Fw: The good, bad and UGLY

Sent: Saturday, May 29, 2010 5:28 PM
Subject: Fw: The good, bad and UGLY

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, May 29, 2010 9:55 AM
Subject: Fw: The good, bad and UGLY


Good Government vs Bad Government


 Governor is jogging with his dog along a nature trail. A coyote jumps out and attacks dog.

 #1. Governor starts to intervene, reflects upon the movie "Bambi" and then realizes he should stop; the coyote is only doing what is natural.

 #2. He calls animal control. Animal control captures coyote and spends $200 testing it for diseases and $500 upon relocating it.

 #3. He calls veterinarian. Vet collects dead dog and spends $200 testing it for diseases.

 #4. Governor goes to hospital and spends $3,500 getting checked for diseases from the coyote and on getting bite wound bandaged.

 #5. Running trail gets shut down for 6 months while wildlife services conduct a $100,000 survey to make sure the area is clear of dangerous animals.

 #6. Governor spends $50,000 of state funds implementing a "coyote awareness" program for residents of the area.

 #7. State legislature spends $2 million investigating how to better handle rabies and how to possibly eradicate the disease.

 #8. Governor's security agent is fired for not stopping the attack and for letting the Governor intervene.

 #9. Cost: $75,000 to train new security agent.

 #10. PETA protests the coyote relocation and files suit against the state.


 #1. Governor shoots coyote and keeps jogging.
 Governor has spent $0.50 on a .45 ACP hollow point cartridge. Buzzards eat dead coyote.

 Any wonder why we are broke?


gruaud said...

Oooooo, look!

Shiny, distracting coyote!

Anonymous said...

I didn't realize coyote attacks on governor's dogs was such a problem in this country.

I wonder what good v. bad government would look like in situations applicable to the average American. Is this email saying we should just shoot all our problems?

Anonymous said...

1) I'm not totally sure, but I doubt that coyotes usually attack in broad daylight and they would likely never attack a person, who is much bigger than them, unless they were either incredibly desperate or rabid from rabies.

The idea that the governor would just let his dog get attacked is stupid.

2) Animal control would definitely want to test it for rabies, but they wouldn't relocate it. It would be put down.

3) Again, testing the dog may reveal important info about disease.

4) Why would the governor have to go to the hospital? I thought he didn't intervene? Are you saying he just stood there and let himself get bitten like a moron? If so, he could have something like rabies, so I guess he should get checked out. And way to pull the $3500 number out of your ass.

5) Another number pulled out of someones ass. But if there are rabid, rabies invested Coyotes who will attack people, don't you think we ought to investigate that?

6) More ass numbers.

7) Even more ass numbers.

8) So their was security there, and yet the coyote still attacked? And I thought the governor made the choice not to intervene because he's a big pussy or something? What?

9) Amazing how many numbers can be pulled from one ass!

10) Again, the coyote is dead, and PETA is annoying but there's nothing to fear from a lawsuit.

1) The governor carries a gun with him while jogging? Bullshit.

Any wonder why we are broke?

I'm sure it has nothing to do with decreased tax revenue from giving huge tax breaks to the rich, or wasteful spending on pork products for political contributors. Nope, the answer is rabies.

ferschitz said...

Thanks to prior posts; sums up nicely. Not only a propoganda FAIL but typical rightwing dumb stab at humor FAIL.

All I could think was: is THIS why Mark Sanford left the Appalacian Trail and, exhibiting derelection in his duties as Gov of SC, flew secretly down to Argentina to grab some hot poontang from his tango-sweetie, who, ya know, was NOT his wife (IOKIYAR,though, naturally).

Was Sanford just a-skeeeeered of rabid cayotes, so he had to fly far, far away from that dreaded Appalacian trail???

Hooray4US said...

WTF? Is the moral of this story just to "solve" everything with your gun??

