When Tigers step on tigers

by Doctor Science

On Wednesday, Texas Senator Ted Cruz put this up on his official Facebook page:

The post received thousands of comments, most of them very negative, from Republicans as well as Democrats. I personally was particularly appalled because, like Cruz, I also am a Princeton alumn, and we tend to feel pretty protective about tigers. I'm sure the Princeton connection was one reason Cruz wanted the picture, but he really should have known better than to pose with the corpse of an endangered species.

Per the Washington Post:

Cruz’s spokeswoman Catharine Frazier says he was kidding, and had no intention of bringing the tiger pelt back to Washington. He had hosted a fundraiser in his home state for Lee and “they ran across it in Houston and took a picture.”

I notice that she did not say whether he (or Lee) had actually purchased the rug. The photo appears to have been taken in an office, not a shop.

Although Roll Call's gossip blog says the rug is "totally fake", Frazier said “we have no idea” if the rug is a real tiger pelt.

This is kind of important, because (as Examiner reporter Mark Whittington notes, in some of the best reporting on the issue)

The Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora has made trade in tiger skins illegal, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Since Cruz, being a lawyer, would know this so it is unlikely that he would pose next to an illegal rug. The item is either an antique, that is to say a rug taken from a tiger before the ban, or it is fake.

In the case of an antique rug, some sort of proof or provenance would have to be included that the item was not taken from a tiger after the ban was imposed, with the USFWS approving the sale in advance.

The Washington Post updated the story:

Frazier, Cruz’s spokeswoman, wrote to us that the office is not defensive of the picture.

“It’s unfortunate the same outrage isn’t displayed by the left when it comes to defending the lives of hundreds of thousands of unborn babies aborted every year,” she said in an email.

I don't know what "not defensive of the picture" means: 'We admit the picture is indefensible, and we're not going to try'? or 'We don't think the picture needs defending'?

The bit about 'the left' and abortion is an egregious deflection. Much of the criticism has come from Republicans and conservatives, not from 'the left'. And why should an act that is both illegal and immoral be excused by one that's legal but, in your opinion, immoral?

I've search online, and I cannot find *any* fake tiger skin rugs for sale in the US (or elsewhere) which have such a realistic head, with the mouth open and teeth exposed. As far as I can tell, this look is exclusively found in real (or mostly real) tiger skins. Absent examination by an expert, I assume that the skin is from a real tiger.

This raises a number of questions that qualified reporters might want to look into:

a) Did either Senator Lee or Senator Cruz buy actually buy the rug? If so, who was the seller? What was the provenance?

b) If the rug didn't change hands but was located in an office the Senators were visiting, who owns it? Presumably the owner is a Republican donor; are they willing to step forward?

I personally think it unlikely that either Senator made an impulse purchase of a tiger skin rug, because they're very valuable and come with a *lot* of paperwork. I imagine that they did, in fact, just happen to see the rug and *wished* that they'd been able to buy it, because tigers are cool.

The fact that tigers are also a seriously endangered species doesn't seem to have crossed their minds. On the contrary, Senator Cruz thinks American small businesses are the "real" endangered species , not, y'know, actual species. But although I think it unlikely that Cruz will ever come to care about endangered species, or be smart enough to act like he does, I'm heartened that so many Republicans do care, whether it's their party's policy or not.

Comments

[Countme-In]

"Brett: Understand that Fox isn't terrifically conservative."

Yet another finding, from Bellmore Labs.

True, Bill O'Reilly's guests aren't yet required to Heil Hitler and click their heels together to the host every time he interrupts them, and Heinrich Kilmeade, Reinhard Doocy, and whomever fancies herself the latest blonde moron Frau Blucher don't goose step to the couch as the introductory theme music to their show plays, and before the Scientific American editor was disallowed his First Amendment right to mention global warming on air the other week, Roger Ailes did not subject him to delousing, a shaved head, and the preparatory shower, but the guy did receive thousands of pieces and hate snail- and e-mail, with the obligatory passive-voiced death threats from the Volk and Hitler Youth afterwards as a glimpse of what's coming if FOX is permitted to invade Poland.

[Countme-In]

'you'd think a 'church' would know all about that 'turn the other cheek' stuff.'

Yes, 'church', as in their version of the kid's rhyme:

Here is the church,
here is the steeple,
don't open the doors,
but load your weapons,
and kill all the people.

[hairshirthedonist]

Step into the party with the Fila fresh gear
People looking at me like I was David Koresh here

[wj]

"Brett: Understand that Fox isn't terrifically conservative."

Forgive me if I'm wrong. But I think you are using "conservative" here when you mean libertarian. Is that right?

Alternatively, you are saying that they aren't conservative, they are reactionary. In which case, I agree whole-heartedly. While recognizing that the term "conservative" has morphed in that direction in the US.

