I’ll Make You Fishers Of Men…

It looks like the left’s messiah, Barack Obama, is not much of a fan of fishing. A panel working on this issue is set to make recommendations by the end of March and the recommendations are likely to involve ending fishing in “…the nation’s oceans, coastal areas, Great Lakes, and even inland waters.”

About 60 million people fish in this country but now that might end if the environmental groups involved in this process get their way. If they make recommendations to end fishing, Mr. Transparent, is expected to implement the recommendations by issuing an Executive Order.

Many people in this country earn an honest living by fishing and millions more enjoy the sport as a past time. Obama can eliminate many jobs and end this past time with the stroke of his pen. The indications are all there that this will happen and happen soon. The government has cut off public comment on the issue which means that the people will no longer be heard on the subject.

Complaining to members of Congress, while therapeutic, will be of no avail because Obama will bypass Congress and enact this via EO.

What will happen next? Will Obama convene a panel to look at hunting? If the environmentalist wackos decide (and they will) that hunting should not be allowed in this country will Obama enact that via EO?

Will he convene a panel of Brady gun control freaks to decide if guns should be allowed in America and then enact gun control via EO?

This might sound unrealistic but who would have ever thought a US leader would ban fishing in this country?

Barack Obama won the last election with 69.5 million votes. I am willing to bet that with 60 million anglers in this country he will not get that many the next time.

Is there any person in this country who has this much disdain for the American way of life, our values and traditions?

It is time for the states to step up and tell this anti American zealot that any waterways belonging to the states will not have fishing banned and if the feds do not like it they can pound sand. It is time for those who fish to let Obama know they will not obey his EO.

Obama will make fishers of men and those men will be fishing for a new leader.

Source:
ESPN

Big Dog

Gunline

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.



Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

23 Responses to “I’ll Make You Fishers Of Men…”

  1. Adam says:

    “Is there any person in this country who has this much disdain for the American way of life, our values and traditions?”

    It would be nice to reserve such language for a person that has actually carried out such a thing as you’re suggesting.

    I will disagree with Obama on this one as it’s framed by the ESPN article but I have a feeling you’re both jumping the gun again. For instance in your first few lines you start to distort even the article.

    You quoted:

    …the nation’s oceans, coastal areas, Great Lakes, and even inland waters.

    But the quote is actually:

    …from fishing some of the nation’s oceans, coastal areas, Great Lakes, and even inland waters.

    Of course BASS is concerned about fishing but signing and order to stop so much fishing is not an easy thing to carry out. How can the local government police such a change first of all? It would be like banning dog walking in national forests. It would take considerable effort to stop such a thing. It’s not impossible of course, but it’s my biggest question for the whole idea.

    I guess we’ll just have to see and hope for the best. I would rather see people hunt and fish for their food every day of the year than go down to the store and buy it only once.

  2. Darrel says:

    When he’s not coming for the guns, he’s coming for the… fishing rods?

  3. Blake says:

    Probably, D- if for no other reason than to tax some more- this is a wrongheaded approach to a voting bloc that is bigger than any other- fishermen and women.

    • Adam says:

      “…if for no other reason than to tax some more…”

      Right, because he’s just taxed us to death so far since he’s gotten into office…

  4. Big Dog says:

    Adam, what makes you think local governments will carry out such orders. The waterways, in many cases, belong to the states.

    The states have a say about the portion of the oceans that states have a coastline.

  5. Big Dog says:

    It is not jumping the gun. We always need to be out in front of anything that might infringe on our rights. If we wait until they enact things to react then we will be slaves.

    • Adam says:

      That would be fine if you were mounting opposition instead of simply attacking and pretending the worst has happened already when you say things like, “Is there any person in this country who has this much disdain for the American way of life, our values and traditions?”

      You can approach this from a logical standpoint or you can approach it like a lunatic blathering on about how Obama is going to take away food to weaken us.

  6. Barbara says:

    This will be another way of control. No hunting and fishing, then no food to eat. What better way to weaken the people. Obama is out to destroy us in my opinion and I wish people’s eyes were opened to see this.

