But a funny thing happened to Eliot on his way to the work one day.
HSUS acolyte League of Humane Voters-NYC, and the seduction of the New York State Democratic Committee
Earlier in May, the New York State Democratic Party signed on to a "resolution in support of animal protection legislation." Unable to restrain the purple prose, animal extremist-affiliated League of Humane Voters-NYC, gushed:
In a move which the League of Humane Voters of New York City is
calling "historic" and "precedent-setting," the New York State Democratic Party adopted a resolution at its spring meeting on Wednesday affirming its commitment to the humane treatment of animals. . . the state Democratic Party's precedent-setting action in support of animal protection is not only the right thing to do, it's also intelligent politically. . .
Animal protection roller coaster revs into gear: intelligent politically?
or bullshit, panderingly?
The Humane Society of the United States is the world's largest, wealthiest animal - ". . .hundreds of thousands of animals are tortured and killed in New York each year. . .
- "there are too few laws to protect animals. . ."
In New York? Arguably the most over-legislated state (second to California, naturally) in the country? Hello? Competent, impartial enforcement of animal welfare provisions, not to mention training, oversight and funding for both staff and programs, are different issues altogether. But not enough laws? Give me a break. No one is shy about putting pen to paper in New York. Twenty three pages on cruelty to animals, and I think the site needs updating.
Stereotyping 650,000 New Yorkers as maniacal sociopaths: political intelligence?
The NYS Democratic Committee signed on to a resolution which profiles hunters as sadistic blood-thirsty drunks competing in slaughter contests. It conjures up the image of trophy-hunters killing drugged up, elderly, trapped circus animals.
The resolution is an animal extremist wet dream. Was signing on to it "political intelligence" on the part of the NYS Democratic Party? Or is something else going on here?
Ed Boks, the General Manager of the City of Los Angeles Animal Services, is a huge proponent of Lloyd Levine's draconian, counterproductive proposal to surgically sterilize every pet dog and cat in the state of California at 16 weeks of age.
But you knew that.
Edward R. Murrow, MacNeil & Lehrer, and now. .Ed Boks?
Turns out that Ed Boks also does political reporting and commentary. He's a political pundit! Who knew?
Boks explains that Levine's AB 1634 "squarely aligns with both Republican and Democratic core values" and writes:
I personally appreciate Republican core values of fiscal responsibility, smaller more efficient government, and the protection of personal property rights. . .[but] Pets are not like refrigerators or motorcycles. Pets can suffer.
So there you have it: Republicans = Cash. Democrats = Love, truth, beauty and all that is good in the world.
Its all so neat and tidy.
And so freaking twisted.
You're either with "us" or against "us". Rank and file Democrats walk the plank
Do I have to buy into the whole "hunters are demented maniacs driven by bloodlust" thing to be politically correct?
Can I still wear leather and vote the party ticket?
Do I have to give up my dog? My Dog Votes, and he's not liking what the Democratic Party has on offer these days.
So, am I still a Democrat?

2 comments:
I think the problem is that the Democrats are no longer Democrats.
you said it, caveat.
They have become purveyors of the fascist nanny state.. just as the republicans have always claimed.
Post a Comment