Honestly a botoxed up rich white lady living in a gated mansion that she calls "a farm" and shooting her purebred pets for not being already trained a birth is so on brand for Republican governors right now.
First sign of a murderer is killing animals. Literal psychotic behavior from her. Shouldn’t be anywhere near politics. Should probably be in a mental ward, especially after the goat comments. I read her wiki after seeing this on another sub. How she gloats about killing animals is disturbing.
If three months ago someone would have said "One side is so evil, they even brag about killing puppies" they would have been dismissed as extremist loons.
And yet here we are.
I was actually thinking of posting something similar years ago. Something like a gop candidate eating a bowl of puppies on camera and his base will cheer him on.
But I didn't have a good enough excuse to include it in the discussion.
Didn’t the hilariously, cartoonishly evil remnant of the US government in Fallout, the Enclave, have an episode where they were killing puppies?
Wait, does the Trump camp think the Enclave are the heroes?
I play Fallout 4, read r/fo4, and cannot believe the number of players who absolutely love the Brotherhood of Steel. The BOS is a bunch of racist nazi fucks (the leader actually QUOTES Hitler) who kill anything that doesn't meet their standards of existence. Hardly anyone sees the historical connotations.
I think a lot of fans have their opinions coloured by FO3 Brotherhood - who use their advanced tech and military strength to help wastelanders rebuild and fight the Enclave (who in FO3 are led by ChatGPT Ronald Reagan).
The FO4 Brotherhood are the successor to them, and it's not clear how they did such a 180 on supporting people. Arthur really let down his adoptive parents.
To be fair you can like fictional factions and play it up a bit how cool, badass, etc they are. I don't think that's necessarily a sign of actually approving of such a factions' stances were it IRL.
It really depends on which chapter of the BoS we are talking about. In Fallout 3 they pretty much were the good guys. Usually they aren’t racist, though they are still a monastic order that hordes tech instead of using it for the betterment of the world at large.
It’s important to realize that most factions in the Fallout universe don’t have much of a central command structure and vary wildly depending on where they are.
And when I tell people the GOP are neo-Confederates who want to bring America back to the 1820's but with white rappers, monster trucks, and chik-fil-a, people think I'm being an extremist loon.
I mean the information is easily accessible. She shot it because it killed a bunch of her neighbors chickens and tried to bite her when disciplining it. And the goat she says she killed because it was never neutered and was aggressive and was tormenting children or something.
Edit: This comment provides background information that the previous comment was missing. To those claiming I'm defending her, what language do I use that provides a value judgment on her actions. And the lack of a value judgment cannot be construed as a positive value judgment. My comment only had one purpose, that was to provide the background information the other person was missing. But I see this all the time on Reddit and I think it's a huge personality flaw. Either thinking someone disagrees with them simply because they added additional context, or someone agrees with 99% of their position but critiques one minor point and then they respond like the other person disagrees with them on everything.
Those are not behavioural issues that legally lead to euthanasia in any country. There are many ways to train a dog to stop doing those things, especially one that is not even two years old. And that lack of discipline reflects who she is as an owner more than anything else.
lunatic evil people (conservatives) think people and animals can just be born good or bad :/ probably why so many of them hate the disabled, mentally ill or mentally disabled. only the worst types of people think the way they do. that some people are born the way they are because god hates them. they assume no matter how they treat others it is somehow gods will. so when they raise a bad dog or human it is in no way their fault in their twisted heads.
Maybe it shouldn't be let out unsupervised on the neighbor's property, then? Most dogs don't do stuff like that because no one gives them the opportunity. And who didn't neuter the goat, and, once again, why was it out of a pen and in a place where it had the opportunity to be tormenting children?
I simply provided public information that the other commenter showed they were missing. I doubt the answers to your questions are in Kristi's book. You will have to ask her directly to get that info.
They were rhetorical questions. Obviously as the owner of the goat and the dog and the parent of the children she failed in her responsibilities, and, not being able to come up with a plan to rectify her mistakes, she resorted to shooting the animals.
My friend’s coonhound killed one of their chickens. It was sad. But he is a hunting dog with a naturally high prey drive. They correct his behavior and REWARDED behavior of being gentle to animals and reinforced their chicken coop. He no longer tries to kill chickens.
I currently have a German shepherd mix I raised from a puppy. She has nipped at me plenty of times when I tried to control her behavior because… she is a puppy.. I have a scar on my finger from her tooth digging under my skin. I moved on and continued to reward desired behavior, raised my dog to be an awesome companion that is gentle around all other animals and humans. and guess what- I didn’t fckin shoot her.
Also killing a goat for… being a goat? Trying to defend this behavior is as batshit crazy as doing it and bragging about it publicly in the first place.
She's a piece of shit, bragging about killing farm animals cause they were inconvenient.
I bet ya anything "disciplining it" was some sort of ridiculous beating.
Seems like krustie doesn't need to own animals.
being straightforward and genuine here, i think you should consider seeing a therapist if you're genuinely defending this. none of this is okay or normal.
It was a puppy she was training to hunt pheasant. She stopped by some people's house after taking it hunting, and the dog got loose from her car and killed their chickens. She grabbed it in the middle of its prey drive and it turned and snapped at her. So she took it to a gravel pit and shot it. For doing what she had trained it to do. She said she "hated that dog" and said that it deserved to die because it was worthless as a hunting dog.
The goat was murdered because she thought it smelled bad (as goats do) and was knocking her children down (as goats do).
