Talk about a hypocrite!

I'm not sure why you've taken against him. He seems to be a pretty sound chap and capable of making a cogent case for his hunting activities.

We know that no one spends more money on conservation activities than hunters, and that what we do -when we do it conscientiously- benefits the natural environment.

The problem is that those who run the Green Party, and all sorts of bunny-hugging pseudo-conservationists, can't being themselves to see or admit this. More fool them.
 
Frankly if the Greens weren't as mad as a box of frogs on most things I would vote for them. I quite like the planet we are on too.
 
Given your righteous indignation, do you mean to tell me that you have always supported every policy decision and manifesto pledge that your chosen party has taken?

I do not like party politics for just that reason.

Obviously I do not agree with a ban on field sports, but I have voted for a Green Party candidate.

At the time I was quite sure that most people also involved in the countryside and with wild life were not actively seeking to pollute and poison it, which is basically all that the greens were saying. The environmental pollution view is not particularly contentious even if one does not agree with the more socialist and radical views of the Green Party.

Both my partner and I beat regularly and I stalk when I can, I do not consider my position duplicitous.

But then I have always been slightly on the outside...I am an Artist Blacksmith not a real one. I own a Blaser and a Lawrence Precision Titanium moderator....and a Land Rover. What hope is there for me... :)

Alan
 
Have to say, the hypocrisy is pretty difficult to understand. The no fieldsports mantra is pretty close to the top of their agenda.

David.
 
Any party will have shades of opinion or, indeed, if the current Labour Party hoo-ha is anything to go by, a rich palette of them, so if someone wants to challenge the Green's anti-hunting flannel from the inside, my inclination is to cheer rather than boo.
 
seems straight forward to me
Maybe he can move the party away from tree and bunny huggers.
.........but then they'll loose their grass root support.

It seems the press cannot show hunting or dead animals without a "distressing images" warning~
 
Duplicity? Multiplicity more like with most politicians. Whatever will get them votes is what they stand for. With few exceptions that is.
 
Duplicity? Multiplicity more like with most politicians. Whatever will get them votes is what they stand for. With few exceptions that is.


I doubt there's any exceptions, but there may be a few who haven't been caught out yet !!
 
Cos he's a member of the greens, who happen to be totally anti hunting, anti shooting anti firearms ownership
In other words he's a member of and a representative of a party which seeks to ban the very activities he himself enjoys
I fail to see why you think that's evidence of being a "sound chap"
I'm not sure why you've taken against him. He seems to be a pretty sound chap and capable of making a cogent case for his hunting activities.

We know that no one spends more money on conservation activities than hunters, and that what we do -when we do it conscientiously- benefits the natural environment.

The problem is that those who run the Green Party, and all sorts of bunny-hugging pseudo-conservationists, can't being themselves to see or admit this. More fool them.
 
Cos he's a member of the greens, who happen to be totally anti hunting, anti shooting anti firearms ownership
In other words he's a member of and a representative of a party which seeks to ban the very activities he himself enjoys
I fail to see why you think that's evidence of being a "sound chap"

I hear you there buddy!
 
Back
Top