Walt Palmer, a dentist from Minnesota, and his bow and arrow are about to have an interesting week

Killing things is not central to writing fucking words. It's justification for it. If you need to kill shit to help you visualize killing shit to write about killing shit you suck at visualization. I don't need to go fuck Jennifer Love Hewitt to visualize it.

 

Name all the canonical works of literature about the merits of slave ownership. Go.

 

Right. Lots of people have gone and run with the bulls because of Hemingway, or had a Bellini in Harry's Bar in Venice -- myself included in both.

This guy took it a step further and went on a big game hunt. Now, the specifics of the hunt are certainly problematic, and the previous episode with the bear doesn't help the situation, but to turn this guy into history's greatest villain seems a little manufactured to me.

Maybe he should have just written a novel based on his exploits, then we could love him -- not in a gay way -- for his masculinity.

 

Actually doing a thing doesn't help in writing about it?

 

Just a little word play in reference to his previous bear hunt.

 

Helps but it's not essential. If you care to disagree then I guess you agree with every athlete who has ever scolded the media for having never played the game.

 

Cecil was no angel.

 

Of course it's not essential. But I can't imagine any writer worth a shit who would prefer not to be more involved in what they were writing about if given the opportunity. I don't think Hemingway would have been as revered if he was the type who thought writing game stories off the TV was perfectly acceptable.

 

I also don't "understand" this post. What's the meaning/point of it?

Why didn't you answer my legitimate question regarding whatever there is to love about Walt Palmer's "hobby," instead of coming back with an idiotic response? (Which DW "likes", of course). Maybe because there isn't anything to "love" about it?

Seriously, answer the question. What is the point of killing animals -- or people, before anybody gets up in arms about me not being concerned about that -- that, of course, don't know "the hunter" is out to get it, and that, of course, don't carry the same freaking gun?

I don't like, and I don't see the point of, deliberate, senseless killing in any form That shouldn't be hard to "understand." How do you know people who are enraged about this are trying to "shame" Palmer? It makes no difference to me that this lion had a name. Pointless hunting of any animal is wrong, and I'm not "shaming" the guy. He can't be shamed, apparently, or he wouldn't engage in his "hobby."

Maybe people are upset about it because of the blatant disrespect for life that it illustrates in disgusting fashion. Why is that so hard to "understand"?

 

Ask Hemingway.

 

Like sports writers actually playing the sport they cover?

 

The Hill has uncovered the true evidence that the guy is a monster: