“It’s true that Barack Obama is on the move. I don’t know if it’s true President Bush called Musharraf and said, ‘Why can’t we catch this guy’”- Roger Ailes
This is the joke that got the Fox News-sponsored Nevada Democratic debate canceled. The joke that’s got Democrats nationwide up in arms, that Harry Reid finds indefensible, that has touched off a mass (and surprisingly high-level) rebellion against Fox News…
…and it’s actually a somewhat funny joke. Harmless, really. [Adam ducks as no-longer-fresh vegetables fly towards the lectern…]
Now here comes the obligatory don’t-get-me-wrong section: I’m not a fan of Fox News, as most of you know. I think Fox News has harmed journalism hugely and it’s good to see people standing up to it. Any news organization that explicitly refers to itself as a counterbalance to what it sees as biased coverage… well, they can’t possibly be objective themselves, by definition. Etc.! And what Fox News recently reported about Barack Obama and his early schooling was unbelievably sloppy and clearly motivated by this bias…
…but that Ailes joke was pretty funny. Not great, but definitely “Weekend Update”-worthy. It is, at its core, a Bush joke anyway.
Many of you are ready to blast me to atoms for this, I’m sure. I’m naive. I can’t see Ailes’ real agenda. I’m unaware of how carefully-crafted the joke was to resonate with the “madrassa” story. Ailes’ joke is no different than Ann Coulter’s - a slap on top of a slur on top of an agenda. It’s the pattern, not the particulars. I know. I’ve been reading such things on the internet for the past couple of days, from the Democratic leadership to the angry commenters over at The Daily Kos.
And I think they’re all wrong. It’s an easy, silly joke. “Obama” and “Osama” are only one letter off, and Bush is an easily-confused man. Zing! It’s a joke that I would have made. I don’t think I’d have been particularly proud of it, but I’d have made it. In fact, I have little doubt that I did, at one point, on a “Wait Wait Don’t Tell Me!” If I didn’t, one of my fellow panelists probably did.
My guess is that to those mythical “plain folks,” those eternally “undecided” voters, this outrage over the “Obama” joke looks idiotic. Because, in point of fact, it is. Few centrists hearing the joke would think it was a slam on Obama. It’s hard to conceive that any even semi-persuadable voter would hear the joke and be subconsciously swayed by its hidden valences with the madrassa story or the Fox News agenda. And would anyone object to the joke if it didn’t come from Ailes?
And that, some say, is the point. By heading a skewed and intellectually corrupt “news” organization, Ailes has forfeited his right to make such jokes, or so the argument goes. I’m all for watching those conservative “jokesters” carefully, and Ann Coulter’s poison is something we all ought to keep our eyes on. But this… come on. The amount of linguistic gymnastics that one has to do to make this particular joke not merely a “Bush is stupid” joke means that it is probably what Occam’s Schick would suggest: A “Bush is stupid” joke. As a comedy writer, I’ll break it down: The idea that “Osama” and “Obama” sound alike isn’t funny. Implying they ARE alike is a non-starter, laugh-wise. But saying that Bush might confuse two vastly different and hard-to-confuse individuals based on a superficial similarity between their names? Bingo!
Again, Ann Coulter’s joke, if one found it funny, could only be funny if you understood that Ann is “not allowed” to call someone a “faggot,” and that that’s precisely what she wanted to call John Edwards. That’s worth getting our collective panties in a bunch over. [Yes, I found the preceding sentence as disturbing to type as you did to read.]
All of this said, I still approve of the Democrats finally standing up to Fox News. They should’ve done it years and years ago, and if they had, Fox News would never have risen to the heights of popularity it currently enjoys. By pretending it was just another news channel and by bellying up to the giant, slimy trough labeled “Air Time,” the liberals and the rational moderates of this country gave Fox News its “Respectable News Channel” Halloween costume. Taking that costume back is not a bad idea at all. Behaving like cartoons ourselves is, though.





60 comments
Gailkate
March 14, 2007 at 11:06 am
1However, Bill Maher noted (Larry King Live, Monday night) that this does make Dems look wimpy. Righteously taking the high ground over something essentially silly reinforces their image as being unwilling to engage. We’ll huff and we’ll puff and we’ll take our ball home. He brought up Clinton’s taking on Mike Wallace and refusing to make nice. Dixie Chicks rule.
