"He has voted in step with the Democrats and in his youth mauled a number of astro-teen-nauts"
This line from the latest ad from my opponent Frank (SHUSTER!) Shuster contains the first of many inaccuracies. Yes, I voted with the Democrats on many occasions. Mainly, because I am a Democrat, but also because unlike the idiot Republicans, they don't condone the shooting of wolves from friggin' helicopters. You may think Sarah Palin and her gun crazed goons are all cool when they hunt wolves, but I can guarantee things would be different if we, I mean, if the wolves, had a helicopter for our use as well. These so-called "air wolves" would handily take care of those flying yahoos.
"My opponent supports 'death panels' for our seniors and keeping abortion legal"
This line shocked me a bit. Are we really discussing death panels still? Yet again, this is a total perversion of my platform. I have never supported 'death panels' (hard to do since they don't really exist) and I have always supported a woman's right to choose. What my opponent is misinterpreting are comments I made (at a private event) to some of my wolf siblings when we were discussing various prey. If you read the transcript (wolves document everything) I clearly state:
"Brothers, just like when we try to separate the babies or the elderly from the rest of the herd so that we can attack them and eat them, we can not forget the members of the herd who are strong and healthy as they are also quite delicious but fight back. So we must be careful and keep our claws sharpened."
"He has threatened violence on our political leaders and has issued extremist 'fatwas'."
This statement is a bit of an over-reaction. I have only threatened the Palin family, but that is to be expected. I was the keynote speaker at the Bear/Wolf Symposium last year and the hunting of bears and wolves by the Palins was one of the main topics. In hindsight, I regret saying that whoever mauls a Palin gets a lifetime supply of fermented berries; mainly because wolves don't like berries as much as bears.
As an aside, I love my bear brothers and sisters, but the last thing they need is more to eat.
"He wants to cut funding in half for our national parks; a move that would eliminate thousands of jobs"
With any issue, things are never black and white. I will start by saying that, yes, I support the cutting of funding for our national parks. There are many reasons for this.
Primarily, we need to balance the budget. But, there is also a secondary benefit. If we close more national parks to the general public, that of course means less people stomping around in our, I mean, the homes of wolves (and bears and cougars and delicious elk). That is a good thing. The other benefit is that with less park rangers involved, any missing hikers that might fall prey to my cougar comrades or even the wolves will most likely stay missing and there won't truckloads of rifle-toting rangers snooping around looking for remains. But, it's mainly about the budget.
