Ezra Klein: No Pride In That

« Who's Leaking Now? | Main | Getting Around Gaucheness »

February 13, 2006

No Pride In That

One thing to be clear on: Dick Cheney wasn't hunting. He wasn't doing what Ted Nugent does, or what Indians used to do. Cheney was killing things.

Update: John Cole notes that the linked report is a couple years old. Whether or not this hunting trip was like that "hunting trip" I don't know.

February 13, 2006 | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c572d53ef00d8345a7d4e69e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference No Pride In That:

» Insert Chuck Norris Joke Here from The Debate Link
Ezra Klein (via John Cole) on a hunting trip Vice President Cheney took a few years back: One thing to be clear on: Dick Cheney wasn't hunting. He wasn't doing what Ted Nugent does, or what Indians used to do. Cheney was killing things. [Read More]

Tracked on Feb 13, 2006 4:47:33 PM

» Does It Make Me A Bad Person from Minipundit
that the first thing that came to mind when I read this was "impeachment"? P.S. Best quote on the matter, from James Brady: "Now I understand why Dick Cheney keeps asking me to go hunting with him." I always liked [Read More]

Tracked on Feb 13, 2006 5:46:19 PM

Comments

Killing animals raised in captivity - raised for the express purpose of being killed by 'sportsmen' - is just sick, f'd-up sick.

For "big game", maybe Cheney will go after some herds of milk-cows - maybe the happy and liberal California cows in the TV ads that are used to provide California Cheese.

Shoot fish in a barrel much?

Posted by: JimPortandOR | Feb 13, 2006 10:10:24 AM

So, even the Vice-President aspires to be like ... (wait for it) ... Chuck Norris.

"Chuck Norris does not hunt, because hunting implies the possibility of failure. Chuck Norris goes killing."

Of course the VP has to cheat and shoot just-caged birds. What sport.

I really don't understand this. It reminds me of the scene in "The Distinguished Gentleman" where Eddie Murphy's character goes duck hunting with some NRA members and they all pull out assault rifles and start shooting. I guess it doesn't matter how you shoot, as long as you shoot something.

(You'd think his gaze turning them to stone would be enough, but nooooo...)

Posted by: Captain Sunshine | Feb 13, 2006 11:05:48 AM

I have never hunted. However, I can't get too worked up about this. Except for the "Ready, shoot, aim" part.

Skeet shooting with live skeet. I do have some empathy for the higher mammals, but "dumb as a duck" is the expression because nothing is as dumb as a quail. Mosquito swatting.

Does anyone have aesthetic or ethical objections to fishing in a stocked pond? It ain't sport, but it ain't quite contemptible either.

Posted by: bob mcmanus | Feb 13, 2006 12:31:16 PM

What's the motivation for the people -- a group that is surely much larger than just Dick Cheney -- who supply the demand for this business? Is it the challenge? Then why do they make it as unchallenging as possible? Why not shoot clay pigeons? Is it the satisfaction of doing something -- even something easy -- successfully? Is it just sadism? Is it just that they like shooting guns, because they provide a fun bang and kick, but they feel that people of their station and class should be using their guns for something more dignified that shooting empty beer cans off of an old card table with a .22, and actually killing things provides a veneer of dignity to an excuse to shoot? Is it that aristocrats in general worry that they're getting soft, because every material need of theirs is taken care of by their wealth, so they feel they should get in touch with some sort of predatory side to keep themselves tough, but they find actual hunting to frustrating? (what is the association between aristocracy and hunting anyway?)

If it were just a few weirdos who like shooting helpless birds en masse without a challenge, these sorts of game ranches would not exist. A few very rich people like Dick Cheney might set up a private operation for themselves, but I don't think that it would exist as a private club, presumably run at a profit (at least most of the time), if there weren't a lot more people than just Cheney who enjoyed doing this.

Why do they enjoy doing it?

Posted by: Julian Elson | Feb 13, 2006 12:42:26 PM

"what is the association between aristocracy and hunting anyway?"

Aristocrats used to own the land and all hunting privileges. In Europe this used to pretty complicated, i.e., the King had rights. Peasants or poachers never had rights, if a quail flew into your hovel, better not cook it.

Republicans I presume have a nostalgia for the days when the "people" or state owned nothing and had no rights. Privatization and market-oriented solutions are an attempt to move back to the good old days.

Posted by: bob mcmanus | Feb 13, 2006 1:14:42 PM

Interesting equation Bob, the people = the state, and private citizens = the government. I generally think the people = private citizens and the state = the government.

As a note, the linked quail shoot was something that happened in Pennsylvania in 2003, the accidental shooting happened in Texas.

Posted by: Dave Justus | Feb 13, 2006 4:00:21 PM

"I generally think the people = private citizens and the state = the government."

Precisely. Conservatives do not believe the people doing the work(soldiers,FEMA workers), the people making micro-decisions(Senators, Secretaries),or the people voting in officials are really people. All many million of them. It is not clear to me what they believe a state, nation or government is. A collection of Martians? Something like a corporation, with a fictional personhood, but no liability, agency, or responsibility, nor containing individuals who partially have those things?

"Government by the people, for the people shall long endure" Not much longer. L'Estat cest Bush.

Posted by: bob mcmanus | Feb 13, 2006 6:11:30 PM

I picked this up at Kevin Drum's, posted by Craigie http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com Neil should see the Feb 12

Posted by: opit | Feb 13, 2006 11:47:17 PM

Strawman alert!

"Conservatives do not believe the people doing the work (soldiers, FEMA workers), the people making micro-decisions (Senators, Secretaries),or the people voting in officials are really people."

Come now… to believe that, you would have to believe that conservatives are essentially evil. (And if you do believe that, we have little more to discuss.)

Besides, given that the great majority of soldiers are conservative, your logic deconstructs itself.

Posted by: Mastiff | Feb 14, 2006 4:16:56 AM

仓储笼
 仓储笼
 折叠式仓储笼
 仓库笼
 南京仓储笼
 上海仓储笼
 北京仓储笼
 广州仓储笼
 杭州仓储笼