Michael
March 14, 2007 at 11:58 am
2I think this is the democrats taking an opportunity given. They realized that the activists hated the idea of this debate on Fox, but how to get out of it in a nice clean manner? One “joke” by Roger Ailes provided the Dems with the excuse they needed to get out. Being funny is not the point, being something that resembled a reasonable excuse is.
Jim (OJNTNJ)
March 14, 2007 at 12:10 pm
3To provide a little more perspective regarding the dropping of the sponsorship of the Democratic debate proffered by FOX “news”, a counter-offer has been made by Air America to sponsor and broadcast a debate between the Republican presidential candidates.
Do you think they’ll snatch this opportunity?
I believe a link to this story can be found at crooks & liars.
gillian
March 14, 2007 at 12:17 pm
4I say the next time we get our collective panties in a bunch, we should to wash them in AllTempaCheer. That stuff really works! Smells good, too.
SeattleDan
March 14, 2007 at 12:25 pm
5Hey Gailkate, good to see you here.
I found it just plain odd that the Dems decided to go with Fox’s offer in the first place. Didn’t anyone say anything? I think Edwards from the get-go was not going to participate in the debate precisely because it Fox sponsored.
Steve
March 14, 2007 at 1:09 pm
6Well said, Mr Felber.
I really tire of both sides leaping on each other’s words and parsing them down to the last phoneme, looking for something by which to be offended, just so that the finder can puff themselves up and, in a high dudgeon, demand that the speaker apologize and apologize this very instant.
In the case of the Bush “Administration” (and I use that term loosely, I admit), there are so many big picture elements to cause visceral recoil and downright revulsion that jumping on Mr Ailes’s dumb joke, however it was intentioned, seems just so very petty and small minded that it drags everyone deeper into the sewer of eternal partisanship.
I really think we ought to ignore the whole lot of dissembling bloviators unless they do something which really merits attention. All we do by getting our undies in a bunch is give them more air time and give them more ammunition.
Folks like Ann Coulter remind me of my attention seeking self way back in about the third grade. I’d do something outrageous (or what passed for outrageous in those kinder, gentler, more naíve days), the teacher and the rest of the class would get all excited and I’d get what I wanted, which was the momentary spotlight.
Well, one day, I recall, for some reason or another, or maybe none whatsoever, I got upset while the class was out on the playground for PE and stomped off to go sit on a bench. I suppose I fully expected the teacher to come over and either console me or reprimand me.
She just ignored my outburst, as did the rest of the class.
I sat there for maybe two minutes, waiting for my “reward”. When it didn’t come, I recall sheepishly returning to the class, where not a word was said by anyone. It didn’t have to be.
Now, I’m not suggesting that we’ll bring Ann Coulter back to civilization by ignoring her fulminations and exaggerations in her column, on the tube, or behind the lectern, but we’ll certainly give her unhelpful remarks much less publicity.
GW
March 14, 2007 at 1:26 pm
7I think “Bert Gonzo” is doing a heck ‘uv a job. Heh, heh.
siobhan
March 14, 2007 at 2:15 pm
8GW, are you referring to Ali G?
Ann
March 14, 2007 at 2:40 pm
9Steve has a good idea. My dudgeon alert status has been Orange for years now. It is tiring. I say we all turn our backs on Fox News, put our fingers in our (collective?) ears, and say “La la la, I can’t hee-eear you!”
GW
March 14, 2007 at 2:55 pm
10That’s right - the At tourney Generator himself. (Laura, did I say that right?)
David
March 14, 2007 at 3:05 pm
11David is struggling. He had the same thoughts as Adam from the get go, but there he sits with a way-past-its-prime tomato, and Adam is such a delicious target. Would that Adam would at least once say something dumb so David could launch his vegan missile.
Dale
March 14, 2007 at 3:38 pm
12I think we should take the same strategy with Ann Coulter that President Bush took about Hugo Chávez. Never heard of her, don´t think of her, won´t talk about her.