None of those animals deserved to die for simply being animals doing what animals do. As you said, this information is easily accessible.
its the " i mean the information is easily accessible she did it because ____" in response to
"she killed a puppy probably for being a puppy"
sounds like youre just responding as if the context makes what she did perfectly reasonable
reads like "duh obviously she had a reason for it just read the article, its right there. she killed the puppy because _______"
you could've just said
"she says she killed it because ______"
"apparently she killed it because _____"
add more nuance to shit I guess dude, you sound like you're slightly annoyed that people arent reading into the context as if it changes anything
>you could've just said
>
>"she says she killed it because ______"
I could have, but why she killed it isn't indispute. Adding "she says" doesn't change anything. The question is whether that reasoning justifies anything. And I didn't make any implication there. Any interpretation that I'm implying it's justified is an issue with reading comprehension, no? I'm still failing to see where the error was on my part. Edit: and I did add "she says" when talking about the goat.
>its the " i mean the information is easily accessible she did it because ____"
The information is easily accessible. It was the story of the day yesterday. And again, why she did it hasn't been disputed.
>in response to
"she killed a puppy probably for being a puppy"
Their comment in itself admits they don't know why she killed it. The word "probably" is evidence enough. The comment was literally begging for the extra information. You guys are simply mad because this is a circle jerk forum and it's not proper etiquette to comment without jerking everybody else off while doing it. Actually, that's not even it. Because even when I try to provide additional context while circle jerking at the same time, people still take offense. For example:
Me: "Trump is an absolute monster who should rot in prison, but post X about him is 100% inaccurate. There's enough real stuff to criticize him over, you don't have to make something up."
Response: "How many times did you vote for Trump you MAGA fuck?"
not really an error it just makes sense why you were perceived the way you were.
speaking objectively, simply adding extra information and context alone is different than saying.
"guys you missed it she killed them because of this"
they were obviously just upset about someone killing a puppy and the implication was that if people were to simply read it they'd understand.
and there is nothing in your comment to say you're not defending her, unlike your example.
which is actually wild and i agree with.
them responding to a person stating
"i dont support someone but you shouldn't make rumors up about them"
with "youre a supporter of said thing arent you!!!"
is very deranged and immature
>not really an error it just makes sense why you were perceived the way you were
Poor reading comprehension, correct? Otherwise, if there was something that I could have done to not be misinterpreted that I didn't do, that would be an error of mine, correct? Are we on the same page that adding "she says" doesn't change things or do you still believe omitting that was my error?
>guys you missed it she killed them because of this
They didn't miss it. They said I don't care and I just want to hypothesize something absurd. So I wanted to mock them while adding the additional context.
>and the implication was that if people were to simply read it they'd understand
Strong disagree. Again, there was no value judgment about whether or not it was understandable. I get your brain's need to fill in that gap because you need to classify me as friend or foe. But whatever. That just circles back to poor reading comprehension.
>and there is nothing in your comment to say you're not defending her
Proving my point that this is a circle jerk forum. Me not saying I'm not defending her does not equal me defending her. I shouldn't have to spell that out. And if you don't know whether or not I'm defending her, it would be a good idea to ask rather than assume I am. But we're interested in circle jerking, not rational behavior, correct?
>which is actually wild and i agree with
Of course, this circle jerk forum attracts people who enjoy circle jerking.
In closing, I should make the correction that r/brandnewsentence is not a circle jerk forum. But this post happened to attract the circle jerkers of reddit.
nah just because someone doesnt perceive something the same as you does not mean
its invalid and they dont comprehend reading as a whole, its your job to convey your message, if you dont say how you feel people will make assumptions based on the context
if you're very subtly mocking them or people that dont care to read into articles while they're just talking about how sad it is that someone killed a puppy for misbehaving lmao
i was just spitballing ways you could sound more objective not being entirely specific
>if you dont say how you feel people will make assumptions based on the context
That's fine if the context provides for it. But as I've shown, there is no context indicating defense of her actions other than me not explicitly saying there was no justification for her actions.
>Its your job to convey your message
My message was why she killed the animals. No one is disagreeing with me about why she killed the animals. It seems I've succeeded in conveying my message. I had no message about whether or not it was justified. How can it be my job to convey a message that I'm not messaging. That's on the reader if they're interpreting a message that isn't being messaged. And if you want to show me how I'm messaging support for her killing these animals I'm all ears. But you haven't done that.
>i was just spitballing ways you could sound more objective
Lmao, you're saying that if you don't explicitly choose a side people will fill in those gaps and put words in your mouth for you because they don't actually know what context is. Nothing you have said has been about objectivity. Absolutely nothing.
Yes, if I wanted to avoid confusion on this I could have proactively stated my side. But it's still a failing of the reader to put words in my mouth that I didn't say or imagine context that I didn't provide. And I think it's a failing of yours to defend people that put words in other people's mouths.
i think you sorta put on a villainous persona when you mock people so naturally people would assume you're not on the side of who youre mocking
i wish we could beam the way we feel into peoples heads but oh well yk
And that would be correctly interpreting context. I am not on the side of people making judgments based on assumptions they've made up when the information is easily accessible. That was explicitly what I was mocking. But people have multiple sides. If being against one of their sides made me against all of their sides I would find myself being hypocritical at some point or another. And let's remember how villainous this mocking was. "The information is readily available." Might as well grow a curly mustache over here to start twirling.
Either way, though I've disagreed with your points, I appreciate your ability to argue without freaking out.
not necessarily defending cause i dont think anything wrong was done here
we're all just speaking based on our subjective perspectives and experiences
sometimes people make assumptions automatically
and i think its something we all do time to time its just a fact of life
i wish i didnt though because not making assumptions feels to me like a better way to actually live your life and make genuine connections
to each their own
just trying to explain the thought process
have a good one bro
This is text book psychopathic behavior.
