Obama Under Fire for Backing Deal to Lift Global Ban on Commercial Whaling

[WingsToDiscovery]

Originally Posted by samurai007

This has nothing at all to do with race, so why bring it up? Is all criticism of Obama, no matter what the issue, always about race?

Look where the article came from. Fox News. Just a little bit ago, when Obama went down to check out the oil spill, they were bashing him for being dressed "too fancy" and should have dressed more blue collar, even though he has just wearing some slacks and a button up shirt with the sleeves rolled up. Besides the issue of tons of oil spilling into the ocean. Fox is a joke.

[GoNative]

Originally Posted by V1nn1

I think he should fix that oil spilling thing first, that's far more worse...

I'm pretty sure that governments are capable of tackling more than just one issue at a time.

I see this proposal as a reasonable compromise if it does have the intended effect of reducing the numbers killed each year. The ban hasn't worked so it's probably time compromises were sought with the Japanese. Certainly unlikely to be a popular decision by Obama but it may well be the best one since the Japanese are hardly likely to start honouring the ban anytime soon.

[samurai007]

Originally Posted by WingsToDiscovery

Look where the article came from. Fox News. Just a little bit ago, when Obama went down to check out the oil spill, they were bashing him for being dressed "too fancy" and should have dressed more blue collar, even though he has just wearing some slacks and a button up shirt with the sleeves rolled up. Besides the issue of tons of oil spilling into the ocean. Fox is a joke.

I happen to like Fox, it's the only major news outlet that isn't just a shill for the Democrat Party. But if you don't like Fox you can find this story on many, many outlets, and Pierce Brosnan has already made a video condemning Obama for it.

[Unknown]

Originally Posted by samurai007

This has nothing at all to do with race, so why bring it up? Is all criticism of Obama, no matter what the issue, always about race?

No not all but majority of the criticism towards him is due to his ethnic background along with any mistakes he unitentionally makes being broadcast almost instantly on the news.No president in the entire US history has ever been under such spotlight but then again their has never been a black president.Just a while back he was thought to have been seen in a rap video and as a result the news was talking about it the whole day until confirming that was not him but rather someone who possessed similar look(s)

[samurai007]

Originally Posted by Unknown

No not all but majority of the criticism towards him is due to his ethnic background along with any mistakes he unitentionally makes being broadcast almost instantly on the news.No president in the entire US history has ever been under such spotlight but then again their has never been a black president.Just a while back he was thought to have been seen in a rap video and as a result the news was talking about it the whole day until confirming that was not him but rather someone who possessed similar look(s)

And how have you determined that the majority of the criticism about Obama is due to race? Because IMO, very, very little, almost negligible, amount of the criticism against him is race-based. The vast majority is due to his radical, socialist policies, vast overspending, corruption, and incompetence.

Also, Bush was under far more criticism than Obama ever has due to the leftist media in this country.

[Unknown]

Originally Posted by samurai007

And how have you determined that the majority of the criticism about Obama is due to race? Because IMO, very, very little, almost negligible, amount of the criticism against him is race-based. The vast majority is due to his radical, socialist policies, vast overspending, corruption, and incompetence.

Also, Bush was under far more criticism than Obama ever has due to the leftist media in this country.

Mainly because Blacks are considered minoritys in the US and majority of its population are Caucasian.

[MMM]

Originally Posted by samurai007

Most or all environmentalists don't believe that this will actually reduce the number of whales killed.

That's quite a statement.

If ALL environmentalists thought it was a terrible idea, do you think anyone would go through with it (especially a Democratic prez)?

Originally Posted by samurai007

If they did, they'd probably support it. And for that matter, Japan and the other countries would probably not support it if it drastically reduced the number of whales they could catch, yet they are pushing for this ban to be lifted. So I think the reduction is mostly just rhetoric, but we'd have to wait and see what the result is if it passes.

For one thing, it doesn't seem to outlaw killing whales for scientific research, which is what the countries have been doing. It simply legalizes commercial killing again.

I think we are mixing terminology. "Lifting the ban" is a bit of a misnomer as there is no ban on whaling now. Countries like Japan are killing whales legally.

