Nat Geo forces woman off show b/c she's a hunter!

[OEDub]

Outdoor TV personality Melissa Bachman has been forced off the upcoming National Geographic Channel reality series “Ultimate Survivor Alaska.” Why? BECAUSE SHE'S A HUNTER. Please let the network know what you think of its decision. Email the network at: <broken link removed> Details here: Melissa Bachman Forced Off Nat Geo

Read More

 

[Mohawk13]

What a bunch of heads...Only 13,000 signatures? someone needs to point out to these clowns that there are 360+ MILLION Americans. What ever happens to Majority Rules? I friggin HATE, yes, DETEST Special Interest Groups. They are neither a Majority or a Voice to be heard. Nat Geo should tell them to get stuffed and Put her back on the show...PERIOD....as for anti Hunters.....BLEEEEEEP....You!!!

 

[AlphaCoyote]

Is the NRA a Special Interest Group? The US Chamber of Commerce? The ACLU? AIPAC? The Southern Baptist Convention? The Catholic Church? Planned Parenthood? Corporation for Public Broadcasting? The Teamsters? Fox News? The State of Ohio? Which are Special Interest Groups? All of them? That's a lot of detesting.

 

[Scrammer]

Remember DIVERSITY is good as long as we decide what form of diversity is approved.

 

[Bacchus]

The socialists fear diversity of ideas.

 

[Mohawk13]

Alpha, Yes and Yes...All have an agenda to defraud, deplete funds, and push their own Ideals. As a Libertarian, I can stand None of them....Majority Rules...I do believe that is stated in the Constitution many times....

 

[The B]

Alpha, Yes and Yes...All have an agenda to defraud, deplete funds, and push their own Ideals. As a Libertarian, I can stand None of them....Majority Rules...I do believe that is stated in the Constitution many times....

You'd have to show me where. As a republic, we recognize that majority-rule is, effectively, mob-rule. So we have moderators, in the form of elected officials, to help buffer the insanity and stupidity of majority rule.

 

[Mohawk13]

Read The Constitution. A 3/4 MAJORITY, a 2/3 MAJORITY...You getting the picture......Also, This is about13,000 (Censored By Mohawk 13 on Advice of the Mods) heads protesting a hunter on a "Survival Alaska" show...Just saying 13,000 is not a Majority. They are a whiny "Special Interest" that should have no clout in changing the format of a television show..If It were 13 MILLION, I could see cause for concern. Just tired of these small splinter groups crying because they don't like something,and people coddling them and throwing them a pacifier. Here's an Idea..Change the channel...easy peasy...

 

[The B]

Read The Constitution. A 3/4 MAJORITY, a 2/3 MAJORITY...You getting the picture......Also, This is about13,000 Zipper heads protesting a hunter on a "Survival Alaska" show...Just saying 13,000 is not a Majority. They are a whiny "Special Interest" that should have no clout in changing the format of a television show..If It were 13 MILLION, I could see cause for concern. Just tired of these small splinter groups crying because they don't like something,and people coddling them and throwing them a pacifier. Here's an Idea..Change the channel...easy peasy...

Those majorities are members of the government... not real people.

 

[Mohawk13]

Really...Give Me a break...Go have some more Starbucks and Read the Onion...Read "Roberts Rules" and stop sniffing glue///

 

[Sgt Nambu]

What a bunch of zipper heads...Only 13,000 signatures? someone needs to point out to these clowns that there are 360+ MILLION Americans. What ever happens to Majority Rules? I friggin HATE, yes, DETEST Special Interest Groups. They are neither a Majority or a Voice to be heard. Nat Geo should tell them to get stuffed and Put her back on the show...PERIOD....as for anti Hunters.....BLEEEEEEP....You!!!

I'm guessing that the people who produce and create Nat Geo are in full accord with the anti's. Just a guess now.

 

[davemata]

Ignoring the strange derailment. I sent some choice comments to NatGeo.

If we don't say anything, they win.

 

[gaijinsamurai]

I'm guessing that the people who produce and create Nat Geo are in full accord with the anti's. Just a guess now.

National Geographic used to be great. I grew up reading the magazine, and learned a lot about geography, history, and other cultures. Nowadays, it's full of ads and fluff, and if you subscribe, you're bombarded with solocitations for various crap on a weekly basis.

 

[slightly disturbed]

nat geo is a bunch of tree huggers! If you look at all there "reality" shows it show all hunters and gun owners trying to "break" the law, Or that they are poaching. never the good side. Made the people on Doomsday preppers look like idiots.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

Is the bubblegum a Special Interest Group? bubblegum? The bubblegum? bubblegum? The bubblegum? The Catholic bubblegum? bubblegum? bubblegum? The bubblegum? bubblegum News? The State of bubblegum? Which are Special Interest Groups? All of them? That's a lot of detesting.

I thought profanities were supposed to be replaced with the word "bubblegum"... so I went ahead and fixed your post for you.

 

[shooter58]

It's all about the almighty $$. Liberals talk a good game but it's all about preserving ratings and making money. Liberals I know would sell their own mothers for a buck. Or at least condemn them with a bumper sticker on the back of the Subaru...

 

[Spitpatch]

I just sent this e-mail:

Gentlemen:

I have been a subscriber to National Geographic Magazine for probably 40 years. I very nearly "inherited" the habit to subscribe from my mother, and National Geographic has been a very large part of my life, even to the extent of influencing my education choice toward Anthropology. I read each and every issue cover-to-cover, and heretofore have appreciated what I have seen as an even hand toward the issue of hunting. As a magazine and organization centered around ecological and environmental concerns, it would have been easy to take the road of vehement anti-hunting early on. National Geographic has held my respect because they avoided the easy road on this issue, and it has been my sincere belief that the organization recognized the value that ethical hunters contribute (in dollars and land at the very least) to habitat preservation and wildlife conservation and research.

Capitulating to an emotional appeal to remove Ms. Bachman from a series about survival in Alaska because she is a hunter is not only contradictory to the central theme of the series itself, it is also contradictory to all of my previous held beliefs regarding the National Geographic Society and its view toward hunting.

I will now be watching with a very critical eye to make another evaluation regarding the Society, and if there is other evidence to suggest that this good organization has fallen prey to emotional reactions rather than adhering to good science, I will regretfully reevaluate my choice each year to continue to be a member. I would not presume you change decisions based on my devotion or disapproval. I would ask that you make decisons based on good science.


Thank you for your time in consideration of my communication.

Yours Truly,

 

[Hook686]

Mohawk13 wrote:

I friggin HATE, yes, DETEST Special Interest Groups.

Are not the folks the gather on this site, and similar sites, a 'Special Interest Group' ?

 

[The B]

I think what the man really hates, if he thinks about it a while, is political pandering to special-interest groups... not the groups themselves, who are simply there to look out for a given cause.

 

[Misterbill]

nat geo is a bunch of tree huggers! If you look at all there "reality" shows it show all hunters and gun owners trying to "break" the law, Or that they are poaching. never the good side. Made the people on Doomsday preppers look like idiots.

In fairness, the the people on "DoOMSDAY PREPPERs" WERE idiots. But I get your point.