First, my disclaimers:
*I'm not a hunter but I don't have much of a problem with other people hunting.
*I'm going to vote for Obama, so yes, I'm "in the tank" for him.
I see a certain hypocrisy in Palin's support of Alaska's predator-control program. You can read about it here as it relates to a political ad which decries the use of aerial hunting techniques.
Palin is a republican who thinks free market economies work best. Government, in her opinion, should not meddle in the affairs of business in order to create a magical community where money falls down from the pockets of rich people into the mouths of the poor. OK, my cynicism was laid on a bit thick there, sorry.
But when it comes to wildlife, she supports a government program that is designed solely for the benefit of the hunter in order to bring the number of fun-to-shoot animal populations up.
Lets call this Hunter Socialism.
But there is something sick about killing animals to allow other people to kill even more animals. I understand that Alaska is like a whole different country. I understand that living there might require survival instincts that a city boy like me doesn't have. So by all means, if a wolf is threatening you or your family (which I'm not sure they actually do) then do what you have to.
So, she is totally against the government trying to use its power and influence to pull people up by their bootstraps, but she's all for the government helping hunters have a better selection of animals to kill...by killing wolves.
I don't know if anyone else sees the hypocrisy in this, or even cares, but I thought I would at least bring it up for discussion.
<-- Gratuitous image of dead wolf.
Phoebe Maltz Bovey: Check Your Privilege-Checking
18 hours ago