That's not a "ban".

So if the idea is to change the rules so that the rules are more strict and that fewer whales are killed, then I would support that. People can call it "legalization of whale killing" but whales are being killed legally now.

You never answered my first question, Samurai.

[samurai007]

Originally Posted by Unknown

Mainly because Blacks are considered minoritys in the US and majority of its population are Caucasian.

So what? Criticism of a black President by white voters is not racism.

[samurai007]

Originally Posted by MMM

That's quite a statement.

If ALL environmentalists thought it was a terrible idea, do you think anyone would go through with it (especially a Democratic prez)?



I think we are mixing terminology. "Lifting the ban" is a bit of a misnomer as there is no ban on whaling now. Countries like Japan are killing whales legally.

That's not a "ban".

So if the idea is to change the rules so that the rules are more strict and that fewer whales are killed, then I would support that. People can call it "legalization of whale killing" but whales are being killed legally now.

You never answered my first question, Samurai.

Yes, I think Obama especially is the kind who'd go through with it because he's all about appeasement and deal-making rather than standing on principles.

And yes, there is a ban on commercial whaling. It's been around for 24 years, pushed for by President Reagan. There is no ban on scientific experimentation on whales that results in the whale's death, after which they harvest the meat.

So, which environmentalist groups are for this, then? Read these:

http://www.earthisland.org/journal/i...d_whaling_ban/

A large coalition of international environmental and animal welfare organizations (see list below) recently completed an analysis of the newly proposed IWC deal and are uniformly opposing it.The deal, as currently formulated, would legitimize commercial whaling practices, allow continued illegal trade in whale products, and would undermine historic efforts to end international whaling.

List of environmental and marine conservation organizations supporting the NGO analysis of the proposed IWC agreement includes:
American Cetacean Society,
Animal Welfare Institute,
Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition,
Asociación do Biologia Marina Guatemala,
Australians for Animals,
California Gray Whale Coalition,
Campaign Whale,
Campaigns Against the Cruelty to Animals,
Centro De Conservacion Cetacea,
Cetacean Society International,
Comite Ballena Azul Nicaragua,
The Cousteau Society,
Dolphin Connection,
Environmental Investigation Agency,
Equilibrio Azul,
Fundacion Promar,
Fundacion Yubarta,
Global Ocean,
Humane Society International,
The Humane Society of the United States,
In Defense of Animals,
Instituto de Conservación de Ballenas,
In­ternational Fund for Animal Welfare,
International League for Protection of Cetaceans,
Irish Seal Sanctuary,
LegaSeas International,
Natural Resources Defense Council,
Ocean Care,
Ocean Sentry.

Pierce Brosnan Urges Obama to 'Save the Whales' - Tonic

Action Alert! - ACS - American Cetacean Society

Obama to Lift Whaling Ban?

Whaling ban in jeopardy? | The EcoSpheric Blog

Obama Breaks a Whale of a Campaign Promise

http://www.ifaw.org/Publications/Gen...e534_61384.pdf

YouTube - ifaw's Channel

Protecting Whales Around the World | IFAW Web Site

[MMM]

Originally Posted by samurai007

Yes, I think Obama especially is the kind who'd go through with it because he's all about appeasement and deal-making rather than standing on principles.

That's really just a matter of opinion. You can give a dozen examples one way and I can give a dozen the other.

Originally Posted by samurai007

And yes, there is a ban on commercial whaling. It's been around for 24 years, pushed for by President Reagan. There is no ban on scientific experimentation on whales that results in the whale's death, after which they harvest the meat.

Call it what you want, but whales are being killed legally by these countries. If changing terminology results in less whales being killed, as your non-left swinging news source states, then there should be little to complain about.

Originally Posted by samurai007

So, which environmentalist groups are for this, then? Read these:

I didn't ask who. You said "most if not all" environmentalists are against this. And now gave a list of a couple dozen among the thousands of environmentalist groups that exist.

I guess it is hard for me to continue the conversation until you answer my first question: Do you think the criticism of the president is justified or not in this situation?