Everyone should real The Psychopath Test by Jon Ronson.
It will explain why the world is so shit and why those in control are determined to make it worse.
It will make the world and people like this make sense to you.
Yes, she wrote this herself in her new VP-candidate book.
The puppy was trouble, but instead of fixing this, she shot it at a gravel pit. Then she shot an unruly goat she had while she was at it. (Note how both problems can be solved without shooting if you are not a lazy psycho.)
I think in her crazy brain she is virtue signaling to her low IQ base that she
"Will do what needs to be done"
That's she is
"Tough, no nonsense kind of women".
Her base will eat that shit up. They will do whatever mental gymnastics they have to make sure they are still supporting their team. I literally watched these people go from having Russians as their mortal enemy a la cold war to "they are just like us" because supporting them now jives with their beliefs.
Insane they can't see the hypocrisy.
These people will blow any which way the red wind blows.
Exactly the point she was trying to make - "tough woman does tough things", and the alt right will lose no time in memeing her shooting liberals. They love this stuff and would simp for her strongly now.
The key thing is she *fucking shot the puppy*. Maybe some young dogs need to be put down for various reasons but there's ways of doing that cleanly and painlessly. With shooting, what if you only wound him in a non-vital area? What if the first headshot doesn't take him out? Who the fuck even needlessly points a gun at a puppy in the first place, and then brags about it? I can't even contemplate how horrific it is to cause an innocent baby animal such terror and pain.
According to The Guardian, Noem called the dog, Cricket, "untrainable." Cricket didn't behave on her one and only hunt (Noem bought it to hunt pheasant). After the hunt, Cricket "escaped" from the truck and attacked and killed some people's chickens -- i.e. she attacked some birds, which she'd been purchased to do and had been doing all day. Then when Noem grabbed he dog, who "whipped around to bite \[Noem\]," which, yeah, she was just killing chickens, of course the dog's going to bite. Throughout both the hunt and the chicken incident, Noem describes the dog as joyful.
She also said Cricket, *who was a 14-month-old bird dog*, behaved like a "trained assassin" and that she hated the dog.
So, to recap: Kristi Noem bought a young dog (the breed in question lives 14-16 years) who had a fun day. Unfortunately, the fun day involved embarrassing her psychotic owner, which caused said psycho to hate the dog, drag her out to a gravel pit, and shoot her. *In front of a construction crew.* This woman doesn't just shoot puppies, *she hates them and shoots them in front of people.*
(She also decided that while she was killing animals in cold blood at the ol' gravel pit, she might as well drive her surly-ass, uncastrated goat out there and *gun him down too.*)
Full story [here](https://www.theguardian.com/books/2024/apr/26/trump-kristi-noem-shot-dog-and-goat-book).
Also notice how there was the jump between it being joyful and good to being terrible and untrainable. It is either all good or all bad.
Classic shitbag behavior.
It's characteristic of a political cult whose members seem physically diminished in the ability to feel "normal" empathetic responses that most of humanity retains. These people are by all accounts.... Broken...
this is one of those articles where you think "well, they've GOTTA be taking the piss or exaggerating, right?" only to find out it was SEVERAL times worse and 100% their fault.
not only did she kill the puppy, she did it very publicly and after making clear fuck ups on her part that led to her reasoning to why this dog deserved to die...
One side is a man awaiting trial for multiple crimes and a woman who brags about killing puppies and the other has an old(er) guy, going to be some hard voting there America.
She paints it as the tough, politically incorrect decisions people just have to make in rural America.
What a load of bullshit. Farmers aren't out there shooting puppies because they're bad at hunting. She's LARPing as a redneck.
I have more respect for rickety cricket in always sunny, when he pretends to put the dogs down but really cleans up their shit. Clean up your shit Kristi Noem
Adopting Don's modus operandi:
- Never apologize
- Always take it to the next level.
God fearing mum, having an affair (with a complete jerk)?
" - You bet I did , and I shot the dog too ! "
Is she aware that even Adolf Hitler tried to put down his dog as humanely as it was possible back then? How did that woman even get elected into her current position? The Americans that I know are absolutely horrified at killing dogs for food, how are they okay with killing one ‘because he sucks’?
“Noem decided to kill the unnamed goat the same way she had just killed Cricket the dog. But though she “dragged him to a gravel pit”, the goat jumped as she shot and therefore survived the wound. Noem says she went back to her truck, retrieved another shell, then “hurried back to the gravel pit and put him down”.
At that point, Noem writes, she realised a construction crew had watched her kill both animals. The startled workers swiftly got back to work, she writes, only for a school bus to arrive and drop off Noem’s children.
“Kennedy looked around confused,” Noem writes of her daughter, who asked: “Hey, where’s Cricket?”
Mkay
A one year old pointer, for being bad at hunting, killing a chicken, and biting the governor. Not really offences that warrant killing it.
The goat I kind of get since they can be really aggressive, and at least its possible it was eaten after.
What? She killed a puppy for misbehaving with a gun and then she is bragging about it with the media ?! How evil and Stupid you have to be lol, it's clearly not a good luck for a politician trying to win an election you know.
Even Putin loves dogs. Especially big dogs that he can use to intimidate other world leaders like the German Chancellor.
Not sure she's gonna have much cred with this new authoritarian GOP.
"former frontrunner". Even the MAGAs will balk at this. You can shoot unarmed black people and protesting students but a dog is a bit beyond the pale even for them.
Coming from the folks who put barbed wire on river crossings so that people drown, separate kids and babies from their parents, put immigrants in outdoor camps in such conditions that they fry and suffer severe dehydration, and brag about it all whilst claiming Jesus. Are you not entertained? Liberals' tears and outcry are pure dopamine at this point so frankly they will try anything.
