Lindy’s Blog: Where Mom is Always Right

January 17, 2009

“Hold on to your sirloin”

Filed under: politics,the Left — by lindyborer @ 8:23 am
Tags: , , , , , ,

This just in: 

Those of us who tend to be rational human beings would categorize the organization known as PETA as kook, fringe, nuts, totally out of their minds, etc…  I’ve talked about this all before.  I simply don’t understand how someone could get their priorities so misaligned that they’d put the lives of insentient invertebrates (in many cases) over human beings.  Yes, in some western European countries (I think it might be Sweden—make that Scandinavian countries) plants, yes PLANTS, now have rights.  But don’t worry, you can still procure an abortion at any time, no problem.  Need I mention that that is where liberal thought has brought them?

(Incidentally, I wonder what PETA’s reaction would be to partial-birth abortion of kittens or puppies?  Think about it.) 

PETA is now campaigning to call all fish “sea kittens” so as to make fish seem more cuddly, so that people are less likely to, well, fish.  I’m not going to waste more time discussing this stuff.  It’s beyond reason or understanding.  If one thing could be said, though, it’s that organizations like PETA are so “out there” that they’d never have any sway in mainstream politics.

Not anymore.

Enter Barack Obama.  And enter his rumored appointee to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (i.e., regulatory czar), Cass Sunstein (courtesy Townhall.com):

Forget about Barack Obama’s income tax-challenged Treasury Secretary or the conflict of interest controversy at the State Department. The most outrageous Obama appointee just might be Cass Sunstein, a Harvard Law School professor who’s flying under everyone’s radar and into a job that hardly anyone has ever heard of.

Cass Sunstein is slated to run the White House’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. He’s going to be America’s chief “regulatory czar.” And shocking new research from the Center for Consumer Freedom shows that he’s a dedicated animal-rights zealot.

The 8 Biggest Celebrity Financial Mistakes

Hold on to your sirloin.

The anti-meat nuts at People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and the anti-hunting lobbyists at the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) used to think that putting Dennis Kucinich in the White House would be their best hope of wielding real power in Washington . But even they didn’t see Cass Sunstein coming. Sunstein has the legal mind of Chief Justice John Roberts and the animal-rights agenda of PETA president Ingrid Newkirk.

We’re not talking about animal welfare—the idea of making sure we don’t cause animals unnecessary suffering when we use them for food, clothing, entertainment, or lifesaving medical research. Sunstein believes in animal rights—the notion that people shouldn’t “own” or “use” animals at all, for any purpose, no matter what the stakes are for mankind.

Cancer research? Not if lab rats are used against their will.

Hunting? Absolutely forbidden, especially if it’s for sport.

Leather jackets? The cows need their skin more that you do.

Seeing-eye dogs? They’re nothing more than slaves.

And that T-bone steak? Fuhgeddaboudit! If animals have any “rights” at all, the right to not be your dinner is at the top of the list.

All of this makes perfect sense to Cass Sunstein, who organized the “Chicago Project on Animal Treatment Principles” at the University of Chicago. He will soon have the political authority to push for a radical overhaul of the way the federal government regulates everything Americans do with animals.

How radical? Sunstein supports making sport hunting illegal, and completely phasing out the consumption of meat. And if that’s not nutty enough, he’s actually in favor of giving animals the legal right to sue people.

Think we’re joking? Think again. Here’s what Sunstein wrote in his 2004 book, Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions:

“[A]nimals should be permitted to bring suit, with human beings as their representatives … Any animals that are entitled to bring suit would be represented by (human) counsel, who would owe guardian like obligations and make decisions, subject to those obligations, on their clients’ behalf.”

Conservative commentators have been openly fretting that Barack Obama may try to turn welfare entitlements and single-payer healthcare into a new Bill of Rights. But Cass Sunstein threatens to expand the whole concept of “rights” to include the rest of the animal kingdom.

That fish wriggling at the end of your hook could soon be a federal offense (if the fish doesn’t file a lawsuit first). Don’t say we didn’t warn you.

*******

Seriously, and I thought the proposed, and uncouth, “Fart Fee” was bad.  The Fart Fee is a  federal proposal to charge fees for air pollution caused by burping and tooting barnyard animals.  No, you can’t make this stuff up:

The newest and craziest idea from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) comes after a U.S. Supreme Court judgment last year that counts flatulence from hogs and cattle as greenhouse-gas emissions. The livestock tax would penalize farms and ranches that own more than 25 dairy cows, 50 beef cattle, or 200 hogs by making them pay a yearly fee of $175 for each dairy cow, $87.50 for every beef cattle, and $20 per pig. The measure would cost even a midsize farm up to $40,000 annually and has the potential to bankrupt most family-owned businesses.

Now animals might be able to file suit against humans.  (And need I mention once again that you could bet what’s left of your life savings that these same liberal whackjobs are militantly pro-abortion?)  Yeah, this is just great for us farmers.    It proves again that these people have simply no footing in reality.  They don’t realize how the markets work, how farmers feed not only the US, but the world. 

Sometimes I seriously wonder about people who voted for BHO.  My first inclination might be, “They’re not overly bright,” but that’s not true.  I know a few really intelligent, good people who fell in infatuation witht the man, and we all know that when we’re infatuated, we cannot think through things rationally.  In many cases, they simply had no idea about any of BHO’s extreme policies.  It’s frustrating for me, but I’m trying not to feel an overwhelming sense of schadenfreude over their reactions, which tend to go something like this, “I didn’t know he was going to do THAT?!?”  Some of the BHO voters I know are farmers.  I wonder if they’ll still be singing the praises of Obama as they pay $87 per head on their beef cattle, or $175/head of dairy cattle?  Or when they find out their tax dollars are funding abortions, even grisly partial-birth abortions?

It’s times like these that remind me why I am a conservative. 

    

 

 

Advertisements

1 Comment »

  1. I’m glad you differentiated between animal “welfare”, and extreme animal “rights”. There are a lot of pro-life folks out there who are also very concerned about the kind treatment of animals. What you articulated was the extremes present today…Balance is the key…Your comment on the reaction of folks to the partial birth abortion of a kitten or puppy hits a chord. We are appalled by it. And yet, after our Congress passed a law banning partial birth abortion, Hilary and BHO immediately began the push for FOCA, which promotes the right to partial birth abortion…among many other disastrous things. We seem to be bending to a hidden evil, not unlike the Nazi’s “peer pressure”.

    Comment by Bridge — January 17, 2009 @ 10:09 am |Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: