So the pulchritudinous actress Ashley Judd is starring in a new advertising campaign by the group Defenders of Wildlife against Gov. Sarah Palin for promoting "the brutal aerial killing of wolves." Palin’s accused of "casting aside science and championing the slaughter of wildlife." Viewers are urged to help stop Palin’s "senseless savagery."
Last year, Judd appeared on a panel of the Clinton Global Initiative and promoted her pro-abortion agenda. She declared to our gang at CNSNews.com that "a woman voting for McCain and Palin is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders." So let’s get this straight. According to the humanitarian ethics of Ashley Judd, Sarah Palin shouldn’t allow wolves to be shot from an airplane, but she should allow human babies to have their skulls vacuumed out and killed in a partial-birth abortion. Who here is in favor of "senseless savagery" again?
This actress-playing-a-scientist makes no attempt to engage in any "sense" on the other side. She’s for letting the lovable wolves live. But the wolves are being killed to increase the moose and caribou population. If she was against "senseless savagery," why is she pro-wolf? It’s pretty funny that a group called "Defenders of Wildlife" is completely in favor of wolves slaughtering caribou. They’re defenders of wildlife from humans, but they love all wildlife indiscriminately enough to completely avoid the issues of how animals savagely kill and eat each other.
Palin knows from personal experience that moose is an important food source for humans in Alaska, but Ashley Judd doesn’t care about the humans in Alaska – unless they’re buying movie tickets.
—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
But you see Tim...
February 8, 2009 - 18:07 ET by mizflame98This makes perfect sense to a liberal. They just haven't convinced us normal people that their way of thinking is the right way.
"Not to be a republican at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at thirty is proof of want of head." - Francois Guisot
The dumb Judd
February 9, 2009 - 01:15 ET by EugeniaI wrote previously -- and my comments mysteriously disappeared -- that I would bet that she's radical on abortion. Liberals who are this rabid in their anti-hunting are usually radical in their support for killing babies. In Ashley's case, married and no children, it stems from the very good possibility she herself had an abortion when she was going to college and hasn't dealt with the guilt but is instead transferring her anger to saving animals.
Her liberal logic makes my
February 8, 2009 - 18:21 ET by addyHer liberal logic makes my head spin.
what logic?
February 8, 2009 - 20:35 ET by klchadwickWhat logic? Libs care more about animals and the environment than they do people. I'm all for the ethical treatment of animals, but that doesn't alter the food chain. Also, I'm all for cleaner air but I won't have to worry about my "carbon footprint" (sorry, I really hate that phrase) if I cant afford to drive my car, buy a new "energy efficient" (another hated phrase) model or even worry about hogging resources to keep my house at 72 degrees if I can't afford my house. (God forbid we get what we pay for)
Lib logic suggests that we should all be living in tiki huts (made from twigs and branches that died naturally) and eating only fruits and veggies that have fallen off of the trees and plants on their own. Of course, we would all have to share these resources with one another in our new socialist nature society.
And the Carnival of Stupid
February 8, 2009 - 18:24 ET by KStormAnd the Carnival of Stupid keeps rollin' on!
Don't try to understand
February 8, 2009 - 18:34 ET by SmartypantsDon't try to understand liberals. They make no sense and never will. If they made sense they'd be conservative.
“We acknowledged that
February 8, 2009 - 18:38 ET by chessplayer“We acknowledged that first of all children have to survive past their fifth birthday in order to become adolescents, "
Takes a real Einstein to realize that! Duh!!! lol
Ashley Judd is Anti-Choice!
February 8, 2009 - 18:41 ET by lotrShe is a against a woman's right to choose. What Sarah Palin does with her body (in this case, her trigger finger, or her executive pen) is none of Judd's business!
And one by one dropped the revellers in the blood-bedewed halls of their revel, and died each in the despairing posture of his fall. -- Edgar Allan Poe
My guess is that this is
February 8, 2009 - 18:47 ET by Nortonalecnothing more than a pre-emptive attack for 2012.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever."~David St. Hubbins
make no mistake
February 8, 2009 - 20:07 ET by LoosMooseOH... make no mistake...... those attacks are NOT going to diminish. These are not "pre-" attacks, the war is already started.