YLlama
March 14, 2007 at 5:10 pm
13First question should always be: is the joke funny? If so, no apology necessary.
piglet
March 14, 2007 at 5:15 pm
14I dunno. I remember John Kerry taking that “I won’t dignify that with a response” attitude with the swiftboat guys, and see how far that got him?
After the last two presidential elections, I just don’t trust the American public to hear anything other than the loudest voice.
(I’ll go back to eating too much chocolate and sulking now.)
Carmel
March 14, 2007 at 5:47 pm
15The Australian Federal election campaigning is now well underway with a kindergarten display of name calling and mud throwing. The highlight came last week when the current treasurer and aspirant for the Prime Minister role came out with: “well, he started it”. Global warming has made the high moral ground very crowded.
Dale
March 14, 2007 at 6:16 pm
16This just in: I believe Khalid Shaikh Mohammed just confessed to the kidnapping and murder of JonBenet Ramsay.
David
March 14, 2007 at 6:27 pm
17That’s common knowledge down here on the edge
of the Green Swamp.
waterfowler
March 14, 2007 at 6:39 pm
18panties…wimps…vegan missiles….???
I’m obviously in the wrong place.
Dale, you’re a sick individual.
Piglet, you are wise to not trust the American public, they elected Clinton…twice!! I still can’t believe people believed anything that came out of his mouth.
siobhan, I got to watch some widgeon and gadwall while waiting on a boat, I think they’re a little reluctant to head north yet.
David
March 14, 2007 at 6:57 pm
19waterfowler, I’m still working on the guidance system, which has to be totally organic and as mushy as the vegan missile.
waterfowler
March 14, 2007 at 7:04 pm
20Adam, to “betray your own” would be to give us that Algore/chicken little bit you’ve been working on. Or to tell us all the truth about ethanol and how inefficient it is or how much more energy a Prius uses than a Suburban. It’s the self-installed blinders that you lefties have that make me ill. Load up and fire away, I’m working 80 hour weeks, but I’ll be back asap.
Sorry to distract, but presidential debates?, FOX?, Obama? Who gives a sh..?
Adam Felber
March 14, 2007 at 7:11 pm
21waterfowler -
For quite a while you’d stopped with the “you lefties” stuff and putting words in my mouth. But… there you go again!
Okay. Your points: Ethanol is indeed incredibly inefficient. I don’t consider that to be a betrayal of my own. As far as the Prius vs. the Suburban… it’s not how MUCH energy you burn, it’s what KIND. For instance, fueling your car by burning toddlers might be incredibly energy efficient, for all I know. That doesn’t make it a better choice.
In the case of the Suburban… it’s the emissions that I’m worried about, not the generic “efficiency.”
sasquatch
March 14, 2007 at 8:48 pm
22Sorry, missed something. You mean I have to start feeling guilty for driving a Prius now??
By the way, it’s not the “lefties” that are pushing for ethanol, it’s GW backed by the corn lobby. Energy sources are not the biggest issue anymore, it’s efficiency, which is why waterfowlers comment about the hybrids bugs me.
waterfowler, do you have a link to back up that statement about the Suburban?
Maximum Bob
March 14, 2007 at 9:50 pm
23I bet “Lefty Blogger Proposes Burning Tots to Avert Global Warming” appears on the Fox news crawl tomorrow. Jonathan Swift-boating, if you will.
Zee Man
March 15, 2007 at 3:18 am
24We burn our tots up as fuel - we burn our kids up in oil wars - there’s a discernible difference here?
Boomer
March 15, 2007 at 3:35 am
25This just in… “Khalid Sheikh Mohammed admits guilt in Lindbergh kidnapping! CIA thrilled with new waterboarding results!”
dee
March 15, 2007 at 4:23 am
26Khalid Sheikh Mohammed: “Buckner’s error in the ‘86 series? That was me, too”
Rabbi Yehuda Abramawitz
March 15, 2007 at 4:40 am
27Alvays mit dem baseball, dee?
tim
March 15, 2007 at 4:45 am
28This just in: Khalid Sheikh Muhammad has confessed to being the mean clown who ruined my 4th birthday party. I knew it.
siobhan
March 15, 2007 at 6:22 am
29Fowler, any day with gadwall is a good day.