I hike a lot. Seen a lot of rattle snakes, bears, cayotes, moose, you name it. And guess what? I never, ever needed a gun... and I was not some trembling scaredy-cat without a gun. What IS it with these yellow-bellied cowards that they cannot conceive of doing anything without packing some heat??

Compensating much?

Tootseye said...

Agree with Gruaud: Republican propoganda distraction. Ignore that gushing oil volcano and focus on stupid, dumb, meaningless stuff that is striving desparately (and failing) to make leftists look like "the problem" rather than the corporation - BP - which is a HUGE problem.

Wake up sheeples...

Anonymous said...

I've never heard of a coyote attack causing that much fuss, but here in California, we have mountain lions instead, and they tend to pounce from behind.

Doesn't shut down the jogging trails for six months, but it does spook people all the same.

Anonymous said...

@ Anon

In my area of CA we get coyotes, but they only attack pets left out at night. Scary and sad, but nothing like this.

Anonymous said...

I don't recall any coyote in Bambi. I don't even recall much killing... except of course when the hunter used a gun to shoot Bambi's mother.

So how exactly did Bambi inspire this guy to let a wild animal just bite him?

Anoner said...

Coyotes do sometimes kill house pets. If a coyote did attack a human, it would mean it had rabies. So it should be checked out. The rest of this is stupid nonsense. What's the point of it again?

Oh to make fun of stupid gov't regulations that protect citizens??

I guess the fact that the Bush Admin filled Mines & Mineral Safety (MMS) with corporate cronies who FAILED to have BP do an adequate job with the oil rig, plus, oh I dunno, enforce "stupid rules" about having a disaster prevention and disaster management plan in place was more "sensible" than this conservative fairy tale about the "stupidity" of checking a rabid coyote for rabies.

Way to go, Republicans, for brainwashing your voters into believing gov't regulations are a waste. Go tell that the small business owners along the Gulf Coast. I'm sure that they'd disagree with that philosophy right now. Thanks for nothing.

Snarla said...

Governor Rick Perry of Texas shot a coyote while jogging in April. Story here: http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/news/720001-196/gun-carrying-governor-shoots-coyote-on-jog.html

No doubt the same argument is meant to cover why we just shoot American citizens who have the gall to live overseas in majority Muslim nations.

Anonymous said...

Good find Snarla.

Amazing that this guy would willingly go running through dangerous ground and yet be so scared that he would actually take a gun with him. Sounds to me like he just wanted an excuse to kill something and act like a big man.

Funny, though, about the last line of this email, "wonder why we are broke?". Texas, which elected Gov Perry, is broke too, and it was only able to balance its budget but sucking up stimulus dollars (the same stimulus Perry was so angrily opposed to). So how's that for good government?

Steve said...

Some people DO like going to areas of nature that just so happen to be dangerous. There's nothing inherently wrong with going out to see these areas. In fact, I'd encourage more people to go see them so we all appreciate, and preserve, nature.

But you'd have to be a total moron to go out to some places without some protection, especially when those areas may be unregulated or inadequately controlled. It's not looking for trouble, its being smart. I'd say Governor Perry was perfectly justified in what he did. You wouldn't even need to check the coyote for rabies unless it had actually physically come in contact with a person- wild animals have rabies, and that fact is usually not a problem unless one bites someone so doctors can decide whether to start the very helpful (but very painful and time consuming) process of vaccination. Pets are usually vaccinated to begin with and just require revaccination if bitten.

However, this email oversimplifies one little event while at the same time throwing out such a huge straw man at "liberals" (I'm assuming) that you'd think we had a second moon. There's a lot of problems that can't be solved by shooting from the hip.

Anonymous said...

@ Steve

Then why take the dog? The dog was the one in real danger (so he says), as the coyote wouldn't attack him. And if he's so worried about snakes then its even worse that he took the dog, which could easy come across a snake and get bitten.

