Posted on 01/17/2009 8:15:28 AM PST by nysuperdoodle
Meet Cass Sunstein. He's a noted animal rights activist. He's dead set against hunting and sees the keeping of pets as a form of slavery. He's been a strong advocate for the concept that animals can sue humans, he's adored by the likes of PETA, he's a Harvard Law School professor and he's about to be America's new Regulatory Czar.
(Excerpt) Read more at evilconservativeonline.com ...
Special thanks goes to all those hunters who thought Obama was safe and would leave their hunting privileges alone.
Here is what you get when you don’t pay attention! You are fools, rubes and useful idiots!
This whole administration is nuts! What has happened???
I googled Cass Sunstein and couldn’t find anything about animal rights. Can you point me in the right direction? Besides the blogs, where is this information coming from?
This has got to be a joke.
I believe they are hunting rights, not privileges. Rights are God-given; privileges are granted by man.
Thank you Dallas59!
WTF??????????????????
Many people--including me--have expressed the wish to come back in another life as one of my wife's cats. Talk about luxury!
Looking at all the Obama appointments, it’s like he is setting the country up for anarchy. I mean, who can respect a treasury secretary who doesn’t pay taxes? Who can respect an Attorney General who blatantly broke the law to pardon a felon? A labor secretary that belongs to a group that advocates a world government? Speaking of World government is that what Obama is aiming for, when his administration breaks down every aspect of the federal government, or just simply, martial law?
“This whole administration is nuts! What has happened???”
Hey with a free billion in support from the media...I could get elected.
As for pets
Rush says Dogs have masters or owners, Cats on the other hand have a staff
It’s gonna be fun watching what happens when he tells Obama’s DEA they have to get rid of all the drug-sniffing dogs.
I know. Rush thinks his little cats (he has only one now, doesn’t he?) are just sooooooooo cute. They probably are. My wife and children and I have lots of animals. We always have had. I love them. Life without animals, it seems to me, would be sterile.
That One is afraid that the vetting process might discover that someone is not a natural b qualified to hold the office, and hopes that his friends in the media will downplay the issue.
Brain dead people + under 18 voters buy into obamas BS.
My guess is that the Richardson withdrawal has something to do with the Clintons. Either, the Clintons went to Obama with information about Richardson, or they went to Richardson and made threats. They don’t want Richardson anywhere near Washington. His federal career was over the day that he crossed the Clintons.
Our county council was considering a special fee and regulatory oversight for anyone who had more than six animals on their property. I heard that the idea was withdrawn, though.
When laws become too goofy, people ignore them. The feds can’t even get the Indians up here to quit spring duck hunting or adhere to game regulations/seasons. Not enough game wardens out thhere to apprehend them either. Our Indianns 50 years removed from the stoneage got it figured out, us stupid White people don’t, no joke. I don’t get too worked up about this or that.
Doggy Ping
Here is a less inflammatory story about Obama’s new appointee:
http://www.consumerfreedom.com/news_detail.cfm/headline/3807
Okay, the one species of animal man has manipulated for thousands of years for various uses, including companionship, are SLAVES? Idiots like this drive me nuts.
We who hunt have been worried about just this sort of appointment, and it’s one of the reasons we opposed Obama (not that there weren’t ten thousand other reasons as well).
I am going to retreat to some cove in the mountains where They won’t know if I take an occasional deer or goose for my own larder.
You and I can believe anything we want. The law views hunting as a privilege.
The founding fathers never foresaw the need to enshrine it into the Bill of Rights, so the liberals can now hack away at it.
>The founding fathers never foresaw the need to enshrine it into the Bill of Rights<
It’s amazing they did not do so, considering England had a long history of keeping the serfs from hunting on the King’s land. They didn’t have Safeways back then, so hunting was a necessity for the average person.
I think that they probably considered that the right to keep and bear arms, in conjunction with the fourth amendment property rights, would ensure our right to hunt as a matter of course. Too bad they could never foresee the legal perversions libs try to inflict on our constitution. Don’t get me started^^...
We are in trouble. This guy is unhinged; it sounds like.
Perhaps they thought 1) everybody would remember the King's lack of gratitude and 2) that supermarkets would replace hunting altogether.
This guy probaqbly calls fish “sea kittens.”
He’s a lawyer. He’s trying to stake out a new set of victims needing legal counsel, and probably does not give a darn about animals or want any pets.
That said, I do think better conditions for factory farmed animals is desperately needed and a stain on our conscious.
“Animals should be permitted to bring suit, with human beings as their representatives, to prevent violations of current law … 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.”
Oh gee, I hope my Yorkie doesn't get mad at me!!
Wrong. The Bill of Rights is not a positive list of rights, but rather a list of things the government cannot do:
Amendment IX: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
It's becoming harder and harder to tell the difference between satire and truth of late. It is beginning to scare me a little.
But to be sure I'm with the program, I asked my crew..
Outside kitties...Of course we have a choice. We choose to allow you to feed us and worship us. Now...where are the treats?
Dog #1...Human control??? Do you mean remote control? I ate that last week.
Dog #2...You are telling me I have the right to an attorney? What's an attorney? Is it good to eat?
Dog #3...I have the right to go out on my own with no food or water or protection? Maybe later.
Dog #4...Is it time to go for a ride in the truck? (please, please, please)
Dogs #5 & #6...Are you crazy? Can't you see we are asleep? We have our names on the no call list.
I totally agree.
You're probably safe with a Yorkie. Be glad you don't have a cat.
more animals
This idiot hasn’t met my dog. She rules the house! No slavery there
.
Excellent post potlatch -
Thank you devolve. Sorry I missed you, the girls just left at Midnight!!
Oooo, poor beat up cat! Funny but not funny.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.