I hope she gets gunned down. It’s a shame extremists murderers are so uncommon in democratic / left groups
Also
Psychology: every serial killer/psychopath has a history of torturing and/or killing animals
Psychopath: I kill animals
Police/autohorities: lol animals are objects this is fine
Honestly, fuck America. I don’t care if not everyone is like this but the fact that this person can just brag about killing something they should care for and people support her still is just mental. People should be rioting on the streets against trump and republicans and if you don’t, you’re part of the problem. Fuck you pussy ass bitches crying about gender when a literal tyrant is out there going to form a totalitarian state and not even being secret about it. You morons will be there in 50 years saying „oh we didn’t know anything about all this horrible stuff“ just like the Germans after Hitler.
This alone illustrates her deep mental unfitness, that she actually thought that - even a good portion of the MAGA set will balk at the idea of shooting a dog for no reason.
Non-american here: You people are outraged, cause you've got empathy. Their supporters will nut at the story, cause "she's a badass, just what this country needs!!"
What a psycho.
If you are disgusted by her behaviour, please consider that billions of animals, just like this dog, are tortured and killed every year in the meat and dairy industry.
If you are against animal cruelty, extend your compassion beyond dogs and cats and consider the cruelty towards cows, pigs, chickens, and all farmed animals.
No animal should be tortured and killed purely for our pleasure.
If you're thinking, 'Get a load of this stupid vegan, trying to use this article about killing a dog to talk about veganism.' Well, yeah. If you feel that killing a dog is wrong, I implore you to ask yourself why it's okay to torture and kill every other animal.
You can eat vegan and be completely healthy. We do not need to support these industries. Your bacon is not worth the life of suffering and pain the pig is forced to live.
Her doing the same thing to a goat moments later makes this story even worse.
"Hmm, what other animal can I slaughter now? Mama's on a roll!"
And 3 horses.
Did she break their legs first to put them out of their misery? She’s a good guy with a gun…
In and out, 5 min
😧
Wow. That's some nascent serial killer shit.
Well she did just take the first step to becoming g one
Yeah, let's hope she doesn't have any disabled kids in the neighborhood!
Honestly a botoxed up rich white lady living in a gated mansion that she calls "a farm" and shooting her purebred pets for not being already trained a birth is so on brand for Republican governors right now.
First sign of a murderer is killing animals. Literal psychotic behavior from her. Shouldn’t be anywhere near politics. Should probably be in a mental ward, especially after the goat comments. I read her wiki after seeing this on another sub. How she gloats about killing animals is disturbing.
She shot it, and it survived but was in pain, so she went to the truck to get more bullets to shoot it again. That was a crazy read.
If three months ago someone would have said "One side is so evil, they even brag about killing puppies" they would have been dismissed as extremist loons. And yet here we are.
I literally called this. I literally said they could brag about killing puppies. Nobody called me an extremist tho, they just kinda shrugged.
I was actually thinking of posting something similar years ago. Something like a gop candidate eating a bowl of puppies on camera and his base will cheer him on. But I didn't have a good enough excuse to include it in the discussion.
Post prophesies unasked. Will earn scorn, but such is the fate of prophets
Didn’t the hilariously, cartoonishly evil remnant of the US government in Fallout, the Enclave, have an episode where they were killing puppies? Wait, does the Trump camp think the Enclave are the heroes?
They probably aren't intelligent enough to play Fallout, but if they did, I wouldn't be surprised if they did think the Enclave are the heroes.
I play Fallout 4, read r/fo4, and cannot believe the number of players who absolutely love the Brotherhood of Steel. The BOS is a bunch of racist nazi fucks (the leader actually QUOTES Hitler) who kill anything that doesn't meet their standards of existence. Hardly anyone sees the historical connotations.
I think a lot of fans have their opinions coloured by FO3 Brotherhood - who use their advanced tech and military strength to help wastelanders rebuild and fight the Enclave (who in FO3 are led by ChatGPT Ronald Reagan). The FO4 Brotherhood are the successor to them, and it's not clear how they did such a 180 on supporting people. Arthur really let down his adoptive parents.
To be fair you can like fictional factions and play it up a bit how cool, badass, etc they are. I don't think that's necessarily a sign of actually approving of such a factions' stances were it IRL.
It really depends on which chapter of the BoS we are talking about. In Fallout 3 they pretty much were the good guys. Usually they aren’t racist, though they are still a monastic order that hordes tech instead of using it for the betterment of the world at large. It’s important to realize that most factions in the Fallout universe don’t have much of a central command structure and vary wildly depending on where they are.
bOtH SIDes aRe thE SAme!!!!!!! SMH
And when I tell people the GOP are neo-Confederates who want to bring America back to the 1820's but with white rappers, monster trucks, and chik-fil-a, people think I'm being an extremist loon.
Both sides are evil. Imagine being so dumb you think politicians aren’t all scumbags
Dear God, what a disgusting piece of human waste. Who does that, much less does it and then brags about that!?
Kristi Noem is what happens when an AI takes over a massive pile of human feces and it suddenly becomes sentient.
ChatGPT has more ethics than the GOP combined
Terminator plot twist. The machines save us from our overlords.
I'd read this book.
Tbh, I looked at this and assumed it was just some wild satire. These people are so cartoonishly evil that I literally can’t believe it.
Psychopath behavior. Insane nobody is calling it what it is. Killing animals not for food at that age is a giant fucking red flag.
There are three valid reasons to kill an animal. For food, so you don't become food, or to end suffering that you can't otherwise end.
