January 11, 2010

PETA Uses First Lady in Anti-Fur Ad Without Permission

COLUMBUS, Ohio--THE U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance reports that PETA, the radical anti-hunting group, admits that it did not seek or receive First Lady Michelle Obama's permission to use her likeness in its advertising.

Ingrid Newkirk, the founder and president of PETA, admitted that they wouldn’t have sought Mrs. Obama’s permission as “it knows that she can’t make such an endorsement.”

PETA is well known for using high profile celebrities as part of its radical animal rights agenda. Often the group’s anti-fur ads use scantily clad or naked celebrities.


PETA unveiled this ad containing Michelle Obama in the Washington D.C. metro on December 28.

PETA unveiled the ad containing Michelle Obama in the Washington D.C. metro on December 28 and also plastered it on the side of the so-called “PETA Van.”

While the ad also included other celebrities such as Oprah Winfrey, country music star Carrie Underwood and model Tyra Banks, it is the image of the First Lady that has attracted the most media attention with newspapers across the nation, such as USA Today, running with the story.

When asked about the ad the First Lady’s Office flatly said that “We did not consent to this,” though no further comment was offered.

“PETA is a group that has done such outlandish acts as pay attorney fees for convicted terrorists,” said Bud Pidgeon, U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance president and CEO. “By aligning themselves with the First Lady, especially without permission, we certainly would hope the White House will take a hard stance against this type of activity.”

Comments (5)

Oil=synthetic fabrics. Makes 'em squirm

Great point!

Gaviota

Posted by: Lee W | January 14, 2010 5:21 PM    Report this comment

I remind PETA solicitors that Fur is a renewable resource, and ask why does PETA endorse Big Oil. Oil=synthetic fabrics. Makes 'em squirm

Posted by: Mister E | January 14, 2010 12:01 PM    Report this comment

My belief is that the main reason celebrities jump on the PETA bandwagon is their undying need for attention. Yes, it's a feel good cause, but like most causes, there's "page 2" as the late Paul Harvey would say. Would there even be a PETA if they didn't have a loyal following of narcissistic pinups?

As for Michelle, she's loving every minute of this free publicity painting her both as a supporter of a cause celebre and a victim of media abuse.

Posted by: PVB | January 14, 2010 10:19 AM    Report this comment

There was a story circulating about twenty years ago or so, around the time when PETA started throwing blood and red paint on women wearing fur.

Seems this young woman walked out of a New York (or maybe Boston, I disremember) restaurant, and a gang of PETA goons attacked her, with one woman splattering her with red stuff and screaming slogans at her. The girl dropped her fur coat on the sidewalk and immediately proceeded to !!whip that b****'s A$$!! right then and there, while her muscular companions chased the other squealing fruitcakes down the street, to the cheers of bystanders. The PETA b**** ended up in the hospital.

Sorta shored up my faltering faith in humanity.

Gaviota

Posted by: Lee W | January 12, 2010 5:41 PM    Report this comment

I thought PETA meant People Eating Tasty Animals.

Posted by: Robert J | January 12, 2010 7:29 AM    Report this comment

Add your comments ...

New to Gun Tests? Register for Free!

Already Registered? Log In