The lack of insight expressed by many people concerning Alaska wildlife is disturbing. I am thankful we have a Governor who is sufficiently concerned about the wildlife resources to take what steps she can to enhance these resources.
Predation control should be expanded to include killing bears. Bears are extremely hard on moose calves in the first two weeks of their lives.
The state has done what it can to implement limited predator control, and management needs to be expanded. On the Federal side there is no management at all. Hunting is restricted on many Federal land management units with the excuse that subsistence uses have a priority. Yet, if the Federal managers were serious about protecting “subsistence” they would also implement predator control programs.
Aside from the obvious need for abundant game animal populations to feed Alaska’s rural and urban population, hunting provides a much needed part of the rural economic needs. To pretend that the provision of hunting services to non-resident hunters is in any way detrimental to Alaska is nonsense.
In many rural communities there is literally no private industry. Rural Alaska cannot sustain itself on Federal and State welfare programs. The negative social effects of 30 years of cradle to grave government funded livelihoods have decimated the social fabric of much of rural Alaska.
Any attempts by the private sector to pursue the creation of mining, hunting or any activities which provide economic benefits to rural residents as an alternative to living off the state have faced huge obstacles. The continued suppression of our wildlife resources by both mis-informed local residents and outside profiteer “animal rights” groups either do not know, or more likely, do not care, of the negative consequences to the quality of life for locals.
Alaska continues to be a destination spot for people from outside to enjoy the country, hire local services, and then leave our state with only beneficial results. These include the store merchants, airlines, locals, artisans and any number of ways. The meat harvested by outside hunters feeds numerous families and elders who can no longer hunt.
Sound management which enhances wildlife resources is critical. We are fortunate to have an administration which appears to be friendly toward small business and the needs of the productive segment of the population.
Alaska’s rural regions best hope for a healthy future is for the government to restrict itself to constitutional limitations, provide access to the resources for its citizens, enhance the resources through sound management where possible and wean its citizens from dependence on welfare.

ambassador to the Holy See

I just wish I’d thought of it first.

Why send an ambassador at all? The Vatican is a historical curiosity that remains independent only because of Pius IX’s tantrums and chronic illiberality. In temporal affairs, which are, I presume, the affairs that an ambassador is sent to address, the Vatican lacks any real independence or influence on world affairs. Even their policing — the most basic operation of an independent polity — is handled by Italy.

What affairs of state can an ambassador even discuss? The Vatican’s single mailbox? The Vatican’s ambassadors from other states? It’s a tremendous waste of money, time, and influence to send an ambassador at all, and the pretense demeans both the Church’s spiritual authority and the state’s temporal authority.

I think he got something like 54% of the Catholic vote. Of course, Obama has taken them completely for granted and most liekly hates them, but you only get these stories in drips in dribbles from the press.

From Catholic hospitals, to school vouchers, to his appointments, to his abortion policies and his general lack of respect, there a a solid case that, if presented carefully, would put a large dent in Catholic support for Obama

I know the Catholic Church (my church) is far from perfect- we admit that. But there are certain issues that are so basic to our principles, that we absolutely will not compromise for anything. I wish a few Republicans in congress would take a lesson from this.

first of all, the Potus is such an arrogant **** that he truly believes the Vatican will just give in after a while. He dosen’t know B16 very well, does he?

Second, I’m really curious to see an out and out religious profile of this guy: in same church for 20 years, no church now, has a seder, offronts all kids of religious with his policies, and fumbles yet another international protocol, this time to the head of millions around the world?

My DH and I are starting to think he is an atheist. All part of the commie/social justice persona behind the slick suited fraud.

This gets more interesting by the day!

an Ambassador?
They are recognized as a State, with an Ambassador.
And every single other State that is so recognized also has the right to reject the Ambassador chosen by the President for that position.
It’s the way things are, not how individuals might want them to be.

you would actually have to KNOW someone who reveres the sanctity of life being the ghoul that he is The Imitation Christ does not roll with those people.