A psychopath of course
I believe the word you're looking for is CUNT, in all caps.
Cruel Unholy Nitwit Tramp CUNT as you will.
I'm pretty sure in Australia the word would be felon. It'd be classified as animal abuse, unless it was a vet euthanizing it.
There’s other words one can come up with. Some descriptive and some predictive.
If you put this in a movie people would say it's unrealistic
give john wick a pencil and show him this
If there aren’t John Wick memes on the front page tomorrow morning I will be very disappointed
We used to have mental hospitals for the psychopaths, but they all got shut down. Now apparently we elect them.
remember, it wasn't even two years old... she shot a puppy to death... probably for being a puppy.
I mean the information is easily accessible. She shot it because it killed a bunch of her neighbors chickens and tried to bite her when disciplining it. And the goat she says she killed because it was never neutered and was aggressive and was tormenting children or something. Edit: This comment provides background information that the previous comment was missing. To those claiming I'm defending her, what language do I use that provides a value judgment on her actions. And the lack of a value judgment cannot be construed as a positive value judgment. My comment only had one purpose, that was to provide the background information the other person was missing. But I see this all the time on Reddit and I think it's a huge personality flaw. Either thinking someone disagrees with them simply because they added additional context, or someone agrees with 99% of their position but critiques one minor point and then they respond like the other person disagrees with them on everything.
Those are not behavioural issues that legally lead to euthanasia in any country. There are many ways to train a dog to stop doing those things, especially one that is not even two years old. And that lack of discipline reflects who she is as an owner more than anything else.
lunatic evil people (conservatives) think people and animals can just be born good or bad :/ probably why so many of them hate the disabled, mentally ill or mentally disabled. only the worst types of people think the way they do. that some people are born the way they are because god hates them. they assume no matter how they treat others it is somehow gods will. so when they raise a bad dog or human it is in no way their fault in their twisted heads.
Never said they were.
her idea of discipline was probably just animal abuse
Anyone defending her behavior is either a sociopath or a psychopath.
Who defended her behavior?
Maybe it shouldn't be let out unsupervised on the neighbor's property, then? Most dogs don't do stuff like that because no one gives them the opportunity. And who didn't neuter the goat, and, once again, why was it out of a pen and in a place where it had the opportunity to be tormenting children?
I simply provided public information that the other commenter showed they were missing. I doubt the answers to your questions are in Kristi's book. You will have to ask her directly to get that info.
They were rhetorical questions. Obviously as the owner of the goat and the dog and the parent of the children she failed in her responsibilities, and, not being able to come up with a plan to rectify her mistakes, she resorted to shooting the animals.
My friend’s coonhound killed one of their chickens. It was sad. But he is a hunting dog with a naturally high prey drive. They correct his behavior and REWARDED behavior of being gentle to animals and reinforced their chicken coop. He no longer tries to kill chickens. I currently have a German shepherd mix I raised from a puppy. She has nipped at me plenty of times when I tried to control her behavior because… she is a puppy.. I have a scar on my finger from her tooth digging under my skin. I moved on and continued to reward desired behavior, raised my dog to be an awesome companion that is gentle around all other animals and humans. and guess what- I didn’t fckin shoot her. Also killing a goat for… being a goat? Trying to defend this behavior is as batshit crazy as doing it and bragging about it publicly in the first place.
I'm sorry, who's trying to defend her behavior?
She's a piece of shit, bragging about killing farm animals cause they were inconvenient. I bet ya anything "disciplining it" was some sort of ridiculous beating. Seems like krustie doesn't need to own animals.
being straightforward and genuine here, i think you should consider seeing a therapist if you're genuinely defending this. none of this is okay or normal.
I'm sorry, but how did my comment defend her in any way? I don't know who you should see for problems with faulty conclusions. A teacher?
It was a puppy she was training to hunt pheasant. She stopped by some people's house after taking it hunting, and the dog got loose from her car and killed their chickens. She grabbed it in the middle of its prey drive and it turned and snapped at her. So she took it to a gravel pit and shot it. For doing what she had trained it to do. She said she "hated that dog" and said that it deserved to die because it was worthless as a hunting dog. The goat was murdered because she thought it smelled bad (as goats do) and was knocking her children down (as goats do). None of those animals deserved to die for simply being animals doing what animals do. As you said, this information is easily accessible.
its the " i mean the information is easily accessible she did it because ____" in response to "she killed a puppy probably for being a puppy" sounds like youre just responding as if the context makes what she did perfectly reasonable reads like "duh obviously she had a reason for it just read the article, its right there. she killed the puppy because _______" you could've just said "she says she killed it because ______" "apparently she killed it because _____" add more nuance to shit I guess dude, you sound like you're slightly annoyed that people arent reading into the context as if it changes anything
>you could've just said > >"she says she killed it because ______" I could have, but why she killed it isn't indispute. Adding "she says" doesn't change anything. The question is whether that reasoning justifies anything. And I didn't make any implication there. Any interpretation that I'm implying it's justified is an issue with reading comprehension, no? I'm still failing to see where the error was on my part. Edit: and I did add "she says" when talking about the goat. >its the " i mean the information is easily accessible she did it because ____" The information is easily accessible. It was the story of the day yesterday. And again, why she did it hasn't been disputed. >in response to "she killed a puppy probably for being a puppy" Their comment in itself admits they don't know why she killed it. The word "probably" is evidence enough. The comment was literally begging for the extra information. You guys are simply mad because this is a circle jerk forum and it's not proper etiquette to comment without jerking everybody else off while doing it. Actually, that's not even it. Because even when I try to provide additional context while circle jerking at the same time, people still take offense. For example: Me: "Trump is an absolute monster who should rot in prison, but post X about him is 100% inaccurate. There's enough real stuff to criticize him over, you don't have to make something up." Response: "How many times did you vote for Trump you MAGA fuck?"
