Veg*n President Bush a Fur Supporter???

I never really minded Bush(please, no comments on this statement) other than his environmental dealings, but quite frankly, that's repulsive. I've seen beavers in their natural habitat, and they are lovely creatures who obviously care for one another. Their social heirarchy is almost that of humans, and they remain close even after the children go through puberty. It disgusts me that he would do such a thing. What's the point in wearing fur and leather when there are different types of faux-fur and pleather that look real enough. And plus, a furry stetson is just plain tacky.

I think some one is say that Bush would do that. I beleive that Bush is against animal crulity. I dont think he would wear it too.

AngelsCavies said:

I think some one is say that Bush would do that. I beleive that Bush is against animal crulity. I dont think he would wear it too.

Click to expand...

What? Are you saying he would or wouldn't wear it. I didn't understand the statement.

he would not wear it. Im saying that some one probably made up that crap

I highly doubt that anyone made that up. He owns cattle ranches, and doesn't he hunt as well??

https://www.peta.org/mc/NewsItem.asp?id=5731

This is another article about it.

(broken link removed)

This one includes pictures of the hat.

I for one, am not surprised.

“And that will all be done by hand. We have the George W. Bush logo in there in metallic red and silver. And then my right hand man, Jared, hand-laced the back of the sweatband. Normally they're just sewn together. This was hand laced together with kangaroo."

I dont think its a beaver skin hat and plus I know Bush loves animal. and why does everone always have something bad to say about him.

AngelsCavies said:

I know Bush loves animal. and why does everone always have something bad to say about him.

Click to expand...

Maybe because he is an AWFUL human being and an absolutely miserable president.

You think Bush loves animals? You think he loves the environment? Try these “Bushisms” on for size.

-Bush has gone out of his way to attack animal advocates on his presidential campaign website! That’s right, in their bid for reelection to the White House, the Bush-Cheney 2004 team posted a report for hunters titled “John Kerry on Hunting,” which attacked not only the Democratic nominee, but also the entire animal protection community!

- the President’s campaign took aim at groups that work on a broad range of animal issues – from pet overpopulation to animal fighting to protecting habitat. He’s slammed two organizations that work to protect animals from cruelty

-President Bush has always portrayed himself as a friend to trophy hunters. He has hosted leaders of about 20 hunting organizations, including the Safari Club International, National Rifle Association, and U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance, at his ranch in Crawford, Texas. And as Governor of Texas, he was named “Governor of the Year” by the Safari Club – one of the world’s most influential and extreme trophy hunting organizations

- rolled back campaign promises on clean air, reversing Clinton administration initiatives on drinking water, and promoting new oil exploration in previously protected regions including pushing to increase domestic oil production by opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska to drilling.

- Withdrew U.S. support for a landmark 1997 global warming agreement signed in Kyoto, Japan

- rolled back rules that ban development on 60 million acres of national forest, lift new limits on the amounts of arsenic allowed in drinking water, and undo new cleanup regulations for federal surface mines. Environmentalists are also worried that Bush administration officials will revoke actions that designated large areas of land as protected national monuments.

-the Bush administration has shown that it is willing to bend any environmental regulation for its corporate friends. For example, Nissan was exempted from a regulation governing the fuel economy of their vehicle fleets
-Bush Administration replaced the Roadless Area Conservation Rule with a state petition process that essentially eliminates federal protections from logging and mining in millions of acres of national forests.

- President Bush’s proposed budget for fiscal year 2005 inadequately funds land conservation, wildlife protection, and the national parks.

I could go on but I think that is quite enough to more then make my point. Bush cares nothing for animals, animal rights, wildlife (unless it includes shooting it), the environment or even the air we breath and the water we drink. I don't know about you but I find it hard to believe that a man that would treat animals and the environment in such a callous way cares a wit about the majority of the people he "leads".

Good grief Voodoojoint. You have interesting view points. Watch the cut and paste technique. Are you forgetting that our President answers to a Senate and Congress? Afterall, this is a democracy. You should really research your facts instead of jumping to false conclusions and jumping on the "bandwagon" of some undereducated interest groups.

It's a fact that he's not pro-environmentalism. Look at the Alaska Wildlife Refuge, look at his hunting, etc. You'll see that it's true.

AngelsCavies said:

I dont think its a beaver skin hat and plus I know Bush loves animal. and why does everone always have something bad to say about him.

Click to expand...

It is a Beaver skin hat...have you read the numerous articles about it???

kkendall said:

Good grief Voodoojoint. You have interesting view points. Watch the cut and paste technique. Are you forgetting that our President answers to a Senate and Congress? Afterall, this is a democracy. You should really research your facts instead of jumping to false conclusions and jumping on the "bandwagon" of some undereducated interest groups.

Click to expand...

I'm not the only one with these view points. If you haven't noticed about half of the country agrees with me.

Nice try with the Democracy thing, but you are joking right? You do know that the President has his ways of pushing things through and creating loopholes right?

The Senate and congress has the Republican majority ...which way do you think their vote will go?

Feel free to educate yourself on the issues. I was able to put up facts about Bush. You told me to "double check". Guess what, I already did. Back up your opinion that I am wrong on these issues or your opinion means nothing. The facts are that Bush has done nothing positive for the Environment and has publically attacked animal rights supporters.

