Kristi Nom Reminds Us We Are Animals

[rogue06]

But if he takes on Noem, it's REALLY "in your face".
But, you're right - it's usually much more self-centered.
But since you're so seldom right, I'll give you this one.
But you know I'm only kidding.
But you probably don't know about which part I am kidding.

The part about giving me anything. You were always the selfish one growing up.

[Cow Poke]

The part about giving me anything. You were always the selfish one growing up.

You're just jealous cause Mom always liked me best. She often wondered if your real parents would ever come back to collect you.

[rogue06]

You're just jealous cause Mom always liked me best. She often wondered if your real parents would ever come back to collect you.

As she said, "it ain't like I like him, but he has special needs that take up all of my time."

[Cow Poke]

As she said, "it ain't like I like him, but he has special needs that take up all of my time."

Hey, wait - this really IS about me!

[rogue06]

Hey, wait - this really IS about me!

Nope. Bacon.

And with that the thread has officially been won

[Sparko]

The excerpts from Noem's book are publicly available, were you interested in those details, and as I wrote earlier, Noem has not provided any exculpatory details not already public, despite having numerous chances to do so in front of friendly media. Noem's depiction of the dog being untrainable refers to its utility at hunting — but, even if it were not trainable in general, that would not remotely equate to "violent" or "dangerous". Noem gives no indications, to anyone who's dealt with dogs in the situations she describes, that the dog posed a danger to humans.

"Being familiar" isn't "acting authoritative". You're asking why I'm not willing to give Noem the benefit of the doubt and I'm explaining why: the details she provides aren't sufficient to justify what she did and, being personally familiar with dogs that bite people under certain circumstances (e.g., chicken killers, food insecure, hurt), I have no reason to believe that Noem wasn't facing a completely common occurrence.

That's why.

-Sam

"excerpts" do not tell the whole story. And do you think Noem put the entire history of her and this dog into her book? The whole thing seems like an aside, a anecdotal story in her book, not the topic of her book. Untrainable can mean a lot of things. You are assuming the worse because you want to. And in combination with attacking chickens and trying to bite her, untrainable does equate to violent and dangerous. And someone else, rogue?, mentioned that she got the dog from someone else and it was supposedly a troubled dog to begin with. Sounds like she thought she could "fix" it, but then learned that she could not.

You are welcome to your opinion but that doesn't make your opinion fact. You don't know the whole story. Neither do I.

I choose to not make a dogmatic statement on why she did what she did. I will give her the benefit of the doubt that she knew the dog and the situation better than either you or I do.

[Sparko]

Bottom line -
those who aren't gonna vote for Noem will now not vote for her even harder.
Those who are gonna vote for her will overlook this mountain of a molehill.

Oh, and, apparently, she has blue eyes.

Wait. She has eyes?

[rogue06]

Wait. She has eyes?

Sounds like you hear "my eyes are up here" from a lotta wimmenfolk.

[Sam]

"excerpts" do not tell the whole story. And do you think Noem put the entire history of her and this dog into her book? The whole thing seems like an aside, a anecdotal story in her book, not the topic of her book. Untrainable can mean a lot of things. You are assuming the worse because you want to. And in combination with attacking chickens and trying to bite her, untrainable does equate to violent and dangerous. And someone else, rogue?, mentioned that she got the dog from someone else and it was supposedly a troubled dog to begin with. Sounds like she thought she could "fix" it, but then learned that she could not.

You are welcome to your opinion but that doesn't make your opinion fact. You don't know the whole story. Neither do I.

I choose to not make a dogmatic statement on why she did what she did. I will give her the benefit of the doubt that she knew the dog and the situation better than either you or I do.

The excerpts from the book contain the whole story about the dog, from all accounts — even Noem's. It's not the topic of the book; it's an example Noem uses to depict her leadership qualities (specifically her ability to do "hard things"). As such, she included the details that she thought were relevant to demonstrating those qualities.

It's not my fault that the details Noem provides are woefully insufficient to the point she's trying to make. Neither is it my fault that those details paint the exact opposite picture — one of a person who callously killed a dog that could have been rehomed, retrained, or simply restrained from the presence of farm and game fowl. She had an excitable dog that had not actually shown itself to be a danger to humans, from her own account, and she chose to kill it and throw it in a gravel pit.

We've had to shoot our share of animals here, including dogs, and I'll tell you that we've at least always dug a grave for our departed pets.

This is a discussion about known facts; facts that Noem herself offered. If you think there are exculpatory facts somewhere out there that Noem could provide but has chosen not to, even as her standing in the veepstakes slides into its own gravel pit, feel free. But no sense chiding people about their reasonable reactions to what Noem chose to publish.

-Sam

[Sparko]

The excerpts from the book contain the whole story about the dog, from all accounts — even Noem's. It's not the topic of the book; it's an example Noem uses to depict her leadership qualities (specifically her ability to do "hard things"). As such, she included the details that she thought were relevant to demonstrating those qualities.

It's not my fault that the details Noem provides are woefully insufficient to the point she's trying to make. Neither is it my fault that those details paint the exact opposite picture — one of a person who callously killed a dog that could have been rehomed, retrained, or simply restrained from the presence of farm and game fowl. She had an excitable dog that had not actually shown itself to be a danger to humans, from her own account, and she chose to kill it and throw it in a gravel pit.

We've had to shoot our share of animals here, including dogs, and I'll tell you that we've at least always dug a grave for our departed pets.

This is a discussion about known facts; facts that Noem herself offered. If you think there are exculpatory facts somewhere out there that Noem could provide but has chosen not to, even as her standing in the veepstakes slides into its own gravel pit, feel free. But no sense chiding people about their reasonable reactions to what Noem chose to publish.

-Sam

You are making a whole lot of assumptions based on limited information. That was my only observation. As I said, you are welcome to your opinion, but being dogmatic and judgmental about some anecdotal story in a book where you don't have all of the information is not a good look for you.

[Sam]

You are making a whole lot of assumptions based on limited information. That was my only observation. As I said, you are welcome to your opinion, but being dogmatic and judgmental about some anecdotal story in a book where you don't have all of the information is not a good look for you.

Noem specifically wrote that story in her book, with those specific details, in order for people to draw conclusions about her character. If the conclusions drawn from her story, as she chose to present it, are negative instead of laudatory, maybe the problem is with her storytelling or history.

-Sam

[Sam]

"Why won't you trust Kristi Noem's character and decision making?"

"Well, in the space of only a few words ..."

ScreenShot00038.png

[Cow Poke]

"Why won't you trust Kristi Noem's character and decision making?"

"Well, in the space of only a few words ..."

ScreenShot00038.png

But she has blue eyes.

[Ronson]

I'm waiting for Noem to shoot another dog, so then I can vote for her. Two dogs make a right.

[Cow Poke]

I'm waiting for Noem to shoot another dog, so then I can vote for her. Two dogs make a right.

But what if it turns out to be a 3 dog night?