The liberals are TERRIFIED of Sarah Palin, and the attemps to attack and discredit her will not cease. The population of Alaska has probably increased 5% since she was named as McCain's VP, just from the liberal rat catchers that are going through her trash and watching her EVER move in an attempt to get something on her. The fact of how well Sarah Palin has run her office is proof in that all the liberal attack dogs can come up with is factless ridicule. As normal minded individuals, we can not begin to even estimate the scope of the attacks that will be aimed at her as the years progress towards 2012.
Only a liberal hates that much, decent people cannot comprehend such behavior.
I had a nightmare that Keith Olberman was run over by a bus,....... and lived.
these hollyweird
February 8, 2009 - 18:49 ET by rontypes sure have their priorities straight, don't they. idiots all
"Ashley Judd doesn’t care about the humans in Alaska "
February 8, 2009 - 18:55 ET by clinging to my guns and my religionand apparently she cares even less about humans in the womb! i added her to my "not one penny of my money" list a looooong time ago.
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle." Edmund Burke
Save a Wolf - Kill a Baby
February 8, 2009 - 19:16 ET by Retired GeekObama
believes when a woman contracts for a dead baby - they deserve a dead
baby. This is what Barack Obama fights for and defends.
Obama opposes a bill that defines as a “person” a fully born baby who survives an abortion.
Obama
votes “present” on legislation that would require doctors to give
medical attention to babies who survive abortions. Obama argues that
defining “…a pre-viable fetus" that survived an abortion as a "person"
or "child would essentially bar abortions, because the Equal Protection
Clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child,
then this would be an anti-abortion statute."
--------------------
By CHRISTINE ARMARIO
Associated Press Writer
"Eighteen
and pregnant, Sycloria Williams went to an abortion clinic outside
Miami and paid $1,200 for Dr. Pierre Jean-Jacque Renelique to terminate
her 23-week pregnancy.
Three days later, she sat in a reclining chair, medicated to dilate her cervix and otherwise get her ready for the procedure.
Only
Renelique didn't arrive in time. According to Williams and the Florida
Department of Health, she went into labor and delivered a live baby
girl.
What Williams and the Health Department say happened next
has shocked people on both sides of the abortion debate: One of the
clinic's owners, who has no medical license, cut the infant's umbilical
cord. Williams says the woman placed the baby in a plastic biohazard
bag and threw it out."
Told ya'll this idiot was from Haiti
February 8, 2009 - 19:27 ET by BlondeAnd not a licensed doctor at all, apparently.
I hope they toss him out of the country....preferably from altitude.
no, under the new administration...
February 8, 2009 - 19:31 ET by clinging to my guns and my religion...he's going to be surgeon general!
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle." Edmund Burke
Well...if it's not Howard Dean
February 8, 2009 - 19:36 ET by BlondeWeirdness....
I clicked to reply and got "Obermann Watch".
Scary. What'd you do, clinging?
not guilty, blonde!
February 8, 2009 - 19:46 ET by clinging to my guns and my religionmust be a vast left-wing conspiracy. "obermann watch"? wow, that's super scary!!
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle." Edmund Burke
It was!
February 8, 2009 - 19:48 ET by BlondeHelp me, my eyes!
I am traumatized.
I steer clear of KO, for a very good reason.
SURPRISE SURPRISE
February 8, 2009 - 19:59 ET by cocodrieThese left-wing extremists were totally surprised that abortion kills babies.
Will wonders never cease.
We should send the Gitmo prisoners to abortion clinics fot the royal treatment.