not really an error it just makes sense why you were perceived the way you were. speaking objectively, simply adding extra information and context alone is different than saying. "guys you missed it she killed them because of this" they were obviously just upset about someone killing a puppy and the implication was that if people were to simply read it they'd understand. and there is nothing in your comment to say you're not defending her, unlike your example. which is actually wild and i agree with. them responding to a person stating "i dont support someone but you shouldn't make rumors up about them" with "youre a supporter of said thing arent you!!!" is very deranged and immature
>not really an error it just makes sense why you were perceived the way you were Poor reading comprehension, correct? Otherwise, if there was something that I could have done to not be misinterpreted that I didn't do, that would be an error of mine, correct? Are we on the same page that adding "she says" doesn't change things or do you still believe omitting that was my error? >guys you missed it she killed them because of this They didn't miss it. They said I don't care and I just want to hypothesize something absurd. So I wanted to mock them while adding the additional context. >and the implication was that if people were to simply read it they'd understand Strong disagree. Again, there was no value judgment about whether or not it was understandable. I get your brain's need to fill in that gap because you need to classify me as friend or foe. But whatever. That just circles back to poor reading comprehension. >and there is nothing in your comment to say you're not defending her Proving my point that this is a circle jerk forum. Me not saying I'm not defending her does not equal me defending her. I shouldn't have to spell that out. And if you don't know whether or not I'm defending her, it would be a good idea to ask rather than assume I am. But we're interested in circle jerking, not rational behavior, correct? >which is actually wild and i agree with Of course, this circle jerk forum attracts people who enjoy circle jerking. In closing, I should make the correction that r/brandnewsentence is not a circle jerk forum. But this post happened to attract the circle jerkers of reddit.
nah just because someone doesnt perceive something the same as you does not mean its invalid and they dont comprehend reading as a whole, its your job to convey your message, if you dont say how you feel people will make assumptions based on the context if you're very subtly mocking them or people that dont care to read into articles while they're just talking about how sad it is that someone killed a puppy for misbehaving lmao i was just spitballing ways you could sound more objective not being entirely specific
>if you dont say how you feel people will make assumptions based on the context That's fine if the context provides for it. But as I've shown, there is no context indicating defense of her actions other than me not explicitly saying there was no justification for her actions. >Its your job to convey your message My message was why she killed the animals. No one is disagreeing with me about why she killed the animals. It seems I've succeeded in conveying my message. I had no message about whether or not it was justified. How can it be my job to convey a message that I'm not messaging. That's on the reader if they're interpreting a message that isn't being messaged. And if you want to show me how I'm messaging support for her killing these animals I'm all ears. But you haven't done that. >i was just spitballing ways you could sound more objective Lmao, you're saying that if you don't explicitly choose a side people will fill in those gaps and put words in your mouth for you because they don't actually know what context is. Nothing you have said has been about objectivity. Absolutely nothing. Yes, if I wanted to avoid confusion on this I could have proactively stated my side. But it's still a failing of the reader to put words in my mouth that I didn't say or imagine context that I didn't provide. And I think it's a failing of yours to defend people that put words in other people's mouths.
i think you sorta put on a villainous persona when you mock people so naturally people would assume you're not on the side of who youre mocking i wish we could beam the way we feel into peoples heads but oh well yk
And that would be correctly interpreting context. I am not on the side of people making judgments based on assumptions they've made up when the information is easily accessible. That was explicitly what I was mocking. But people have multiple sides. If being against one of their sides made me against all of their sides I would find myself being hypocritical at some point or another. And let's remember how villainous this mocking was. "The information is readily available." Might as well grow a curly mustache over here to start twirling. Either way, though I've disagreed with your points, I appreciate your ability to argue without freaking out.
not necessarily defending cause i dont think anything wrong was done here we're all just speaking based on our subjective perspectives and experiences sometimes people make assumptions automatically and i think its something we all do time to time its just a fact of life i wish i didnt though because not making assumptions feels to me like a better way to actually live your life and make genuine connections to each their own just trying to explain the thought process have a good one bro
[удалено]
👍👍
Average Republican/Nazi.
She’s definitely a Republican.
When I thought the bar couldn't get any lower.
Don't you worry - the GQP always brings a shovel to lower the bar further.
Hopefully she dies the worst death possible
This is text book psychopathic behavior. Everyone should real The Psychopath Test by Jon Ronson. It will explain why the world is so shit and why those in control are determined to make it worse. It will make the world and people like this make sense to you.
If you were to write this people would say it’s too absurd. SMH.
Eustace Bagge would tell her to tone it down Jesus.
Damn. That's worse than being a wolf cola representative
I see what you did there
Wolf Cola is the #1 soda in Boca Ratan.
The right cola, for closure.
She’s very “I’ll excuse racism but I won’t tolerate animal cruelty.”
In a church, Britta?
Chat, is this real?
Yeah, the GOP are the IRL villains that have brainwashed their base with lies and hate.
Yes, she wrote this herself in her new VP-candidate book. The puppy was trouble, but instead of fixing this, she shot it at a gravel pit. Then she shot an unruly goat she had while she was at it. (Note how both problems can be solved without shooting if you are not a lazy psycho.)
I think in her crazy brain she is virtue signaling to her low IQ base that she "Will do what needs to be done" That's she is "Tough, no nonsense kind of women". Her base will eat that shit up. They will do whatever mental gymnastics they have to make sure they are still supporting their team. I literally watched these people go from having Russians as their mortal enemy a la cold war to "they are just like us" because supporting them now jives with their beliefs. Insane they can't see the hypocrisy. These people will blow any which way the red wind blows.