That said, I hope you’ll forgive me for the following: For years, the energy companies and the car companies used scare tactics, shouting that the whacko enviros wanted to destroy America - we wanted everyone to live in a cave, eat nuts and berries, and give up their cars. We said no, we just want greater efficiency and less pollution and CO2. Oh, and by the way, the rest of the world is interested in these things - so if we get a jump on creating them, there will be a ready market and we’ll have a new booming industry in this country to make up for all the other jobs we’ve offshored.
So what happens? Al Gore wins the Oscar and the next day the right wing noise machine jumps in and starts screaming “Hey! Look! He has a big house! He has a big car! He flies places! HE HAS AN UPPER CLASS LIFESTYLE!!!”, without mentioning that he’s fueling it with green energy, driving hybrids and using carbon offsets. Which is to say, he’s demonstrating that it’s possible to reduce your impact on the environment without living in a cave, eating nuts and berries and giving up your car. In other words, showing that the scare tactics mentioned above are bullshit. How… inconvenient.
I grew up in Detroit, the child of an automobile designer, with our fate tied to the health of Ford Motor Company (and friends/neighbors tied to all of the big 3). The industry never learned from the 70s, and has relied on protectionism rather than innovation, which has caused them to continue to lose market share worldwide. Yet smarter companies like GE (not likely to be accused of crunchy granola thinking) see where things are going and are developing products to address the new realities. The US auto industry oughta follow their example.
Rebecca
March 15, 2007 at 6:24 am
30Also, Khalid Sheikh Muhammad confesses to being the culprit behind global warming, due to all the hot air being expelled from the media.
Murray
March 15, 2007 at 6:25 am
31This just in: Khalid Sheikh Muhammad has confessed to being on the grassy knoll with an AK-47 back in 63. He also insists that HE is deep throat.
If Ailes joke was funny it would have been hard to tell from the crowd. He serves up jokes like lead pancakes. Even those whose careers depend on yucking it up for the boss had a hard time delivering.
Yes we lefties look foolish when we get offended by something so benign. Our outrage should be focused on the cover Fox News gives to this morally bankrupt and completely incompetent administration. Let’s get our outrage straight.
As an ecologically obsessed lefty, I think that ethanol is a very bad fuel. (Other than in the proper beverage). Even with the new technology it uses almost as much energy to produce as it gives off. Soy Beans are a better fuel. But the best fuel is gas savings. A Chevy Suburban Subdivision gets between 11-15 mpg, the Honda Insight gets 57. So if you are driving the kids to the mall you can do it about 5 times in the Insight for every trip in the Sub. Besides you can park an Insight with out taking up two spaces. http://www.envirofront.org/Publications/Lists_of_Note/Pollution_Lists/ B1List.html
If we all used cars that got twice as much mileage, we would have a glut of oil and way less pollution.
Murray
March 15, 2007 at 6:34 am
32Well said Siobhan.
dee
March 15, 2007 at 9:24 am
33When I grow up I want to be as eloquent as Siobhan.
Ann
March 15, 2007 at 10:17 am
34Iowa. My home state. It’s been taken over by “Big Pork,” a group of corporations that care nothing for the environment they’re quickly ruining with enormous hog confinement operations. Monsanto and other corporations have taken over seed production (and genetically modified seed, at that, with its attendant economic ills), and now “Big Corn” has arrived, which pushes ethanol as fuel despite its inefficiencies. This is a corporate effort, make no mistake.
I’m not saying that all big corporations support the Republican party, but this is NOT a “lefty” effort.
Ann
March 15, 2007 at 10:23 am
35Also, Ailes’s joke wasn’t particularly funny, but it was aimed at Bush, not Obama.
cooper
March 15, 2007 at 12:28 pm
36Well said, Murray and siobhan. BTW, I just upgraded to Firefox 2.0 today and it now underlines siobhan’s name in red, just like my English professor was so fond of doing when I misspelled a word. That’s a very good feature. This blog has always needed a spell checker - now our host doesn’t have to spring for it. This is a good day, Adam.
Adam Felber
March 15, 2007 at 1:42 pm
37I like Firefox’s spell check a lot. Though as a Mac fanatic I do have to point out that Safari has featured a spell check for years. [It’s not widely known, but if you’re typing in Safari, you can activate the spell check and/or move on to the next questionable word by hitting the Apple key and the semicolon.]