Most of all I find it just weird that this guy would go jogging with a laser mounted pistol and then use it a the first sign of any danger. No warning shot. No animal repellent, which they give people in areas with bears. He deliberately goes into a situation where there's a high probability this will happen, and he shoots an animal to get his rocks off. This makes him some kind of hero?

Anonymous said...

Coyotes will definitely "take" smaller animals, so it begs the question of why Gov Hair Perry would go jogging in a semi-wilderness area with a puppy. That's just asking for trouble and stupid.

From reading the article (thanks, Snarla!) it's unclear - since Perry was yelling at the coyote (a reasonable thing to do) - wether the coyote would have "taken" the puppy. Maybe. Maybe not. Or maybe Perry just felt like shooting to kill, since he had the coyote in his laser beam site. Hair Perry, a real man's man, for sure!

Question: how does one get from a dumb story about dumb Hair Perry needlessly shooting a coyote to this dumb email with some weird strawman argument about alleged bad government? Even dumber than Gov Perry.

Anonymous said...

Comment 14-

Read the story. He went running around the house he was staying at. Was he supposed to stay inside? He yelled at the coyote to stop while it ignored him. Would a warning shot really help a coyote intent on attacking? He shot it once- hardly sounds like someone "getting his rocks off". Do you know that he was "getting his rocks off" or are you just throwing that in there?

Maybe he'd also assume that the puppy would be smart enough to avoid getting bitten by a snake? Dogs are lower to the ground and can have better situational awareness of stuff like that- they were domesticated after all to be our watchdogs (no pun intended, seriously). For all you know it could have been the dog who actually made Perry aware of the coyote.

Also, repellent wouldn't work so much- that's usually applied to territory and not on individuals. It's not 100% effective anyway.

Comment 15-
I don't think he was really "asking for trouble." I wouldn't be taking my dog anywhere I couldn't protect it, but if the guy feels he can take the necessary steps to protect his dog its his right. No place is 100% safe to take your dog out, and its not like he was actually looking for trouble. Plenty of people go out into full-on wilderness (not semi-wilderness) with their pets all the time- are they all asking for trouble? I'd say they're taking their pets out for some recreation.

As for whether or not the coyote was actually going for the dog, I'd lean on the side of yes- usually wild animals run off when you make a bunch of noise because they don't want trouble and usually only stick around when they a) know you can't hurt them or b) don't care.

Anonymous said...

Would a warning shot really help a coyote intent on attacking?

Couldn't hurt to try, and I bet it would.

He shot it once- hardly sounds like someone "getting his rocks off".

A grown man puts himself in a situation where he gets to play Dirty Harry and take out a small animal with a laser guide pistol. Just saying.

Also, repellent wouldn't work so much- that's usually applied to territory and not on individuals. It's not 100% effective anyway.

Bull. Bear repellent will stop a charging grizzly in its tracks.

Anonymous 15 said...

No one suggested that Hair Perry LOCK himself inside whatever house he was staying at. I suggested that if Hair Perry knew he was in a type of wilderness area with wild animals, then the intelligent choice would be to not take a puppy with him on an early morning jog when it's a well-known fact that wildlife are more likely to be out and about. Clearly Hair Perry expected some kind of trouble, or he wouldn't have bothered taking his laser sighted gun with him.

It's much more likely that a coyote or other animal of that nature would attack a smaller puppy. So, yeah: I think it's very, very irresponsible of Gov Perry to put his dog's life in danger. Perry could have easily gone jogging on his own; no one here suggested that he lock himself inside.

I've done a lot of wilderness hiking myself. I've seen lots of wild animals, including rattle snakes, out in the forests and deserts, high mountains, you name it. I've never carried a gun, and hey, guess what??? Gee whiz, I've never needed one.

It's a fallacy if you believe that Hair Perry really really needed to shoot the coyote. I don't buy it, but IF he did, it's because he was irresponsible as dog owner.

Yeah: Hair Perry - a real man's man... shooting the wildlife to show how manly he is.

Creative Commons License
MyRightWingDad.net is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.