Here, Since you seem to refuse to educate yourself I’ve supplied origins and cross referenced my quotes.

-“Bush has gone out of his way to attack animal advocates on his presidential campaign website”
- “the President’s campaign took aim at groups that work on a broad range of animal issues...”
...Unfortunately his campaign website is closed but here is where I got my quote. I also saw this info myself on Bush’s website when it was up. I’m sure you did too...unless you didn’t actually bother researching a candidate you support. (broken link removed)

-President Bush has always portrayed himself as a friend to trophy hunters...
(broken link removed)
https://www.scifirstforhunters.org/articles/index.cfm?action=view&articleID=860&typeID=3&archive=1

- “rolled back campaign promises on clean air...
- Withdrew U.S. support for a landmark 1997 global warming agreement signed in Kyoto, Japan.
- rolled back rules that ban development on 60 million acres of national forest...
-Bush Administration replaced the Roadless Area Conservation Rule ...”
(broken link removed)
https://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/10/07/MNG9H94VEF1.DTL
https://ea.pomona.edu/4candidates.html
(broken link removed)

-the Bush administration has shown that it is willing to bend any environmental regulation for its corporate friends....
(broken link removed)

Just for good measure tryTHE BUSH RECORD

More than 300 Crimes against Nature
(broken link removed)

So in the end you think Bush is a peach and I think he's a poisoned apple. Ain't America great?

I voted for Bush and Im a republican too.

I too, voted for Bush and I am a Republican. But I was under the impression that this was a Cavy Cage site. Not a site for political bashing, being it Bush or Kerry.

This topic is within the Vegetarians forum. I believe Teresa said topics that involve Animal welfare is okay to discuss here.

Yes, it is.

These issues are related to animal and environmental welfare. I’m not bashing anyone. I’m stating cold hard facts about our president. Facts that prove he cares little about animal welfare or the environment.

If people are getting upset about what I am saying then they shouldn’t be upset with me. They should be upset with our country’s leaders. If you think I’m lying then do your best to prove it. If I’m wrong I will gracefully admit it. However, I did a lot of research for the 2000 election, during Bush’s 1st term, for the 2004 election and I will continue to monitor this man as he tramples animal rights, human rights and the environment.

I don’t understand why people feel the need to announce they voted for Bush. Is this supposed to upset me? It doesn’t. I firmly believe that everyone has the right to vote as they choose. I simply expect people to actually understand how and why they are casting their vote.

After all, democracy only works if people use their brains to think and get involved in the process. History has proved that people that allow themselves to act as sheep, go with the crowd and not think for themselves end up getting treated as sheep and once they realize their errors it’s too late. They are facing "slaughter" (<------ meant figuratively).

not everything that environmental groups say is true. For example, the EPA study about second smoke that declares it harmful- later in a court case it was declared that the scientists had wanted to prove that there was a correlation, the court said they flat out lied, and there was no increased risk of lung cancer from second hand smoke according to the EPA's own data, and any reliable statistical test that a first year college math or science student would know proves otherwise. I don't like second hand smoke, but I would still rather they had told the truth.

Another good example is PETA, most of the members are nice well intentioned people, however the higher up administration has given thousands of dollars to people who have openly, on camera and in court, declared themselves to be responsible for ARSON. This is provable because their tax records, as a nonprofit group, are public. In fact, on an HBO tv show, they had interviews with people associated with more main stream groups, SPCA's, etc who were willing to come right out and say that PETA was a terrorist organization. Also, their founder has made comments that their should be no circuses, horseback riding, or PETS- the phrase she uses is "total animal liberation", so if you'd like to support PETA, toss your pets in the yard so they can be "free".They are good for investigating animal cruelty and getting press, but if as many people donated money to the SPCA, they might be able to do just as much, without the arson.

Not to mention, I get really miffed about environmental groups that are really anti-capitalism, or anti-globalization, and use environmentalism as a self righteous platform for those ideas. I don't like Bush, but I come right out and say it, instead of faking concern about the environment just so I can shout about evil companies cutting down the rain forest. The companies are not the ones doing the cutting in rain forests, the starving, indigent peoples trying to feed their families are cutting it down. If any one of us was in the same situation, we'd probably be the first to pick up an axe, if it meant feeding our families. Those of us that are privileged enough to live near a grocery store need to think about those people before mouthing off.

I have a science degree, and the first thing they teach you is to forget everything you've been told thus far, and start again reading peer reviewed material from good scientific journals. They aren't necessarily easily accessible to everyone, they do use lots of jargon and overly complicated, formal language. But if you aren't willing to take the time to learn how to intepret reliable information, don't just pretend likes its ok to spout off whatever your favorite propaganda machine thinks you should be. Thirty years ago, the people who are now raging against global warming, were predicting an ice age, and FYI, its been getting colder again since the nineties.

Worse yet, this causes a lot of environmental groups to spend money fear mongering and not doing anything, instead of focusing on worthy, quantifiable issues. What if every dollar spent on leaflets with misinformation went to stopping live animal sales in pet stores?

The union of concerned scientists, including 48 nobel laureates, has come out against the Bush administration, even going so far as to suggest a hotline that government scientists could call when the government refused to publish, or insisted they changed their data.

I want environmental protection and animal welfare as much as the next person. However, I think we need to be responsible, dignified, and maintain scientific and moral integrity when working toward these goals.