KN was really, really stupid . . .
to put that story in her book. Which also means she's got even more ignorant advisers and editors who allowed her to put such a story in her book. Why you ask? Just look at the reaction above. Regardless of the merit of her decision, a significant portion will react accordingly. There are people who wanted worse for Michael Vick than a convicted murderer. Knowing that, dumb, dumb decision to include the story in her book. That being said, people who have never lived or worked on a farm or a ranch would be shocked about the reality of life not being all flowers and lollipops. It's never that simple.
I wonder if she simply did this to get the story out there and let it be "old" news rather than surfacing in the heart of a critical moment of some future campaign. Imagine the great hyena bringing this up for the first time in the middle of a VP debate.
you know what's funny but sad? I mean other than
@Heels Noir trying to get in some weak-ass jab at me that involves the death of something loved. Please Lord never let me be so desperate and butthurt as to sink that low. But I digress.
It doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone that maybe she's just basically honest. It seems to be the assumption all around that if she had thought clearly, she would have obscured and manipulated and omitted and maybe just plain lied. That's sad.
As
@heelmanwilm and .pooponduke point out, it ain't all peaches and cream in real life. There have been and still are hunters who treat their dogs the same as their truck or their rifle. If it works for you you cherish it, if it doesn't you get rid of it with little regret. Sometimes the poor dog is just thrown out the back of a truck as it moves down the road.. But there is nothing indicated here to put this woman in that category. It was merely
insinuated that she belonged there by what wasn't said to begin with.
On the other hand, I have no trouble seeing that she might have considered the dog useless as a hunting dog and therefor something of little value to her. But clearly, as the story goes she didn't dispatch the dog until it became a necessity. And in contrast to the notion that she hated the dog (a silly assumption), the gist of the anecdote was how putting it away was a hard thing to do. Additionally, you can argue about the necessity
being a necessity, and everyone will have a different opinion; but if you argue that putting the dog down by bullet is less humane than having it injected with some drug, you just have no notion of reality. And while you consider that, how are you squaring your objections to the act of putting a bullet in whatever is being hunted?
We all die, every living thing does. Death doesn't bother me so much because it has to be accepted as inevitable, but suffering to me is an intolerable evil. I'm honest. I've never killed a dog and I'm no hunter, but I have dispatched kittens that were seriously sick. I hated it but I hated
not doing it even more.