But you’re right, Cooper, the red underline is a very gratifying approach. Missspellings are now a thing of the paest!
gillian
March 15, 2007 at 2:30 pm
38Well, it’s too late for me, but maybe future generations will find relief from the Gay Curse.
SeattleDan
March 15, 2007 at 2:43 pm
39Khalid Sheikh Muhammed has now confessed to being the father of Anna Nicole’s baby.
Seattle Tammy and I are in Portland,OR. for the regional trade show. If anything interesting occurs, we’ll keep you up to date. After 24 hours, nothing new to report. But I gotta tell you the Holiday Inn here sucks.
siobhan
March 15, 2007 at 2:46 pm
40Gillian - Did you catch this Tom Toles? I think it’s the most direct piece I’ve ever seen from him.
cooper, it’s got nothing to do with spelling. Firefox just wants to make sure that you never miss a single pearl of wisdom from moi.
gillian
March 15, 2007 at 3:11 pm
41Thanks, siobhan. I hadn’t seen that one - and do keep those pearls of wisdom coming our way, sis.
Steve
March 15, 2007 at 4:26 pm
42ann sez “Steve has a good idea. My dudgeon alert status has been Orange for years now. It is tiring. I say we all turn our backs on Fox News, put our fingers in our (collective?) ears, and say ‘La la la, I can’t hee-eear you!’”
Note that I’m not necessarily suggesting putting out fingers in our ears and doing the “La la la” bit.
I am suggesting that, as progressives, there are more important battles to fight than whether Mr Ailes or Ms Coulter makes some lame joke. Obviously, importance is somewhat in the eye of the beholder and what’s trivial or stupid to me may be of transcending importance to someone else. And, just as obviously, just ignoring them and “being above it all” does run the risk of being Swift Boated.
What I do suggest is that we don’t give these gasbags any more exposure or press than necessary.
Another thought, which I may have proposed here or in some other forum: a boycott by the progressive chattering class of FAUX News. Don’t go on Bill O’Reilly’s execrable excuse for a television program. Give Fox and Friends the cold shoulder.
Why give O’Reilly or Scarborough or any of the other schoolyard bullies a punching bag? As long as they control the mike volume and the crosspoint switcher, they’re going to fix the fight so that they win every time. They’ll probably wave their little fists in the air and shout “chicken”, but there’s no cowardice in walking away from a fixed fight.
waterfowler
March 15, 2007 at 5:09 pm
43http://blogs.chron.com/lorensteffy/2007/02/the_ethanol_chr.html
http://blog.kir.com/archives/002673.asp
Adam, sorry, I’ll try to use it more consistently.
Siobhan, carbon offsets are a ruse. You’re smarter than that. It’s “Do as I say, not as I do”. Don’t fall for that BS, just because he’s a dem. I’m more of an environmentalist than that puke ever thought or tried to be. And I’m a little ticked that lefties have won the “enviro” title. It’s insulting to us wingnut enviros.
Senor Cooper, Que pasa?
Ann
March 15, 2007 at 6:01 pm
44No, Steve, of course you’re not necessarily suggesting that. That’s why I said “I say…”
Just to clear this up for everyone: Steve makes reasoned and mature suggestions, and I make childish and petulant suggestions. It’s what I do.
However, I don’t resort to the cheap and patronizing “You’re smarter than that” argument. I’m sure there’s a Latin term—something like ad hominem—for this technique.
Dirk's Diary
March 15, 2007 at 6:09 pm
45March 15, 2007
Dear Diary,
Beware of today. Strange matters are afoot. So far, no shank in the back, but I got the weirdest e-mail from a K. Rove today. He wrote that there is a dangerous bus, careening out of control down Pennsylvania Ave. and was looking for volunteers to step out in front of it. You know, like that Chinese protester in front of the tank - like that. And like the protester, no one will be hurt. Scout’s honor. Really. I forwarded it to 10 of my friends, to ward off the bad karma from chain letters not passed on, but this town is ferblunjit! You like that word? Chuck Schumer’s teaching me a few yiddish words to impress the rubes back home. He’s really not such a bad guy, but if you want to put Cheney into intensive care, just say a kind word about the senior Senator from NY in front of Shooter. You know, that’s not such a bad idea…
siobhan
March 15, 2007 at 6:18 pm
46Fowler, I think it is extremely unfortunate that the wingnut enviros get overlooked. I can think of two reasons for that:
First, the right wing (and please note that I’m using that term and not “conservatives”) has become identified with corporate America - especially with elements like big oil, many extraction industries, etc. - who are seen as pushing a “profits first, planet/people second” agenda. I’m not saying that Dems don’t have ties to those groups (some far too close for comfort), but the R’s are much cozier with them. R’s are also blessed with the likes of Pombo in their ranks - and they chose to put him in the key position to deal with environmental issues. Enviros on the right are judged by the company they keep, rightly or wrongly.