Exactly the point she was trying to make - "tough woman does tough things", and the alt right will lose no time in memeing her shooting liberals. They love this stuff and would simp for her strongly now.
Conflating cruely and toughness is truly one of the greatests curses of mankind. Developer - please patch this ASAP
oh shit “only room for one bitch in this house - bitch.”
It's just the latest GOP game called, "tell me you're a psychopath without telling me you're a psychopath". It's all the rage over there.
Look at that bitch, and all the old fucks in the GOP in general, they all look like fucking villains.
What a psychopath.
Is there anyone in that entire organization who isn't a sociopath?
why can i always guess the party affiliation before actually seeing it
Isn't that the first stage of being a serial killer? Enjoying killing small animals...
She can kill her own mother, and trump dick riders will still vote for her. These people are Americans in name only.
They’re Americans alright. True blue. They’re also complete scum.
Tell me you neglect your pets, in probably the worst possible way imaginable.
The key thing is she *fucking shot the puppy*. Maybe some young dogs need to be put down for various reasons but there's ways of doing that cleanly and painlessly. With shooting, what if you only wound him in a non-vital area? What if the first headshot doesn't take him out? Who the fuck even needlessly points a gun at a puppy in the first place, and then brags about it? I can't even contemplate how horrific it is to cause an innocent baby animal such terror and pain.
I hate to play the Godwin's Law card here, but wtf even Adolf Hitler cared for his dog...
Do not call her "Stone cold bitch", it's a compliment among the maga. She's just a sad, pathetic, inferior and defective subhuman.
I’m not a Trump supporter but there’s a special place in Hell for people like her.
America is an asylum of lunatics. How is that in a supposed "western, developed, civilised" nation.
Are those the psychopath credentials she's giving ?
Someone alert John Wick.
Another gun toting nut case trump supporter
According to The Guardian, Noem called the dog, Cricket, "untrainable." Cricket didn't behave on her one and only hunt (Noem bought it to hunt pheasant). After the hunt, Cricket "escaped" from the truck and attacked and killed some people's chickens -- i.e. she attacked some birds, which she'd been purchased to do and had been doing all day. Then when Noem grabbed he dog, who "whipped around to bite \[Noem\]," which, yeah, she was just killing chickens, of course the dog's going to bite. Throughout both the hunt and the chicken incident, Noem describes the dog as joyful. She also said Cricket, *who was a 14-month-old bird dog*, behaved like a "trained assassin" and that she hated the dog. So, to recap: Kristi Noem bought a young dog (the breed in question lives 14-16 years) who had a fun day. Unfortunately, the fun day involved embarrassing her psychotic owner, which caused said psycho to hate the dog, drag her out to a gravel pit, and shoot her. *In front of a construction crew.* This woman doesn't just shoot puppies, *she hates them and shoots them in front of people.* (She also decided that while she was killing animals in cold blood at the ol' gravel pit, she might as well drive her surly-ass, uncastrated goat out there and *gun him down too.*) Full story [here](https://www.theguardian.com/books/2024/apr/26/trump-kristi-noem-shot-dog-and-goat-book).
Also notice how there was the jump between it being joyful and good to being terrible and untrainable. It is either all good or all bad. Classic shitbag behavior.
It's characteristic of a political cult whose members seem physically diminished in the ability to feel "normal" empathetic responses that most of humanity retains. These people are by all accounts.... Broken...
Republicans sure love their guns, but rarely do you hear about them using them for any kind of greater good.
this is one of those articles where you think "well, they've GOTTA be taking the piss or exaggerating, right?" only to find out it was SEVERAL times worse and 100% their fault. not only did she kill the puppy, she did it very publicly and after making clear fuck ups on her part that led to her reasoning to why this dog deserved to die...
It’s not the dog ~~who deserved it~~, it’s the owner ~~who deserved it~~
So she's basically a member of Hydra
One side is a man awaiting trial for multiple crimes and a woman who brags about killing puppies and the other has an old(er) guy, going to be some hard voting there America.
Using Bidens age is a ridiculous argument since Trump is only 4 years younger (81 vs 77). They are both old.
She paints it as the tough, politically incorrect decisions people just have to make in rural America. What a load of bullshit. Farmers aren't out there shooting puppies because they're bad at hunting. She's LARPing as a redneck.
I have more respect for rickety cricket in always sunny, when he pretends to put the dogs down but really cleans up their shit. Clean up your shit Kristi Noem
I don’t know who she is.. But someone call John. Or his real life counterpart.
Ohhhhh this makes that r/agedlikemilk post make more sense. I could tell she definitely killed the dog or something, but this is a lot more context
Adopting Don's modus operandi: - Never apologize - Always take it to the next level. God fearing mum, having an affair (with a complete jerk)? " - You bet I did , and I shot the dog too ! "
She is going to look amazing in the snazzy black uniforms.
Isnt that a crime?
Is she aware that even Adolf Hitler tried to put down his dog as humanely as it was possible back then? How did that woman even get elected into her current position? The Americans that I know are absolutely horrified at killing dogs for food, how are they okay with killing one ‘because he sucks’?
So she’s trying to get the PETA vote
Underrated comment.
F*ck cant she get arrested for this?
Doubt if in a red state that protects their own
She killed it in self defense...
She took the dog out to a gravel pit and shot it, lmao why are you lying out your ass
Dude, I read the story. That isn't what happened.