Jesus Loves You
Monsters
February 8, 2009 - 19:20 ET by nadadhimmiMonsters like Judd actually value animals more than human beings. This is a form of insanity and sociopathic behavior. No compassion for innocent human life, what are the odds she's anti-death penalty for even the most heinous crimes. This sort of analytical thought deficit renders her a non-serious person, anyone who values her opinion does so at their own peril. I'll bet she's anti-semitic and pro terror as well. Silly bitch.
death penalty
February 8, 2009 - 20:12 ET by LoosMooseI am completely against the Death Penalty, and here in Texas we have dispatched an average of one death row inmate per week of 2009 so far. That is a terrible waste. Rather than break a commandmant, these individuals SHOULD be sentenced to LIFE AT HARD LABOR, and I hope that they live a LONG MISERABLE life. Execution is entirely TOO good for them. Chain them to a water barge and let them ROW.
"You live to serve this ship... row well... and live."
I know I posted this
February 8, 2009 - 20:15 ET by dark_dsI know I posted this before..
I reversed my position of being pro choice a number of years ago when I was a cruelty investigator (volunteer) for the Humane Society ... not a real pleasant experience... well anyway I began to question how I could be against cruelty to animals yet turn a blind eye towards the reality of abortion. The fact that if anybody did to an animal what they do to a fetus we would have been all over them.....and so after careful thought I changed my position about abortion. Judd should look into her own heart and examine the hypocricy of her world view. This was the 1st step in my journey from being a lefty to becoming a conservative. Although I am not on some issues neraly as conservative as some who visit here.
Water Boarding is illegal but Koolaid Boarding is still an option... dark_ds said that
No logic
February 8, 2009 - 20:39 ET by KC MulvilleIt is an offense against logic to defend a wolf but not a baby. Even if you think that the entity is not yet a full legal person, it has to have at least as much right to live as a wolf.
I would suggest that late
February 8, 2009 - 20:41 ET by BKeyserI would suggest that late term abortions could be completely eliminated if the same argument was used as the one against income taxes... That being, if you had to write a check for all your taxes in lieu of payroll deductions, people would be much more up in arms over tax increases and things like "stimulus packages." For late term abortions- I'd suggest the babies be birthed alive, then given to the mothers for termination.
Okay, that's awfully gruesome, but my point remains- being detached makes it easier to accept the uncomfortable...
If an accusation is
February 8, 2009 - 20:41 ET by JerIf an accusation is couched in language designed primarily to inflame--as the claim that Ms. Judd favors...the vacuuming of the skulls of human babies and killing them is undoubtedly intended to do--surely it is not too much to ask that a corroborative statement by her explicitly relating to partial-birth abortion be presented.
Jer
you know Jer
February 8, 2009 - 23:43 ET by candanceI've never gotten an answer from lefties here as to why they are outraged over the "botched abortion" death in Florida. What is the difference between killing a baby inside the womb or waiting 20 minutes for delivery and killing it then?
But acts of kindness and generosity must be free and voluntary; no man has a right to compel another to follow his conscience. This is a concern which lies between a man and his God.
-Richard Fuhrman, pro slave advocate, 1823
candance...
February 9, 2009 - 00:05 ET by JerI wasn't aware you asked the question. Outrage is generated by the awful details recounted in the article, virtually every word of which batters one's senses. Furthermore, I personally don't support abortion rights that far into term except in exceptional cases.
Jer
fair enough
February 9, 2009 - 00:12 ET by candanceThanks for answering. I won't pester you with a drawn out debate on this tonight, as I'm about to go to bed and anyway my logic isn't generally very sharp after midnight.
But I will make a few quick points:
-If the gruesome details of every abortion were explained, more people would come to see it as barbaric. Any kind of torture can be tolerated if you stay detached from it.
-If Planned Parenthood agree to *any* kind of limits we could all have a more rational discussion about abortion legislation.
But acts of kindness and generosity must be free and voluntary; no man has a right to compel another to follow his conscience. This is a concern which lies between a man and his God.
-Richard Fuhrman, pro slave advocate, 1823
allow me, Jer
February 9, 2009 - 10:19 ET by lotrThe top level entry states [emphasis mine]:
[Judd is] starring in a new advertising campaign by the group Defenders of Wildlife against Gov. Sarah Palin for promoting "the brutal aerial killing of wolves." Palin’s accused of "casting aside science and championing the slaughter of wildlife." Viewers are urged to help stop Palin’s "senseless savagery."
