit71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 02:55 PM
Response to Original message
16. Bad example. Caribou are food. Better example is her allowing the slaughter of wolves from the air..
..now THAT is heartless and cruel...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 03:07 PM
Response to Original message
17. Because he's just a clown.
Edited on Thu Dec-30-10 03:09 PM by Marr
His words have about as much meaning as Ronald McDonald's.

He said what he said about Vick because of Obama's comments on the subject, that's all. Tucker Carlson and all the people like him are just media clowns, doing whatever they think will get them some attention from their chosen audience. Lots of noise, zero meaning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ramulux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 04:08 PM
Response to Original message
19. I love how we think we are so much better than caribou
Its funny listening to supposedly liberal people talk about how caribou are just food and that we as humans have a right to do whatever we want with them because we are so superior. Seriously, what is the real difference between killing a caribou and a dog? If Michael Vick ate all the dogs that he killed would no one have a problem with it? This idea that as long as you eat it, it is fine to kill it is so twisted and primitive. I dont know, I think there is just a real difference between wild animals that have spent their entire lives in the wild and have families and retarded, genetically engineered animals bred to be eaten who can barely move, live 6 months, and are born and bred to be eaten. Hunting is sadistic as fuck, I dont care whether you eat it or not, you are killing a wild animal that you had no right to kill. If we are going to eat meat we should eat the meat of animals that are bred for that purpose and have no understanding of what life is like in the wild, not animals that have experienced life, not harmed anyone, and have minded their own business.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 08:07 PM
Response to Reply #19
29. So it's fine to cause animals to suffer while they are being raised ...
as food to be eaten. It's OK to genetically modify such animals so as to increase the amount of meat you will harvest. It's a good idea to load these animals up with chemicals and steroids which end up poisoning our bodies.

But animals in the wild are sacrosanct. They should live their lives without any fear of mankind.

The sad part is that because we have eliminated many of the natural predators, the beautiful wild and free life that you imagine for animals in the wild is all too often a difficult life ending in starvation.

Hunting is a method of controlling herd size. Let's consider hunting deer in the continuous United States.


General Deer Population Facts

Population History

In the early 1900's there were an estimated 500,000 white-tailed deer in the United States. Unregulated commercial hunting and subsistence hunting threatened to eliminate the white-tailed deer from much of its range. At that time, many state wildlife agencies were formed with the goal of conserving the nation's depleted wildlife resources. Hunting regulations were put into place, and the harvest of antlerless (female) deer was prohibited. The rebound of white-tailed deer populations that followed is considered a wildlife management success story. Today there are over 20 million deer in the United States and numbers are rising. Successful management was one of the keys to increasing populations. However, other key factors have contributed as well. Around the turn of the century, large predators such as wolves and mountain lions, were eliminated from much of the white-tails range, removing the natural check on deer numbers. More recently, habitat changes, including reversion of abandoned farm fields to forest, and human population shifts to rural and suburban areas, have created mosaics of open and forested land ideal for deer. In addition to habitat changes, landowner decisions to prevent hunting have limited hunter access to many areas, allowing populations to increase. 

Public Concerns

Deer are very charismatic animals, and many people in New York enjoy seeing, watching, photographing, or hunting deer. Although a highly valued species, the white-tailed deer has reached record population levels in many states and will continue to grow. Densitites may exceed 40 deer per square mile in some rural areas, and over 100 deer/square mile have been documented near many eastern metropolitan areas. Overall, public attitudes toward deer are becoming more negative as deer populations increase (Swihart and DeNicola, 1997). Public concerns include crop damage, damage to landscape plants, deer/car collisions, transmission of Lyme Disease, and effects of high deer populations on habitat quality for both deer and other wildlife species. 

The Challenge

Many communities are facing the challenge of managing locally-overabundant deer herds in areas closed to hunting. Fencing and repellents can help manage site-specific problems, however these methods may just move deer and potential damage to other locations. As long as adequate food resources are available, deer populations can double in size every 2-3 years. Eventually some form of population management is needed to control herd growth and maintain deer numbers within the social carrying capacity.
http://wildlifecontrol.info/deer/pages/deerpopulationfacts.aspx



An Integrated Approach To Deer Damage Control

The white-tailed deer is West Virginia's most popular game animal with 343 thousand hunters harvesting over 175 thousand deer annually. As deer numbers have increased, damage problems to farms and gardens have also increased. Deer have high nutritional requirements and can be very destructive; however, deer damage is a natural hazard of the farming profession and should be considered analogous to insect and disease problems. Therefore, an integrated management strategy (Figure 1) is often necessary for solving the problem.