[Countme-In]

Seriously though Slart, you'll want to get those weapons out of your Dad's house if he ever starts showing signs of dementia, which I hope he doesn't.

I have some experience with that kind of situation years ago - resolved peaceably -- but a couple of rifles, maybe ten pistols, including a 357 Magnum, hidden all over the place within reach of the grandkids if they got curious enough, and I kid you not, somewhere over ten thousand rounds of ammo.

My then father-in-law, now passed, but it could have evolved into a physical confrontation with either me, the only remaining son-in-law in a family of all daughters, or a job for the police, who would not have shown up in that Western town without their weapons.

I spose we could have gotten him out of the house on some pretence to remove the stuff, but I have a feeling he would have found out his toys were missing - via the pure demented fuel of paranoia, and this was a man who at that point in his illness couldn't find his fly with both hands.

He had, at that point, we thought, lost his ability to speak because he hadn't spoken a word in weeks.

He loved his guns. Which, by the way, was, in my opinion, a love that was actually an early symptom of Alzheimers paranoia (the blacks, you know, and the Jews, even though there had been very little talk like this earlier when I knew him).

Then one morning, this large, muscular, but elderly man walked out of his bedroom and uttered the last full sentence (besides "salt" as in "pass the salt" at the dinner table) anyone remembers him speaking to his wife: "Time to get the guns out".

So we did.

[Priest]

Tearing up at work. Thanks, Count.

Streets is hard.

[bobbyp]

The aftermath. From the wikki: "Other items found at the compound included about 1.9 million rounds of "cooked off" ammunition."

Now that's heavily armed!

[Brett Bellmore]

"I find that "throw your weapons out, let the women and children go, put your hands up, and come on out" takes both the guessing and the work out of the guess work."

It's all very well to advocate that, but it kind of ignores the reality of what happened at Waco. Which is not that the feds showed up, served a search warrant, and were fired on. But rather, that they showed up, and immediately started shooting without any provocation.

People being fired on for no good reason do not generally proceed on the assumption that, if they just submit, you'll stop trying to kill them. They certainly don't send the women and children out into the path of the gun fire.

As a general matter, if the police try to arrest you, you're best off submitting, and trying to clear things up later. It is notably hard to "clear things up later" when the police are just trying to kill you without any preliminary formalities.

Now, it does not appear, in retrospect, that the BATF showed up at Waco intent on murder. (Or particularly averse to it, unfortunately.) Rather, they were following their training, which taught them that the first thing you do when raiding somebody is shoot any dogs present, so they can't be sicced on you. It's thanks to the cock-ups at Ruby Ridge and Waco, that they changed that training, having discovered that, if the first thing you do when you show up is start shooting in somebody's direction, they assume you mean to kill them, and shoot back.

Cleeks, "If the police shoot at you, put up your hands, maybe they'll stop short of killing you." stance obscene. Some people really are just serfs looking for the right master to put them in chains.

[Countme-In]

"It's all very well to advocate that, but it kind of ignores the reality of what happened at Waco. Which is not that the feds showed up, served a search warrant, and were fired on. But rather, that they showed up, and immediately started shooting without any provocation."

Here's the wikipedia page we're both reading, apparently:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_siege

Given hairshirt's quotes above regarding Koresh's previous involvement in a running gun battle, the known stockpiling of weapons at the compound, and the fact that the leaders in the compound were militarily preparing and ready for violent confrontation, and a myriad of other contextual evidence, including unanswered questions, except at NewsMax, about who in fact fired the first shots, your paragraph leaves out an awful lot.

Look, the BATF f&cked up. Water cannons instead of tear gas and ramming the walls down would have worked better I suppose in saving lives.

But this is America, where everyone knows how do everything better than whomever is actually doing it, until they change positions, and then the same rule applies.

One's job is to listen to everyone else tell you how to do your job. If you want something done right, do it yourself and everyone else will say "If I was you, I'd do it differently."

That's the problem here: give an American man a job to do and provide plenty of firepower and ammo and they will do that job, the idiots.

"Some people really are just serfs looking for the right master to put them in chains."

Exactly my thoughts when I saw this video:

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2011/11/uc-davis-cops-pepper-spray-protesters

Refresh my memory on your outrage here regarding that excessive force.

See, I couldn't have sat there and taken it.

I'd have stood up and tackled that cop and and taken that canister away from him and emptied it into his eyeballs and down the front of his pants and then broken his skull with it.

I'd guess you'd be visiting me in prison and having bake sales for my defense fund. Am I wrong?