Last year, Judd appeared on a panel of the Clinton Global Initiative and promoted her pro-abortion agenda. She declared to our gang at CNSNews.com that 'a woman voting for McCain and Palin is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders'.
First off, it is Ms. Judd who begins with the "accusation couched in a language designed primarily to inflame":
"casting aside science and championing the slaughter of wildlife" ??
"senseless savagery" ??
'a woman voting for McCain and Palin is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders' ??????!!!
This last statement is, in my opinion, particularly inflamatory in the extreme. But if we extrapolate from the statement, we can very reasonably assume that she is endorsing Obama. Among a handful of other things, Obama distinguished himself from his liberal Democratic opponents in his vote against the partial birth abortion act. If Ms. Judd wants to open her mouth and endorse candidates, yet condemn those as savage and cannibal who think otherwise, then it is perfectly reasonable to point out the utter hypocrisy (to the n-th power) in her support for a candidate that actively opposed legislation designed to outlaw the vacuuming of baby skulls.
And one by one dropped the revellers in the blood-bedewed halls of their revel, and died each in the despairing posture of his fall. -- Edgar Allan Poe
Right, lotr... Judd does
February 9, 2009 - 13:06 ET by JerRight, lotr...
Judd does use inflammatory language to support her "Defenders of Wildlife" views and unnecessarily and unfairly personalizes the debate by attacking Governor Palin.
But the merits of her position--and that arguably inappropriate personalization--can and should be challenged without resorting to abortion grotesqueries extrapolated from nothing more than her well-documented support of Planned Parenthood and Barack Obama.
It is very probable Sarah Palin does not "favor" the brutal and savage killing of wolves just as Ashley Judd most likely does not "favor" the vacuuming of babies' skulls.
I am bothered by simplistic reductions of complicated and extraordinarily emotional issues to 30-second sound bites of hyper-charged rhetoric--regardless of whose political agenda is being advanced.
[But, lotr, the chicken/Colonel Sanders analogy? That quip has been used so frequently it's almost a political colloquialism. Barely registers on the 'outrage meter'.]
Jer
I see your point, but I
February 9, 2009 - 20:06 ET by lotrI see your point, but I still don't agree with the moral equivalence you are making. Obama supports legalized partial birth abortions (i.e., a "late-term procedure" requiring the suctioning of the "skull contents" of a partially delivered human being), and she supports Obama. Sorry, but that's what the procedure involves. I know that she hasn't come out saying this explicitly, but that's what her candidate supports, and abortion is not an incidental issue in her support for Obama (i.e., it's one of the main reasons she supports him).
And, sorry, but I also disagree regarding the Chicken/Col. Sanders analogy. First off, this was the first time I heard it -- there are some folks out there who don't know all the political colloquialisms. Secondly, it's still outrageous. Women and men are split evenly (to a statistical dead heat) on the issue of abortion, and her casting it otherwise (using her celebrity status to broadcast it) is a boldfaced lie.
And one by one dropped the revellers in the blood-bedewed halls of their revel, and died each in the despairing posture of his fall. -- Edgar Allan Poe
I would venture to say the
February 9, 2009 - 22:14 ET by JerI would venture to say the entire range of (so-called) women and gender issues were the controlling factor in Judd's support for Obama. To her, being pro-choice and pro-life are not mutually exclusive concepts. But, her ideological zealotry blinds her to the rationality underlying an opposing view, and thus she is unable to comprehend how any woman could support a candidate--such as McCain--whose politics (to Judd's thinking) are inimical to her self-interest. Therein lies the basis of the chicken/Colonel Sanders comparison--which [maybe it's more of a southern thing] I have now heard at least a few times in recent years from candidates of both parties applied to a variety of issues.
Jer
OK, fair enough. Thanks
February 10, 2009 - 09:45 ET by lotrOK, fair enough. Thanks for the reasoned conversation.
And one by one dropped the revellers in the blood-bedewed halls of their revel, and died each in the despairing posture of his fall. -- Edgar Allan Poe
lotr...