Second, for many of us enviros on the left, that is the issue that we care about, front and center; with most of the conservative enviros I know, it’s an issue that’s important to them, but it’s not number one on the list. An analogy on the right would be something like taxes. I know a lot of liberals who’d like lower taxes, smaller government and a smaller deficit, and who consider it an important issue; I don’t know many (actually, I don’t know any) who consider that their number one issue. However, there are many on the right who do consider it to be their prime issue, so the issue has become identified with the right - even though there are people on both sides who want action.
I hope you can agree with one thing that Al Gore said - this isn’t a right or a left issue, it’s a moral issue. I care about it because it pains me to think that we’re leaving the world so much worse for the next generations. I really hope that some Republicans will come back to their party’s earlier heritage and move this issue to the front again; if it was a priority for both sides we could really make some progress.
David
March 15, 2007 at 6:58 pm
47siobhan, thanks for that Tom Toles link. Powerful. And thanks for articulate, thoughtful #46.
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed
March 15, 2007 at 7:04 pm
48New Coke
Supertrain
The Ventura Freeway and Interstate 405 intersection
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed
March 15, 2007 at 8:23 pm
49Repressive regime of Saddam Hussein in Ira….oh no, wait. Didn´t have anything to do with that.
gillian
March 16, 2007 at 3:22 am
50tim, your parents loved you enough to hire a clown for your 4th birthday party? Really? That’s sweet. No really, it is. I’m sure my parents would have done the same if I hadn’t been in the midst of 4 other siblings. That certainly puts the Kibosh on all “extras” when just putting food on the table is a struggle. But I will say this about my parents; when I came out, they were surprisingly (to me) understanding and non-judgmental and accepting. That’s showing love, too.
tim
March 16, 2007 at 8:09 am
51Um, I made that up. My parents loved me enough to have 8 other kids before they had me, so I wasn’t getting no clown. I think I might’ve gotten a Hess toy truck, which my Dad bought at the gas station for $1.95. I’m sure I broke it in under 11 seconds, per my norm.
Also, what in the bejesus are you talking about?
Finally, KSM has admitted to Y2K. He really thought that would work.
gillian
March 16, 2007 at 8:35 am
52Oh sorry, tim. I thought “coming out” was pretty much mainstream jargon these days. What I meant to say was - I like girls as much as you do - if you catch my drift. And, if by chance you don’t like girls (and that’s certainly okay), then I like them much more than you do. Capisch?
Murray
March 16, 2007 at 5:54 pm
53Gillian, many of my customers are gay, how can I not love them,,,well not like that,,, you know, uhh, differently, well as customers.
Fowler, You will have to forgive my reaction to your claiming,”I’m more of an environmentalist than that puke ever thought or tried to be”.
Anyone’s idea of being an environmentalist to better kill birds leaves me a bit on the cold side.
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed
March 16, 2007 at 6:55 pm
54The weather in New York today! My most nefarious act yet!
siobhan
March 16, 2007 at 7:49 pm
55Murray, I can’t condone calling Al Gore a puke, but I do have to defend duck hunters and their conservation ethic.
The shear amount of habitat that has been protected by duck hunters over the past century is huge, and that habitat is there for all of the species who need it, not just the duck. (Refuges are great birding areas.) If the goal was just to have plenty of duck meat, it would be easier and cheaper to convert the refuges into farms (and turn the rest of the land into subdivisions) which doesn’t help the other species.