Or would I read you at some other blog in the prison library in the comments, writing: "This Countme character obviously did not observe law and order, refused a direct order from a law enforcement official to remove himself, and then took the law into his own hands, and besides, he was blocking a public thoroughfare in the first place. He got what he deserved. Also, the tie dye shirt he was wearing is a sure signal of incipient Maoist insurrection on American soil. And, if you read him at Obsidian Wings, you'd have been prepared to use overwhelming force on him without so much as a bye-your-leave.

Say it ain't so, Joe?

[navarro]

as mr. bellmore knows all too well from our occasional commenting debates at the formerly interesting and useful reality based community, i am no friend to the nra. that said, the raid on the davidian compound was ill-premised and even worse executed. the davidians were in possession of fewer guns per adult at the compound than the texas state average was at the time. they also weren't paying attention to the fact that in texas there is an even a larger tendency than elsewhere to shoot back at someone who begins shooting at you without first identifying themselves as law enforcement. at the time of the events i wondered if they had deliberately burned them alive but i soon recalled one of the two or three aphorisms by which i organize my thoughts-- "never assume malice or intent what can be as easily explained by stupidity."

[russell]

Some people really are just serfs looking for the right master to put them in chains.

Says the man whose intended response, when The Shit Hits The Fan, is to hop on a plane and screw.

[russell]

See, I couldn't have sat there and taken it.

In the history of this country, nearly all significant advances in civil rights and liberty of any and all forms have occurred via non-violent means.

Which is to say, non-violent on the part of the folks seeking to gain or establish the rights or freedoms in question. Quite often their opponents have been quite violent, eagerly and enthusiastically so in many cases.

The exceptions are:

1. the Revolutionary War
2. the Civil War

Those are, in fact, significant exceptions, but they are in fact exceptions to the rule.

Knuckleheads running around with guns have accomplished f**k-all.

If you need or want guns to hunt, defend your self or your home, shoot target, or just because you think they're a cool and interesting hobby, help yourself. I will not stand in your way.

If you think you are the guardian of liberty, it's highly likely that you're full of crap.

[sapient]

Look, the BATF f&cked up. Water cannons instead of tear gas and ramming the walls down would have worked better I suppose in saving lives.

But this is America, where everyone knows how do everything better than whomever is actually doing it, until they change positions, and then the same rule applies.

Thank you for this, Count.

[dr ngo]

Thought maybe I'd missed something, so I went back and re-read the thread, only to find I was right.

No one mentioned Waco until Brett himself brought it up. Russell immediately chimed in to say, yes, it was a total clusterFUBAR. Brett came right back on the topic of Waco, with the following:

The feds learned two lessons from Waco, IMO. The first was a good lesson: Don't be quick on the trigger finger, don't kill a bunch of people, no matter how outraged you are that they don't do what you say.

The second, not so good: If you can smear somebody, you'll get away with things you'd never get away with doing to somebody who still had a good reputation.

Cliven Bundy is still alive, for the moment, thanks to the first lesson. But the second lesson is at work, too, as you demonstrate. (emphasis added.)

To which I say - as I originally thought - this is bullshit, Brett. It's not even subtle enough to be sleight of hand. It's just plain bullshit.

No one was talking about Waco. No one here has even yet - certainly not at the time of your writing this - defended the action of the Feds at Waco. Nobody here had "demonstrated" the bad faith of which you accuse them/us.

This is you SMEARING the rest of the denizens of ObWi because we're too librul and statist for your liking, and throwing at us all of the mud - or in this case, bullshit - you can gather up in your sticky hands. And I'm tired of it.

To the moderators: if this language results in my banning for a while (or forever), so be it. I'm tired of these gratuitous insults.

[cleek]

Cleeks, "If the police shoot at you, put up your hands, maybe they'll stop short of killing you." stance obscene. Some people really are just serfs looking for the right master to put them in chains.

what i'm saying is a simple matter of numbers. I assume you're able to read, so i'll attribute your refusal to acknowledge the plain meaning in what I'm writing as trollery. (hey, it's working - once again, the liberals are trying to silence Brett by making a thread all about him).

but, for the record: i said not one thing about masters or serfs - that's all you. what i'm talking about is numbers: if you're holed up in your house, then the government outnumbers and outguns you. if you choose to make it a fight, you will die. this isn't rocket science, and it isn't philosophy. it's accounting. you principles are not going to stop bullets. if you fight it out, you will lose.

i dare say you'd make a terrible general.

(why is the comment box not showing up on FireFox?)

[russell]

typepad seems to have issues with firefox, at least on some platforms.

[Sick and Tired of Conservatives]

The only thing missing is two .45 caliber entry wounds in the foreheads of both those cretins.

[This, sadly, says volumes more about you than it does about conservatives. If you don't understand why this is comment-worthy, please take the time to peruse the posting rules. - Ed.]