February 10, 2009 - 12:28 ET by JerMega dittos
Jer
kill babies, not wolves?
February 8, 2009 - 20:52 ET by TN MomHow can Ashley Judd defend the killing of babies as 'A woman's right to choose' then attack Sarah Palin for choosing to kill wolves in order to save the moose/natives of Alaska?
Actions speak louder than words!
I'm sick of the Same Old TIRED meaningless, unfounded, unfactual, arguments from Hollywood actors who have their Liberal quota to fill. Nothing but a bunch of 'players' who don't live in the real world.
To say that Judd's ideas are
February 8, 2009 - 21:23 ET by msh1973To say that Judd's ideas are insane would be putting mildly. "Woe to the man that calls evil good and good evil"...I am just sayin.
Question for A-Judd
February 8, 2009 - 22:24 ET by BarkerAshley Judd: How would you react if you saw a wolf about to devour a newborn baby?
My guess is you'd serve the baby's head to the wolf on a silver platter.
No?
These liberals can't even
February 8, 2009 - 23:24 ET by rbosqueThese liberals can't even win elections gracefully. Palin's not even running anymore and yet they continue their hatred for her. They should give it a rest. What a bunch of *-holes.
Ashley Judd
February 8, 2009 - 23:40 ET by vibriococciHawt -n- stewpid.
Gawd, I would love to see Palin come out and say...
February 9, 2009 - 00:23 ET by Lord Erond"Mrs. Judd, I don't get it. You have more sympathy for predatory wolves than for unborn children?" Tactful, to the point.
"What you can not enforce, do not command" -Sophocles-
Sorry, Tim...
February 9, 2009 - 01:01 ET by Indiana Joe...but if you're expecting any consistency or common sense from people like Ashley Judd, I can't help you.
;^)
"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss..." - The Who
Liberal thinking
February 9, 2009 - 07:29 ET by Blogger Guy00001Liberals can have contradictory thoughts in their mind at the same time. Normal people would see the contradiction right away. It doesn't bother liberals - logic and consistency are not important for liberals.
Thanks for the update on
February 9, 2009 - 07:51 ET by Jack BauerThanks for the update on the massively stupid, abortion-extremist Judd Head.
Little did I know how right I was when I posted this last week...
JUDDgment day
February 3, 2009 - 19:29 ET by Jack Bauer
Judd is, of course, an extremist PRO-ABORTER. Maybe she get's a bounty on the severed forearms of babies, who knows?
But imagine this: it's suddenly realized that there are too many ANIMALS on the planet.
In order to control this vast population of animals, scientists
invent a "species-specific" air-borne abortion chemical which can be
sprayed in the wild and causes, for instance, WOLVES to abort their
pre-born cubs.
Wanna bet Ashley Judd and the rest of the Kate Naral pro-abortion
extremists would be more outraged about that, than aborting human
beings?
Ashey Judd: Medical Miracle
February 9, 2009 - 11:36 ET by Tom in NCAshley Judd is actually a medical miracle, she actually survived a partial birth abortion AFTER having her brains sucked out!
That explains a lot about her and most other liberals like her.
Just one Reason
February 9, 2009 - 11:45 ET by illumnaThis is just one reason to boycott her movies. Money talks and and not watching her movies will remove her from the public scene.
In fact, I'm in boycott of many actors because they continue to spread their ignorance.
partial birth abortion
February 9, 2009 - 11:50 ET by east tennessee johnwhere was Ashley when Olbermann's mother need advice?
partial birth abortion
February 9, 2009 - 11:50 ET by east tennessee johnwhere was Ashley when Olbermann's mother need advice?
We could still abort Olbermann...
February 9, 2009 - 12:29 ET by Lord ErondThat's one of those late term abortions right? It's just semantics...murder, abortion, I mean come on....
