Posted on 04/19/2010 6:51:50 AM PDT by Vigilanteman
The media conglomerate Discovery Communications used to be known for their earth-friendly offerings. But they’ve just paid millions to Sarah Palin to host a “nature” show, despite her decidedly anti-environmental stance: She vocally advocates for habitat-destroying oil drilling, she denies global warming is a human-caused threat, and she spearheaded a brutal wolf-slaughter program as governor of Alaska.
It’s one thing if Fox News gives Sarah Palin a platform. But when Discovery Communications – home to the Discovery Channel, the "Planet Earth" series, the Science Channel, Animal Planet, and TreeHugger.com – gives a show to Sarah Palin, it undercuts everything the Discovery brand has come to represent.
Anti-environmentalism has no place in the Discovery Communications lineup. Demand that the company cancel "Sarah Palin's Alaska" before it airs.
(Excerpt) Read more at act.credoaction.com ...
the “publication of working assets” seems to be written by nonworking asses
Maybe Discovery is trying to show both sides of the argument.
Or reality.
I watch “Life” narrated by Oprah and don’t have any issues with it. In fact I love the show. These people are intolerant little fascists.
Now I know why I don't watch Discovery Channel any more. And I can say I've never had an inclination to watch any of those other channels as well (yes, I mean Animal Planet).
“anti-environmental stance:”
BS, anyone that loves the outdoor life are the LAST people that want it destroyed.
They just have a better understanding of nature-human interaction.
Volcano vs humans as a lesson plan.
Urban liberal know nothings vs rural conservatives who grew up in nature.
.
Every housing development destroys a “habitat”.
So what?
That's one way to look at her. Another would be:
1) this devastated economy needs energy and can't suffer $4 gasoline, and it would come from virtual wasteland on the north slope while barely affecting only the habitat of mosquitoes.
2) Man's contribution doesn't register on the meter when compared to natural events, like Icelandic volcanos.
3) "Wolf slaughter" was actually humane culling, designed to save Caribou which PEOPLE need to survive.
Other than these points, the author makes a pretty convincing argument, don't ya' think ?
Maybe Discovery is moving a little to the right to improve their ratings — to pick up some of the Fox audience. Lotta other networks need to see the light thrown off by Fox if they want to improve their financial performance.
Ha haaaaaa!!!
Go get 'em, Tigress.
A liberal is a person who sincerely believes that the environment can better be cared for by a lawyer in a high-rise office in Seattle or San Francisco than by someone actually living in it.
“habitat-destroying oil drilling, she denies global warming is a human-caused threat, and she spearheaded a brutal wolf-slaughter program as governor of Alaska”
Wow...Hard to know where to begin to rebut this idiocy
SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO true.
Can you imagine ANY farmer or rancher wanting to destroy their own property? This is the kind of stuff that totally discredits the enviros.
Maybe Discovery is smarter than the MSM and has decided to throw in with the majority of Americans who haven’t drank the Kool-aid!!!
Try $7-8.00!!!
I sent my cousin a photo of two wild turkeys wandering across my neighbor’s yard. My ultra environmentalist cousin said he thought turkeys were pretty much extinct in Michigan.
He’s completely clueless but he isn’t going to let that get in the way of saving the planet.
Wow, Sarah is MUCH older than I thought? That wolf policy has been in place for more than 40 years.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.