Effin' TOOL and a HALF Matt Carter (TV Examiner) thinks Cenk's Palin-Vick comparison is "unusual"

[Amerigo Vespucci]

If by "unusual" you mean "spot on," you're RIGHT, you hopeless fuckstick.

:grr:



"Matt Carter is a poet, journalist, and screenwriter from Dallas, TX. A former reality and game show contestant, he published his first book, "Storms of Change," in May 2008. He can be reached here: [e-mail] "

Sarah Palin, Michael Vick situations compared on MSNBC (video)

* January 2nd, 2011 2:07 pm ET

http://www.examiner.com/tv-in-national/sarah-palin-michael-vick-situations-compared-on-msnbc-video



Is this situation fair at all?

We have seen some rather unusual comparisons drawn on news programs before, but this new one on MSNBC may very well take the cake. Cenk Uyger -- filling in on "The Ed Show" this past week -- decided to use Tucker Carlson's now-infamous comments about Michael Vick deserving "to be executed" on Fox News to draw a comparison to Sarah Palin.

How how did he do it? Really it was quite simple -- he showed the Carlson clip, and then said that anyone who thinks someone should die for killing animals should remember that Palin took out a caribou on her TLC program with a gun.

So is there ultimately a comparison here to be made? While it may be a kitschy "shock value" thing to do, we also have to remember that Vick trained his animals to kill, and then watched them do so for sport. Meanwhile, the act of hunting originally served a purpose -- though the criticism of Palin choosing to exploit this act on TV may indeed be valid.

Ultimately, the message here may be a true one -- eventually, there is a point where a sentence (whether fair or not) is served.

Do you think this comparison steps over a line? You can check out a video to the left.

[Ramulux]

1. Cenk was totally right on this one

Sarah Palin murdering a wild animal on TV to increase her celebrity is no different than making two animals fight and kill each other to make money. I know people love their dogs and want to think they are so much more special than a defenseless caribou, but they aren't. I'm not against hunting in every way, but the way Palin did it and the way she exploited the situation is fucking sick. I also dont give a shit if she ate the caribou or not, if Michael Vick ate the dead dogs he had kill each other, it wouldn't make the situation any better, and the same is true of Palin's case.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

2. It was a matter of degrees, and I don't believe in "the joy of killing"

I don;t see hunting as a "sport," I see it as murder for fun.

Yes, there are people who have no other option but to hunt and kill what they eat.

I'm not talking about them, and Palin certainly isn't one of them. She simply enjoys snuffing out a helpless animal.

[blueamy66]

4. I agree 100%

"murder for fun"

AMEN

[jmowreader]

3. Does ANYONE really think Sarah Palin shot that caribou?

Yes, Sarah Palin was out there shooting at a caribou for the TV cameras. And yes, the caribou died.

But pay attention here: When the caribou actually died, you didn't see anything but it through the scope camera. You didn't see who was actually on the gun. And remember, this was the fifth shot taken at the animal--Palin fired four times with two different guns and still couldn't hit the poor thing.

I think what happened is, the TV crew got sick of Sarah's horrible marksmanship and asked her dad to kill it before it walked off or died of old age.

What would have been LOTS more fun for the home audience is to show how Alaskans really fill their larders--by getting in their airplanes and flying to the store. Alaska has some SERIOUS scenery that would have looked fantastic on television, even better than Sarah's piss poor attempts at killing anything.