Deer hunters lobby for unnaturally high numbers of deer, who destroy habitat as they overgraze (overbrowse?). Some gamebird hunters put aside land, but not on the scale of duck hunters (and I’ve never heard of a canned duck hunt). Duck hunters eat what they take; they’re not just looking for something on to put on the wall. Waterfowl are plentiful, so they’re not hunting endangered species. Numbers have remained healthy for ducks even as many bird species have declined. It would be great if everyone just preserved the habitat on general principle, but…
Waterfowler is my polar opposite on just about any other issue, but I’ve got no problem with duck hunters.
However, ‘fowler, you really need to reconsider the anti-Gore crap. All of those refuges won’t be enough to save the ducks. Climate change will hit waterfowl hard when it ruins their breeding grounds up north. Don’t let dislike of Dems blind you.
cooper
March 17, 2007 at 5:35 am
56siobhan, “Waterfowler is my polar opposite on just about any other issue…”. I knew there was a reason why I liked you so much. (I mean that in a nice way, Mr. ‘fowler. BTW, thanks for the hummingbird update. I’ve got my feeders out, loaded, and waiting for their arrival. The viburnums are greening up and it was sunny and close to 80F two days this week. Spring is on the way.)
David
March 18, 2007 at 7:13 am
57But I will say this about my parents; when I came out, they were surprisingly (to me) understanding and non-judgmental and accepting. That’s showing love, too.
gillian, that’s showing love of the first order, and leaves any material presents in its dust. Closest parallel in my life would be when I told my parents I would go to jail or to Canada before I would accept induction during the Viet Nam War (”My country, may she always be right, but right or wrong, my country”) and found out they backed me completely in refusing to participate in that criminal misuse of American troops. I came to realize that what my mother meant was that she always wanted America to be right, but that America could also be terribly wrong, and that she and my father stood behind my refusal to participate in such a terrible wrong.
Parents can at times be so wonderful in such surprising (to children) ways, and when one least expects it.
Murray
March 19, 2007 at 6:21 am
58David, you need to put things in quotes. You took me back for a minute there.
Murray
March 19, 2007 at 7:03 am
59Sure Siobhan, attack the bird lover
I agree with most of what you say but come to a slightly different conclusion.
Any thing that increases wetlands and bird habitat is good. That doesn’t mean that they necessarily have good intentions. My issue is not that duck hunters don’t do good work, but that their motives are questionable. Fowler didn’t argue that Ducks Unlimited was good but that he was an enviro because he is a member. Again increasing wetlands to kill their inhabitants is in my mind not a good motive, even if the outcome is good for the environment. As long as he doesn’t use his membership to cloak himself as an environmental hero, I’m fine with him killing ducks.
People killing ducks is not a bad thing. People killing deer is a good thing. People wanting more deer is a bad thing.
As far as deer hunting goes you are completely right that deer hunters want an unnaturally high number of deer despite the tremendous amount of damage they do. My property is surrounded by state game land. Hunting is the number 1 religion in the area, despite my attempts to introduce biking. All of my property has a browse line (the trees have no leaves below 5’) and my woods are completely devoid of normal spring flowers. I haven’t seen a Trillium, Blood Root, Jack-in-the-pulpit, ever on the place. The understory is free of oaks but filled with black locust. I have over a hundred fruit trees and I need to put deer guards around each one. The people who want more deer are those who don’t own land. They feel it is their right to get a buck with in the first hour of open season, even if they’re too drunk to do much more than fire randomly. So they insist on regulations that insure that we land owners will always have damaged property. Oh, and despite careful driving I have hit 4 deer, so having too many deer is not as benign as many make it out.
David
March 20, 2007 at 8:01 am
60You have the drunk hunters, too, Murray? I’ll never forget the hunter swigging from a bottle of whiskey with his deer rifle across the hood of his pickup. It’s the reason I gave up deer hunting in Central Florida, that along with the fact that I could no longer shatter the beauty of the early morning (I did still hunting only) with either the explosion of the gun (I considered bow hunting) or the sight of the deer going down. I could help someone with a deer they’d killed, and I still endorse deer hunting, especially because the natural predators are pretty much gone, but the moment of death, while central to all living things, no longer appealed to me as a sport. The only way I can now hunt is with a camera. I could still kill for the necessity of eating, but that’s it.