"What you can not enforce, do not command" -Sophocles-
All Aboard The "Jolly Tet Offensive"
February 9, 2009 - 11:48 ET by RadiomanAshley did her thing on Larry King last week and Larry got it right: It was the wolf with four legs under discussion, not the one strutting around on two legs. One wonders with Larry sometimes. It seems to me that Larry and Andy Rooney and Robert Byrd should get aboard Walter Cronkite's boat, the "Jolly Tet Offensive" and head for the warm waters of Cuba. You can expect more Juddniks to spew their anger in Palin's direction. Any time there is an opportunity to bring up her name Olbermann's glasses will steam and Rachel (Can't this gal afford a blouse?) Maddow will go on a Palin rant. They can't let Sarah or her conservative ideas gain any national recognition. She and all conservatives must be stamped or stomped out... under a well polished boot. By the way, I've got just the lady to play recreation director on the good ship "Jolly Tet Offensive" and pass out the daily allotment of Depends. I do think Helen Thomas would be perfect for the job!
http://www.chalktalk-talk.blogspot.com
Increasing the moose and caribou population...
February 9, 2009 - 12:14 ET byTim,
...by killing the wolves equates to increasing the god-fearing conservative prolifer population by allowing the liberal masses to have abortions. You could call it the culling of their own pack. So leave them alone and let them kill themselves one abortion at a time. More Moose & Caribou for the rest of the world to enjoy. A world full of conservatives, tasty!
This uproar over abortion pitting the conservative pro-lifer against the abortion-loving liberal is fascinating. Though you hate the liberals, you want more of their liberal offspring in the world. Why? Why wouldn't the liberal offspring become a burden on your precious tax dollars? Excellent paradox.
Odd Job
Fetuses, babies or children
February 9, 2009 - 14:05 ET by SickofLibsFetuses, babies or children are neither liberal or conservative.
They're just living beings. And killing any of them at any stage of life is inhuman. Period.
Exactly
February 9, 2009 - 14:11 ET by Sergeant ROCKWhat a stupid conclusion by the doofuss.
"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason
Bolton/KEYES 2012
A shining of example of the
February 9, 2009 - 14:12 ET by SickofLibsA shining of example of the fact that some people will politicize ANYTHING.
Now, now...
February 9, 2009 - 14:16 ET bySarge,
If the only ones having abortions are liberals than the logical conclusion would be that the children "saved" would be born & raised as liberals.
Odd Job
I knew it
February 9, 2009 - 14:22 ET by SickofLibsSo being a liberal IS genetic!
Conservatives, true conservatives do not have abortions.
February 9, 2009 - 14:27 ET bySickolib,
If conservatives aren't having abortions than it's gotta be liberals having all the fun. If you take away abortions from the liberals, they will likely create more liberals...genetics? No, just strength in numbers.
Odd Job
True but...
February 9, 2009 - 14:23 ET bySickolib,
"Fetuses, babies or children are neither liberal or conservative."
...eventually they will be part of the Nanny State and will feel entitled to all of its wonderful programs the conservatives rail against. So, are you willing to help these poor mothers and children to a better life or are you going to pull the "personal responsibility" card when they are in need of help? It looks as if the pregnant women are showing a little intelligence by relieving the conservative taxpayers of the burden an extra child will be on the system.
Odd Job
Odd Job
February 10, 2009 - 09:58 ET by choselife3xOnly liberals want to kill people simply for disagreeing with them. Conservatives only want murderers to die.
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
Have you read through this thread?
February 10, 2009 - 17:45 ET byCL3x,
I'm trying to keep a straight face while I read your comments...please try to look around this site to see the hatred towards liberals and their views. Who wants to kill who?
Peace be with you and as Jesus said..."Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing."
Odd Job
Odd Snob
February 10, 2009 - 17:52 ET by Sergeant ROCKWho wants to kill who?
Damn, you're dense. That was answered in the previous post. Nevermind, the stories presented on NB about you nut jobs wanting to kill people that oppose them. Like you don't read the nonsense your Kossak buddies post at DK and DU? Please..lol!
I say, bring it on big mouth.
"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason
Bolton/KEYES 2012
Time to head for the hills!