***snip***

It has been estimated that in the United States deer damaged a total of $100 million of agricultural crops, $750 million of forest regeneration, and $1 billion in deer vehicle accidents. Economic and recreational benefits from deer were judged to be $14 billion. The white-tailed deer is both a valuable and highly esteemed animal in the eyes of the public and at the same time a serious cause of agricultural and other damage problems. These conflicting values among residents of the State emphasize the need for options to control damage due to the white-tailed deer.

***snip***

Regulated Hunting is the best way to reduce the size of the deer herd and the amount of damage being received. Most counties experiencing deer damage have liberal antlerless deer seasons allowing the removal of does to accomplish this goal. Herd reduction requires the removal of does and cannot be achieved only through the harvest of bucks. Given their choice, hunters will frequently take a buck and not return for a doe. Landowners must regulate the harvest of does by choosing hunters who will carry out their management objectives. Access is of primary importance. No game regulation will reduce deer herds on private land unless sufficient hunter access is available to remove the required number of does.
http://www.wvdnr.gov/hunting/IntAppDeerCon.shtm



How Does Hunting Keep Deer From Overpopulating?
updated: June 26, 2010

Hunting is a controversial issue. Animal lovers find hunting cruel if deer are killed just for sport. Hunters defend themselves by arguing that hunting deer helps keep the deer population in check (and provides a freezer full of meat). Deer are overpopulating because they have a decrease in natural predators. Humans are the largest group of predators for deer today.

***snip***

Deer Issues
# Deer are moving into areas inhabited by humans to find food. Often deer eat vegetables and harm gardens, farmland and landscaping while feeding. This means there is less food to be produced and less on our tables. Still there is not enough food to sustain the growing deer population, which causes starvation. Starving deer are more susceptible to diseases, such as tapeworm and roundworm as well as lyme disease. When deer become diseased the illness can move quickly throughout the population.

***snip***

Keeping the deer population under control is a reasonable solution. Hunting to keep deer from overpopulating helps both deer and humans. Hunting season is a time for licensed hunters to go after deer. There are certain months they kill deer with some restrictions, such as using only a rifle or only bow and arrow. Another option found at various times during the year are controlled deer hunts. These hunts are often scheduled at particular locations, such as at national and state parks. Hunters and marksmen register to participate in these events focusing on controlling deer overpopulation.

Benefits
# Deer hunting is a benefit when it comes to controlling deer overpopulation. Hunters consider their efforts a more humane way for the deer to die. Dying of starvation can be a miserable experience that leads to long suffering for the animal. Hunters are also protecting vegetation which allows more productive crops to be found in stores. This helps store owners and farmers with their livelihood. Another major benefit is helping save lives when it comes to deer related vehicle accidents.
http://www.ehow.com/about_6668616_hunting-keep-deer-overpopulating_.html


If managed properly, hunting can benefit wildlife by helping to eliminate disease and starvation caused by over population.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Travelman Donating Member (326 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 04:40 PM
Response to Original message
21. Holy shit, what a moron!
She didn't torture the caribou to death, you idiot (Uyger, not kpete). Killing one's food is NOT the same as torturing dogs to death by making them fight. No matter how much people want to try to make those two events equal, they are not. Period.



All this Michael Vick crap has completely and totally jumped the shark. Yes, what Vick did was very, very wrong. Had I been in charge of sentencing, I probably would have given him a harsher sentence. But, he's done felony time in a federal slammer, and his time is done. It's over. He's on probation, and by all accounts I have seen, he's abiding by that reasonably well. Yes, the President would have been wise to keep his nose out of it all together. It's not the first time he's involved himself in things he would have been better to leave alone, so this should hardly surprise anyone.

But for cryin' out loud, people, it's done and over with. Move on with your lives. Stupid talking heads arguing with one another across cable networks. Good grief.

Let's have a New Year's Day duel between Carlson and Uyger. We can work it in with the Rose Bowl. Make it part of the halftime show or something. At least one of these assholes will be dead and it will stop the idiotic bickering.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ramulux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #21
28. What if Vick had simply eaten the dogs?
Would that make what he did OK?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 05:25 PM
Response to Original message
26. Tucker is a piece of shit and everytime anyone gives him any airtime
100 baby angels die a grizzly death.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
66 dmhlt Donating Member (935 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 09:42 PM
Response to Original message
31. 'Cause Tucker Carlson is an ASSHOLE
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VeryLibGal Donating Member (17 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-30-10 10:20 PM
Response to Original message
32. Because Caribou is basically food while Dog is man's best friend?
Seriously Tucker is just a whining brat. Can't believe he is still on the air.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 05:14 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC