Wolf At The Treeline
For the dissatisfied.
Sunday, September 12, 2010
Economic Crisis Passes Over the Rich
Monday, September 6, 2010
Pastor Passes on Petraeus's Plee
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Only a Mosque
Thursday, August 12, 2010
What is Florida so Scared of?
Friday, August 6, 2010
Wolves
I feel like our country is going completely insane, and I'll have more to say about that at a future date, but I just thought I would briefly address the plight of this blog's namesake species. If you read the article provided with the link, you probably won't be surprised. The US's puritanical roots have yet to shed the "man vs nature/order vs chaos/good vs evil" mandate, and ranchers hating wolves is an old story. But we have to keep addressing it because the balance of our ecosystem is off and will continue to be until we accept that we are part of nature, not above or removed from it.
If wolves decrease livestock, I understand the economic concern for ranchers, but as a country that provides ludicrous subsidies to other agriculture interests, including corn farmers (that is a whole other story for another time), we should be able to make accommodations. The meat industry is already a heavy burden on the environment because Americans stubbornly demand high quantities of beef for their diet and we insist on eating a non-native species, when in fact we should be embracing the more eco-sustainable and healthier option of native buffalo (you know, that animal our gun-crazy fore-fathers nearly wiped off the earth). Again, I find myself introducing another debate. But the issue is that complaints of reduced livestock are overstated and provide a weak argument when trying to defend the destructive way of life that is our agricultural industry.
Hunters that complain of wolves reducing game-stock? Less prey makes hunting more difficult, so are they afraid of a challenge? Modern hunting is so lacking in honor-ability with all the tech available and game preserves that this concern lacks any substance.
I don't know if this is a problem Obama can address, but if Idaho gets its way, it will feel like he hasn't set the right tone for environmental issues.
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Civic Duty?
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
TEA DRINKING TO ALLITERATION
Take heed, leftists, the Tea Party cometh. Take heed because this is what you should be doing. Just because you got the President you wanted doesn’t mean you can rest, that you can stay quiet. Now is the time to be loud because now you have an ear. Meanwhile, the Tea Party rises, steeped in secrecy (is it a legitimate movement or orchestrated by a powerful-elite-cabal for a greedy agenda?) and an ambiguous if not ignorant message. There’s no better illustration of this than the upcoming first National Tea Party convention which is barring journalists from full coverage and has Sarah Palin as a spectator. In case you need that explained: a supposedly populist movement is shrouding their biggest even yet and is featuring a woman who couldn’t even recall the name of any newspaper let alone prove she knows how to read (I don’t think Going Rogue is any credit, that’s what ghostwriters are for) and who is a documented liar (I site her lumping Obama in with terrorists during the infamous campaign and her claim that Democrats wanted to set up “death panels” to judge the elderly). I suppose some discount the Tea Party as isolated irritants with no influence. But even so, these gatherings that keep popping up show a trend, a very real trend that took shape during the race to replace Ted Kennedy. Democrats lazed about thinking it was in the bag; Republicans took up the example of the Tea Party and caught the Blue state unawares.
The Tea Party’s professed points of contention are valid at a glance. Anyone who’s ever gotten a pay check wishes they could get some of that dough back, and certainly health care has come off the rails. Of course, they don’t want to fix health care; they just don’t want to pay for it. But they can’t discuss these issues intelligently, or without using disinformation. For example, at a rally in
Additionally, the event in
“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”
(The day this isn’t true is the day we wake up in Utopia.)
“The ACLU is the enemy within.”
(This seems digressive. I thought we were talking about healthcare and taxes? Furthermore, if you want to claim a position of liberty – with such other signs as “Wake up
“Marxism. Communism. Obamaism. Sameism.”
(Isn’t Joe McCarthy dead?)
“Don’t blame me, I voted for the American.”
(This reeks of racism – what makes Obama un-American? Skin color? Foreign father? Politics?)
“Free markets, not freeloaders.”
(Unregulated free markets got us in this recession mess. End of discussion.)
According to Wikipedia, Tea Partiers have been seen co-opting leftist iconography such as the raised fist of solidarity and the usually pro-choice slogan “Keep your Laws off my Body.” This makes for a perplexing political movement. It also confuses the greater discussion because the left is not yet thrilled by Obama’s performance, but it would be counter-productive to side with tea-partiers. Society can be stifling, but once you agree to adhere to a civil society, maintaining it is not achieved by being more passionate about making sure everyone can own a gun over making sure everyone has access to a doctor, food and shelter. And if the Tea Party really is a manufactured phenomenon marionetted by Big Business, then we all lose because we already have two puppet political parties.
This is a tricky time. After eight years of having a Mayflower-Ivy-League party boy posing as a good-ole-Texas-rancher in a ploy to appeal to the common man and conceal ineptitude, our country came around and elected a candidate who didn’t hide his illustrious education or his flaws. Obama stumbled, perhaps by relying on too many