Whoever has his enemy at his mercy &
does not destroy him is his own enemy

He’d make PA a happier, better place.

Obama and his administration have made it perfectly clear that they do not have any respect for the Pope, The Catholic Church or the majority of American citiznes in this country that do not support the concept of murdering our own children.

To dismiss the fundamental belief of the Catholic doctrine is to insult millions around the world. It’s never surprising to see the liberal left who claims diversity, inclusiveness and actually considers sharia law in some form perfectly acceptable, but dismisses a religion over 2000 years old.

I am not even Catholic (yet) but I do believe the Pope is the only person in this scenario that has integrity, character and true spirituality Obama’s faith is always convenient and opportunistic..,just like his choice of a church will be, if he ever makes one. We are all waiting with baited breath.

Caroline Kenneky may consider herself a true Catholic but she hardly behaves like one, and doesn’t deserve an appointment to the Vatican. Like the New York Senator office, she believes that it should be hers because of who her parents were, not because of anything she’s done to deserve it. Her arrogance in this matter is insulting the Vatican, she should pray about it and maybe even ask for an audience so the Pope can make her understand that ‘the least of us deserve our love and respect’.

She can take Nancy Pelosi with her.

It’s a pretty big insult, in my eyes, to send a NYC socialite who doesn’t seem to show any enthusiasm for foreign affairs, much less the Vatican, as the ambassador to the Vatican, and implies that Obama’s paying off of a political favor is more important to him than US relations with the Vatican. This would be OK for some tinpot third-world country whose importance is minimal, but is not acceptable for the Vatican, whose influence extends to 1/6th of the population, and many countries.

With ND University offering him a honorary doctorate; over 50% of Catholics voting for him; and a Catholic VP and Speaker of the House saying pro-choice is peachy, with no repercussions for their actions from the U.S.Catholic Church–is it any wonder that he has trouble understanding how seriously the Vatican takes the abortion issue?

Remember in RS 2.0 (I think) in which every time you revisited a post, all the comments that weren’t previously there said “new” by it? Man I miss that.

Obama may be arrogant and yes he stumbles all over the place with rookie mistakes, but I never thought he was actually stupid! Give him a pass the first time for not realizing that the Vatican is serious about its anti-abortion position. The second time the nominee is rejected for the same reason, you have to take note. The third time, one begins to wonder if there is another agenda at play here.

Perhaps “the one” is wanting to do away with the Vatican ambassadorship altogether. This would be much more consistent with his Marxist ideologies. This way he can say :

Well, we tried as hard as we could to send an ambassador to the Vatican, but they just kept rejecting them. So what can you do? It’s not our fault!

I spent Easter week vacationing away from the Masters here in Augusta, GA to return to news, the internet and thunderstorms. I did hear a blurb about this on the drive back from Disney Orlando on Friday.

Moe, thank you for the details.

Happy Easter one and all. A blessed Passover (Pasch a/k/a Easter in some European parts)

~Andrew

Firstly one cannot be “pro choice” and be a Roman Catholic. I fail to see how you can have a choice to kill the innocent unborn child in the womb. Pro choice means pro murder. Lets stop using euphemisms. Lets call a spade a spade. Stop sanitizing language. By supporting abortion you exclude yourself from the Church. To pick a pro abortion ambassador is the ultimate insult to the Vatican. Obama is so used to a fawning media in America that he just does not get it.
Obama has relentlessly pursued a pro-abortion agenda since his election. He has no regard for the law of God on this issue. To the pro aborts I say: For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world and suffer the loss of his eternal soul. We are all answerable to God for our actions.
The Vatican is upholding the law of God on this issue. To accept a pro abortion ambassador would be a signal that the Vatican was comfortable with Obama’s policy on the issue. Under no circumstances can the Vatican accept a pro abort.

Remember his speeches in the Dem primary about “putting aside our differences”, “bringing people together”, “people are tired of the same old partisan politics”?

And now that he’s been elected, the most polarizing president in recent history (according to a recent poll) can’t even bring himself to appoint ONE pro-life person.