    • Darrel says:

      Good stuff Barbara, Obama doesn’t want people to have food to eat.

      You made quote of the day.

    • Corrinne Novak says:

      The treat to our food supply is real. If you want the straight information on what the World Trade Organization has in mind of US food -(very well researched wit references) google:

      The Festering Fraud Behind Food Safety Reform. by Nicole Johnson

      and Google:
      History, HACCP and the Food Safety Con Job
      by Nicole Johnson

  7. Darrel says:

    Well, you guys have got me scared, so just to be on the safe side I’ve warned all my friends to hide their fishing polls!

    I had friends gasping for breath over this at dinner.

    D.

    • Big Dog says:

      Considering where you and your friends hide their heads this is not surprising.

    • Darrel says:

      Good point. The friend I was speaking of is a physicist who received his Ph.D. in 1966 and knew/worked with Richard Feynman.

      Maybe Bigd shouldn’t speak about things he doesn’t know.

      D.

      • Schatzee says:

        And that means what exactly? I know a lot of educated people with recto-cranial inversion issues. I believe some even comment here! I am offended by the use of an EO for something of this nature, if in fact any ban of fishing is to be enacted and enforced. This is not supposed to be a dictatorship so one person is not supposed to be making these decisions and signing a piece of paper to whisk away rights. I believe BD is right that we have to stay out in front of these things before they get out of control. Give an inch kind of thing. And further, the fact that our elected representatives are not doing their job by representing and listening to the people really ticks me off. Even Ashburn, who has recently been outed, voted against gay rights continuously because, in his words, that is the way his constituents wanted him to vote. At least the man has the integrity to do the job he was hired to do. IMHO of course

      • Big Dog says:

        I would think I know as much about fishing as a PhD unless his PhD is in fishing.

        To give an opinion on a story about a possible ban on something millions participate in might seem like something a person should not talk about but I think the opposite.

        Yes, give an inch…

      • Big Dog says:

        If people here spoke about only those things they knew you would not have as much to say.

  8. Adam says:

    Well, too bad even ESPN has admitted the article is full of crap:

    Regrettably, we made several errors in the editing and presentation of this installment. Though our series has included numerous news stories on the topic, this was not one of them — it was an opinion piece, and should have been clearly labeled as commentary.

    Pretending your knee jerk reaction and attack on Obama are justified in order to stay “out in front of anything that might infringe on our rights” ignores the fact that there is was zero evidence to justify your outrage. There is not going to be an executive order to ban fishing and I very much doubt any person that likes to fish will even notice any changes.

  9. Darrel says:

    Bigd: “If people here spoke about only those things they knew you would not have as much to say.”>>

    ADAM: “Well, too bad even ESPN has admitted the article is full of crap:”>>

    DAR
    Well that’s a rather ironic juxtaposition isn’t it?

  10. Big Dog says:

    Yeah, admitted it was full of crap. Two Members of the House asked for assurances from NOAA and there is discussion that COULD (operative word) lead to banning of fishing in some waterways.

    I know you morons believe in fairy dust and letting gubmint do what it wants but when public debate is cut off on such a process and news organizations (besides ESPN) discuss it then it deserves to be discussed.

    It is amazing to me how much time you guys spent on non issues like Bush being AWOL (not true) Bush crashing a plane (not true) and all the other things only to white wash everything this radical does without any thought.

    Could it happen? Yes and it could be in total or in pieces but either way it should not happen.

    Screw the UN. Screw Obama and Screw the rest of the radicals.

    Stay out in front.

    But don’t worry Adam, if they ever have another draft rumor I will let you go bonkers again so long as you blame it on the correct people this time.

  11. Big Dog says:

    Darrel there is a difference between non emergent and non urgent. One can have an urgent injury that is non emergent.

    Non emergent visits would include urgent and non urgent visits that are not emergent.

    Hope you understand now.

    A cut that needs stitches can be urgent but non emergent. A sprained ankle is neither urgent nor emergent. An avulsed eye is an emergent problem as is cardiac arrest.

    I hope this helps you understand the difference between urgent and emergent. Then you should be able to figure out the rest.