Peta Comics....

[M.T. Bucket]

Quote:

---

And you're ripping Republicans in you're post...

---

No I'm not! I just stated that I disagree with most of what the party has done and should at least be capable of stating why RATHER than just calling names. (I only used the republican party because it came to mind as an example first, I could have just as easily chose some other group I disagree with...) I just don't think running around saying everyone who doesn't agree with hunting and fishing is psycho will get sportsmen ANYWHERE! Most people think the Nuge is no less goofy than PETA. I just figured that you got 3 choices...you can tell people WHY being a sportsman isn't evil, you can say nothing, or you can froth at the mouth and hurl verbal coconuts. I see you've made your choice, Hooked.

[Hooked On a Feeling]

[AF-1984]

Is this just getting wierd, or is it me?

[hoggs222]

Yup, it's getting pretty weird in here. Ummmm. I think I'll go & sort out my tackle so I can go catch (hurt in PETA's eyes) some fish & maybe even eat a few of them. If you look at the comic, it's ridiculous! Way to try to brainwash some future hunter/fisherpeople! It's about as bad as a vegetarian wearing a pair of leather Doc Martins.

[Ice9]

Sure, it's weird, if reasoned discussion supported by evidence is weird. Seems quite clear to me. If you huff around and make the usual "let's kill something" jokes, you'll satisfy those already convinced (the folks here, including Bucket and myself) but you won't advance your cause at all.

You'll probably have a chance at some point to have a real conversation with one of these people, face to face. You could offer to put 9mm holes in them or point out that leather shoes makes them a hypocrite--in other words, yield to the most basic impulse and make the conflict stays the same or gets worse. You could ignore them, which really pizzes them off, since like all fringe groups all they really can do is annoy the vast majority of people in this country who hunt or who accept it. Or you could make reasonable arguments and take the high road--Bucket's suggestion. I don't know about you, but I was taught that it was proper and patriotic to leave things better than you found them, and I think a moderate conversation is better than a urination match.

ice

[M.T. Bucket]

Ice9,

Try [email protected]

[DARK30]

Actually, I'm not too worried about peta. There are all kinds of clueless lemmings out there and the peta agenda is mild compared to some.

Onward Through The Fog......

[kc0myy]

I have not shot a deer yet. I will give up deer hunting for 5 years. When every other mile those (Contact US Regarding This Word) people drive and they hit I deer I don't want them crying to me that there is too many deer and we have to hunt them. Same with raccoon and any other huntable animal that runs out in front of them driving. My aunt is not a member of peta but she is a veg. When she grow up my grandpa (her dad) always took her fishing. no hunting just fishing and she loved it. but as soon as she when to collage thats when she turn a veg. She went to the UofM. There are a lot of nuts there. I just can't understand why those people dont get a life.

[YukonDew]

M.T. -

For what it's worth, I doubt you and I agree on much related to politics, but I appreciate your posts on this subject. The point you make is an excellent one that applies to so much more than the topic of this thread. Don't get me wrong guys, I look at the dump that organizations like PETA put out and wonder how anyone can take that stuff seriously. But some people do, and when I object, it IS my responsibility to be able to communicate my position clearly on this or another topics that I could represent in a discussion. Little credibility is ever earned by those who cannot articulate their position effectively.

In any case, I believe that we HAVE to keep one eye on these type of organizations - no matter how nuts they seem to us. There is a lot of truth to Hook's comment on "Tell a lie often enough and people will believe it" and left unchallenged groups like PETA end up finding new members. The fact is, there are plenty of people who start with no opinion and will latch onto someone else's unless a more credible position is presented. Fortunately, groups like PETA are often are their own worst PR firm, but with 850,000 members and a $25 million dollar budget we would be foolish to write them off completely as "Just a bunch of Nuts". Even a bunch of nuts with $25 million can have an impact on the things that all of us here value if we let them.

Now, the real question I have is - If M.T. is such a critical thinker, then why isn't he a Republican? ............. Just teasing you M.T., I'm sure you'll see the light someday.

[M.T. Bucket]

Thanks Dew--maybe I just didn't make my point well.

Quote:

---

If M.T. is such a critical thinker, then why isn't he a Republican?

---

You guys would love to recruit an agitator who types fast like me, wouldn't you?

Truth is, I haven't scraped together enough paper for the lobotomy yet. If you'd like to contribute, please send your name, credit card #, and exp. date to [email protected]............

[YukonDew]

Quote:

---

You guys would love to recruit an agitator who types fast like me, wouldn't you?

---

Naw, we try to restrict the agitators to the other teams - Besides, what fun would life be if ALL of the smart people we on my side?

[M.T. Bucket]

Quote:

---

what fun would life be if ALL of the smart people we on my side?

---

Sly...but I'll take the compliment!

[Tonka Boy]

If you guys haven't caught it already, check out the 11/30 MSNBC article by Tucker Carlson (w/ video clip). Tucker interviews PETA's director of farmed animal campaigns, Bruce Friedrich about this very add.

I wish I could post the link, but if you do a search for MSNBC's "The situation with Tucker Carlson", you should find it. I think Bruce Friedrich definitely shows the mentality of the PETA organization.

[Ice9]

TB has a good point--I doubt that PETA or other fringe organizations on either side have a mentality. In fact, as an organization they exhibit many traits of the insane. As individuals they can be reasonable, but once they gather together and start to try to function as political entities they go downhill.

For example, they have no presence on the political scene if they aren't outside of the general or individual views of their members. Organizations never move to the center, and they don't tend to choose achievable goals--because they want to perpetuate themselves. (Olin foundation is an exception to that, and what made me think of it.) If they compromised, the conventional wisdom is that they'd cease to exist.

THen when representatives go out in the field to talk about it, they can present themselves as reasonable and display to viewers or listeners or readers a surprisingly moderate viewpoint.

Donors are of course devoted to profile--these groups are in competition with other groups for the donation dollar, and the most strident and extreme tends to profit the most.

So when it comes to the occasional contact a group like PETA makes with political enemies, such as us, they lose nothing by coming off as violently extreme. This is partly the fault of the electorate, who are nearly impossible to wake up; everybody plays to a fairly small base these days. I wish we had a moderate center to draw leaders and ideas from.

ice