The latest "czar' is the regulatory czar and he just happens to require senate confirmation. They are voting on him today. He thinks hunting should be illegal, the 2nd ammendment is not an idividual right and animals should be able to sue people...
Quote:
Another of President Obama’s appointments is coming under fire. This time it is Professor Cass Sunstein, tapped by the Obama administration to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. On the surface he does not seem nearly as extreme in his views as Van Jones. The hearing held by the Senate Homeland Security and Government Oversight Committee revealed a pragmatic approach to regulation viewed as centrist in nature. What is not centrist about Professor Sunstein are his beliefs on hunting, animal rights, and agriculture.
Professor Sunstein has stated in the past that all hunting should be eliminated by regulation. This is extremely dangerous to hunters as this is one of the most powerful positions in the White House, controlling all kinds of regulations that will directly affect hunting. At a Harvard University conference, he said “We ought to ban hunting, I suggest, if there isn’t a purpose other than sport and fun. That should be against the law. It’s time now.” Even though he seems to have left the door open to some hunting for sustenance in that statement, his other beliefs on animal rights preclude nearly all animal use. That is an extreme viewpoint not shared by most Americans.
On animal rights Professor Sunstein has stated that animals may have the right to sue in court. His position stops short of granting animals full citizenship and while he believes they still may be considered property, they should be granted the opportunity to sue with human representation in a court of law. In this far-fetched parallel reality, there would practically be an end to any animal use anywhere in the United States. A chicken suing a farmer for better living conditions is just as preposterous as an attorney representing a deer that a hunter has harvested. Those kind of questions addressing animal welfare are usually settled through regulation. Unfortunately for farmers, hunters, fisherman and anyone else who makes their living with animals, the regulatory direction Professor Sunstein will take us in is guaranteed to be onerous.
It is an exercise in mental gymnastics to debate the merit of an animal having the right to be represented in a court of law. If this became the law of the land, it opens a Pandora's box for attorneys to enter into litigation on the behalf of animals. It also begs the question; if an animal can sue a human for damages, can an animal sue a human entity such as a wildlife management agency for introducing a predator into an Eco-system formerly devoid of predators? Would an attorney be able to represent a herd of elk in the case of wolf re-introduction? This is just one example of why this is not currently allowed. It is curious that people with these beliefs stop at granting animals rights equal to humans but never enter into the debate as to which animals have more rights than others. While the elk in this example would not be directly suing the wolves, the rights of the wolves would have to be balanced against the rights of the elk. This can only come from the basic premise that animals and humans are somehow separate and independent of each other and do not co-exist. This is not the case. Humans and animals will continue to be in direct competition for habitat and food as long as we both live on this planet. While the animals may or may not benefit from increased litigation the attorneys certainly would. Professor Sunstein is a professor of law. I guess it is true that when you are a hammer the whole world looks like a nail.
It could be that Professor Sunstein’s appointment to a politically powerful position is pay-back for animal rights groups supporting the president during the campaign. As the public begins to hear more about these extreme viewpoints there is the potential of an even greater push-back against the administration and this appointment in particular. The president does not need another debate about a radical appointment when he is trying to pass such controversial legislation as health care reform but that is what is happening as this approval process moves forward. Already the National Rifle Association and hunting groups such as Safari Club International are aligning to prevent his appointment not to mention all the agriculture lobbying groups. This is not a man the outdoor sports community needs in a sensitive, powerful position in any sector of government.
http://www.examiner.com/x-2320-Balti...ext-Van-Jones#
FYI the Kansas senators are:
Senator Sam Brownback 202-224-6521
Senator Pat Roberts 202-224-4474
I have already emailed both expressing my views on the subject and from what I heard Brownbacks staff also expressed how they felt about this douche.
So if you hunt or eat meat you might wanna call your senators TODAY
Linear Mode