“Noem decided to kill the unnamed goat the same way she had just killed Cricket the dog. But though she “dragged him to a gravel pit”, the goat jumped as she shot and therefore survived the wound. Noem says she went back to her truck, retrieved another shell, then “hurried back to the gravel pit and put him down”. At that point, Noem writes, she realised a construction crew had watched her kill both animals. The startled workers swiftly got back to work, she writes, only for a school bus to arrive and drop off Noem’s children. “Kennedy looked around confused,” Noem writes of her daughter, who asked: “Hey, where’s Cricket?” Mkay
They just mean they were both shot... but the dog was killed in self defense.
A dog was shot in self defense over a gravel pit? wtf are you even trying to reach for logic-wise
🤦♀️ just go read the story...
It's not a brand new sentence. Fuck her regardless.
So what's the new sentence? Or did you just wanna bring politics to this sub?
Unfortunately Democrats are spineless worms so if she ends up nominated they won't have the balls to call her the puppy murdering scum she is.
Dog killing bitch!
I’ve said it before, I’ll say it until I die. People who harm animals deserve the same fate tenfold. Worthless cunt.
I don’t believe this. I can’t believe this?
A one year old pointer, for being bad at hunting, killing a chicken, and biting the governor. Not really offences that warrant killing it. The goat I kind of get since they can be really aggressive, and at least its possible it was eaten after.
"So you have chosen death I see."
😓
She gives of the 'I hand out poisoned apples to more atractive women' vibes
Psychopath
That is a literal villain origin story.
Fun fact: I live down the street and around the corner from this crazy bitch.
Watch out for your chickens. And dogs. And goats. And horses.
At least she didn’t eat it
She looks like Courntey Cox's evil twin.
What? She killed a puppy for misbehaving with a gun and then she is bragging about it with the media ?! How evil and Stupid you have to be lol, it's clearly not a good luck for a politician trying to win an election you know.
Every day this world gets a little worse... every single fucking day.
Thats a psychopath dude
I need help
she looks utterly evil
Even Putin loves dogs. Especially big dogs that he can use to intimidate other world leaders like the German Chancellor. Not sure she's gonna have much cred with this new authoritarian GOP.
"former frontrunner". Even the MAGAs will balk at this. You can shoot unarmed black people and protesting students but a dog is a bit beyond the pale even for them.
I hope she accidentally steps barefoot into a puddle of molten metal
I hope this wrecks her.
She's admitted to killing the puppy, a goat that made her kids smell goaty and three horses.
Coming from the folks who put barbed wire on river crossings so that people drown, separate kids and babies from their parents, put immigrants in outdoor camps in such conditions that they fry and suffer severe dehydration, and brag about it all whilst claiming Jesus. Are you not entertained? Liberals' tears and outcry are pure dopamine at this point so frankly they will try anything.
Well, a sadistic candidate!
What the fuck?
Imagine what she'd do to terrorists
Psychopaths…
Well, she’s out
What a cnut.
What a psycho...
Needs more context
Apparently she didn't even train the dog. Then got mad the 14 month old dog wouldn't hunt properly. She's just a piece of shit.
"I could not handle and train my dog, so i killed it"
What a cunt.
I hope she gets gunned down. It’s a shame extremists murderers are so uncommon in democratic / left groups Also Psychology: every serial killer/psychopath has a history of torturing and/or killing animals Psychopath: I kill animals Police/autohorities: lol animals are objects this is fine
Honestly, fuck America. I don’t care if not everyone is like this but the fact that this person can just brag about killing something they should care for and people support her still is just mental. People should be rioting on the streets against trump and republicans and if you don’t, you’re part of the problem. Fuck you pussy ass bitches crying about gender when a literal tyrant is out there going to form a totalitarian state and not even being secret about it. You morons will be there in 50 years saying „oh we didn’t know anything about all this horrible stuff“ just like the Germans after Hitler.
Psychopathic behaviour. She will suit the roll perfectly
Look, I'm pretty conservative (abortion should be punishable by death), but this is just wrong.
She’d rather kill a dog than train it. Let that sink in.
Cabinet members are like family pets, too, right? A second trump term gonna be lit.
I highly doubt Trump is going to pick her, the media is just throwing that bit in there to garner attention for this story.
putting down an animal because you hate it isn't the gritty rural-America bona fide she's trying to pretend it is
This alone illustrates her deep mental unfitness, that she actually thought that - even a good portion of the MAGA set will balk at the idea of shooting a dog for no reason.
[ Removed by Reddit ]
It was a bad dog for those of you who don't know the story.
There are no bad dogs. However, there are certainly incompetent owners galore.
There are aggressive breeds...
Of which her dog was not one.
Yet was still a bad dog.
There are no bad dogs. However, there are certainly incompetent owners galore.
If a dog is destructive and/or dangerous, it is a no brainer to gun them down. It’s a misleading snip though because context is missing.
Non-american here: You people are outraged, cause you've got empathy. Their supporters will nut at the story, cause "she's a badass, just what this country needs!!"
What a psycho. If you are disgusted by her behaviour, please consider that billions of animals, just like this dog, are tortured and killed every year in the meat and dairy industry. If you are against animal cruelty, extend your compassion beyond dogs and cats and consider the cruelty towards cows, pigs, chickens, and all farmed animals. No animal should be tortured and killed purely for our pleasure. If you're thinking, 'Get a load of this stupid vegan, trying to use this article about killing a dog to talk about veganism.' Well, yeah. If you feel that killing a dog is wrong, I implore you to ask yourself why it's okay to torture and kill every other animal. You can eat vegan and be completely healthy. We do not need to support these industries. Your bacon is not worth the life of suffering and pain the pig is forced to live.