Sarah Palin to host a show on the Discovery Channel?

[freydis]

Sorry... I never said they didn't qualify as threatened in the Cook Inlet. I said they don't qualify as endangered. The distiction is not minor. Do you know what group is the most opposed making them endangerd? Just a short search finds that the natives, who under the current laws and treatys with thier tribes are allowed to hunt them without restrictions, are adamantly opposed to any more regulation or restrictions on the killing of the whales.

...and simply because the tribe wants to continue to hunt them makes declining numbers irrelevant, and therefore no longer endangered?

I provided links, and you tell me to run a search? Not that I cant, but for argument's sake, you tell me something's obvious, but provide nothing to back it up?

[freydis]

...and simply because the tribe wants to continue to hunt them makes declining numbers irrelevant, and therefore no longer endangered?

I provided links, and you tell me to run a search? Not that I cant, but for argument's sake, you tell me something's obvious, but provide nothing to back it up?

and as a side note, a quick search isn't giving me the information you describe.

What it IS showing however, is that the population dwindled by 60 percent since 1979. And between '94 and 98, 47 percent, due to subsistance hunting.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

...and simply because the tribe wants to continue to hunt them makes declining numbers irrelevant, and therefore no longer endangered?

I provided links, and you tell me to run a search? Not that I cant, but for argument's sake, you tell me something's obvious, but provide nothing to back it up?

I didn't say that. I soppose I should have been more clear. For one, I did not tell you to search for anything. The short search I did on the subject gave me lots of information... like the cause of the decline. Which, according to everythign I can find, is over hunting by natives. Honestly I can understand why some are pushing to get them listed as endangerd now. The most politically expidiant way to stop the over hunting is to list them as endangered. That would stop the over hunting without breaking treatys with Native tribes.

[freydis]

I didn't say that. I soppose I should have been more clear. For one, I did not tell you to search for anything. The short search I did on the subject gave me lots of information... like the cause of the decline. Which, according to everythign I can find, is over hunting by natives. Honestly I can understand why some are pushing to get them listed as endangerd now. The most politically expidiant way to stop the over hunting is to list them as endangered. That would stop the over hunting without breaking treatys with Native tribes.

Then perhaps I wonder if the objection was political. It was still currying favor of natives over protecting the whale. It arguably may have been part of her job as a politician to try to find a balance between the state (and the environment of the state) and the people, but it still makes her a poor choice for host.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Then perhaps I wonder if the objection was political. It was still currying favor of natives over protecting the whale. It arguably may have been part of her job as a politician to try to find a balance between the state (and the environment of the state) and the people, but it still makes her a poor choice for host.

I would assume that it was political in some way. What I can say for certain is that the situation is far more complex than it would appear at first or how presented by those in opposition to her.

[candyman]

I think that maybe on this show they could highlight the wolf hunting and such and explain WHY it is done for people that do not understand these things.

The show could also show how the hunting is done in Alaska...and then they could show how it is done over in Russia and a few other countries...oh wait that would support why people in Alaska do this...

I don't care who the host is there are still going to be groups that say the host is too friendly with the environment and groups that say the host in not friendly enough with the environment. It all has to to with the watcher and how "good" they think they are when it comes to the environment. Shit, I know a few people living off the grid in Minnesota and even though they live off the land many of the "environmentalists" would think that they are not friendly with the environement.

Just give here a chance...I personally would love to see most of the other politicians, on both sides, handle being outdoors for more than a few minutes. And no being against her is not sexist unless you include sexist phrases in you statements.

[freydis]

I think that maybe on this show they could highlight the wolf hunting and such and explain WHY it is done for people that do not understand these things.

The show could also show how the hunting is done in Alaska...and then they could show how it is done over in Russia and a few other countries...oh wait that would support why people in Alaska do this...

I don't care who the host is there are still going to be groups that say the host is too friendly with the environment and groups that say the host in not friendly enough with the environment. It all has to to with the watcher and how "good" they think they are when it comes to the environment. Shit, I know a few people living off the grid in Minnesota and even though they live off the land many of the "environmentalists" would think that they are not friendly with the environement.

Just give here a chance...I personally would love to see most of the other politicians, on both sides, handle being outdoors for more than a few minutes. And no being against her is not sexist unless you include sexist phrases in you statements.

I think you're completely missing my point.

[freydis]

I would assume that it was political in some way. What I can say for certain is that the situation is far more complex than it would appear at first or how presented by those in opposition to her.

The situation indeed may have been complex. I honestly dont care what the political implications of her decision were, or what her opposition thought of it.

Hell, until she started showing more opinions I disagreed with, I'd liked her. I even voted McCain in the election. Since then, she's been very vocal on positions I don't agree with. So, I don't like her so much anymore.

I still maintain that the decisions she made in these cases showed more care for political implications than for environmental ones, which makes her a poor choice for host. They could have gone with anyone, really.

[candyman]

I think you're completely missing my point.

I wasn't really responding only to you I was really just making a statement. Notice I did not respond to one of your posts or quote you there.

[freydis]

I wasn't really responding only to you I was really just making a statement. Notice I did not respond to one of your posts or quote you there.

Ok, the point in general then.

I guess it was convenient to say "my" since a lot of the substance of the rhetorical basis of the argument's been supplied by me.

I say rhetorical basis because name calling doesn't count as a real argumentative debate to me.

[phee]

I think the irony lies in the perception that someone who seems to be very non-environmentally leaning... is hosting a show about the environment.... It would be kind of like a pyro hosting a show about fire safety.

[candyman]

I think the irony lies in the perception that someone who seems to be very non-environmentally leaning... is hosting a show about the environment.... It would be kind of like a pyro hosting a show about fire safety.

But that is all perception right?

I am just confused here because her votes and stances deal with issues in Alaska where the environment is much different that what we have around here. The wolf hunting is a good example since it deals with an issue that is there and not here.

Considering the fact that she tries he best to work with the local tribes and the people I would probably put her on the fence when it comes to the environment. Its not as easy as it sounds and even trying you best can backfire and you end up with egg on your face.

You know they do have quite a few shows where a former addict or criminal teaches people about safety or how to deal with the issues...with what I have under my belt I could surely host a fire safety show just watch what I do and do the opposite!

[phee]

But that is all perception right?

That is the question of the ages..... lol

[candyman]

Ok, the point in general then.

I guess it was convenient to say "my" since a lot of the substance of the rhetorical basis of the argument's been supplied by me.

I say rhetorical basis because name calling doesn't count as a real argumentative debate to me.

Actually I was kinda going back to the OP and added a few things from the general discussion...which gave me a headache when I tried to read only the stuff that mattered but still.

She supports measures that could slowly heal hunting methods in Alaska instead of a brute attack on them that won't work and will divide the people. Hunting from planes up there has a reason, look it up, and is actually more humane than what the local tribes call hunting...they hide sharp blades in a chunk of whale fat so when the wolf tried to eat it the blades cut up its mouth and its bleeds out leaving them a trail of blood to the body.

[candyman]

That is the question of the ages..... lol

Good point...but we could ramp up the banter and keep this going for months! Wouldn't that be fun?

[phee]

http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/sarah-palin-network/1217966/