February 10, 2009 - 17:59 ET bySarge,
Please while you're on your way to the compound in Idaho...you can sing this...
The hills are alive with the sound of music
With songs they have sung for a thousand years
The hills fill my heart with the sound of music
My heart wants to sing every song it hears
My heart wants to beat like the wings of the birds
that rise from the lake to the trees
My heart wants to sigh like a chime that flies
from a church on a breeze
To laugh like a brook when it trips and falls over
stones on its way
To sing through the night like a lark who is learning to pray
I go to the hills when my heart is lonely
I know I will hear what I've heard before
My heart will be blessed with the sound of music
And I'll sing once more.
Gee wilkers, I love that tune!
Peace be with you!
Odd Job
win-win
February 9, 2009 - 12:17 ET by wiley catThe answer is simple:
Gather up all the pregnant wolves once a month or more frequently, as necessary, and give them abortions. If the wolf is about to give birth, puncture the fetus' skull with surgical scissors before it comes out (or after for that matter, it still hasn't had a chance to become live wolf, by definition).
I can't think of more humane solution, can you? It should definitely feel good for Ashley Judd, don't you think?
There is NO "anthropogenic" Global Warming. NONE.
Here's an idea....
February 9, 2009 - 12:27 ET by Lord ErondWe could take Ashley Judd and feed her to the wolves along with all the rest of the idiotic liberal ilk. That way, the wolves wouldn't eat the caribou, we don't have to shoot the wolves and to really go for the trifecta, decrease the planet population therefore saving us all from global warming. Liberals and Environmentalists are happy because we spare the wolves, and stop global warming and Conservatives are happy because there are no more liberals!
I vote yes on this plan immediately.
"What you can not enforce, do not command" -Sophocles-
I think every pro-abortion
February 9, 2009 - 12:32 ET by moderncommentaries83I think every pro-abortion (and pro-PBA) advocate should be required, by law, to be present for an abortion from beginning to end, including a follow-up with the mother.
The horror they'd see, and the affect it'd have on the woman, would change their views.
Pray for them.
Aut viam inveniam aut faciam
Just another
February 9, 2009 - 15:16 ET by Ozark_SunshineJust another Hollyweird Bimbo who proves she doesn't have a brain, much less a conscience. She should have been aborted so we don't have to listen to her. According to Keith Olberwoman, it is not to late to abort her.
sunshine, ashley's mama...
February 9, 2009 - 15:32 ET by clinging to my guns and my religion...is not the baby-aborting sort. in fact, she was very supportive of sarah palin during the campaign. "mama judd is mad," she told a cheering crowd (in springfield, missouri 10/24/08). "i could not stand by one more moment while this fabulous woman is viciously attacked." really makes you wonder where ashley contracted her derangement! rumor has it that there's something in the water in hollywood.
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle." Edmund Burke
Now we know!
February 9, 2009 - 15:28 ET by GTOIn case any of us were wondering what a feminist looks like....Ashley's t-shirt makes it quite clear.....a couple of boobs.
Now if the left could only get a sense of humor!
The dud, Judd
February 9, 2009 - 17:08 ET by wotsiznamewotsizname My grandmother told about women she knew who had had abortions (doctor in the next town; no coathanger jobs here). Some seemed alright, some looked hardened, one she knew went out of her mind, "I hear them calling to me." It is a usual adjustment mechanism to transfer guilt to another person or object when it becomes obsessive or intolerable, then publicly condemn the object as evil. Animal husbandry, including protecting the human food supply from predatory destruction is necessary to prevent starvation of the human population. Although not yet usually domesticated, the free range animals of the North in rural areas, (fifty miles to a grocery store and no road) are the livestock and major food supply of isolated villages. Wolves kill for food and fun, run in packs, and can decimate the yearly crop of moose and caribou calves. People can starve. Many years ago the village of Tonsina starved out one winter. All that remains is a few old graves. Apparently that's alright with this person who lives in uncaring ignorance in a synthetic concrete world. Well, if you're dull you can study harder. If you're ignorant you can learn more. But alas, there's no cure for stupid.