A Little Vindication for the Dog Lobby

By Editor
In Animal Rights Groups
Jan 24th, 2013
0 Comments
5299 Views

A few years ago, when there was rampant fallout and internet spewing against Michael Vick, I (gulp) argued for Vick’s due process rights — i.e. that he not be tried in the court of public opinion, but rather that he be tried in a court of law.  I even went so far as to (gulp) say that radical animal rights groups would use Vick as a shill to push for their oppressive and unconstitutional legislation. 

I got a lot of flak* for that from rabid animal rightists too, but it turns out that those in the dog lobby brave enough to stand up against the animal rightists’ lies were right on both fronts.  Vick admitted to his crime and went to prison.  Voilà, the system worked.  And the dog lobby was also right that no sooner had Vick left prison and the radical animal rights group the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) began using Vick as a shill to legitimize themselves as so-called “experts” in combating dog fighting and to push more of their onerous, rights-negating, and oppressive legislation.

Psst!  Wanna hear a secret?  The HSUS was one of the animal rights groups (along with PETA) that was encouraging the judge in the Vick case to kill all of Michael Vick’s former fighting dogs:

The Humane Society of the U.S., agreeing with PETA, took the position that Michael Vick’s pit bulls, like all dogs saved from fight rings, were beyond rehabilitation and that trying to save them was a misappropriation of time and money. (Sports Illustrated)

That’s right, while holding themselves out as dog fighting “experts,” both the HSUS and PETA claimed former fighting dogs could not be rehabilitated.

Meanwhile, animal welfarists in the dog lobby like Blue Dog State and myself were arguing vehemently to save these dogs.  Since folks here at NPBB.com had adopted and rehabilitated formerly abused bulldog breeds and mixed breeds well before the HSUS claimed to be “experts” on dog fighting, we were well aware that Vick’s former dogs could be saved.  So, for all the flak the dog lobby got — I’ve been called a dog fighter defender, and “in it for the money” when I so obviously don’t get paid for my lobbying unlike the slicksters at the HSUS — we were vindicated. 

As it is well known now, and as it has been widely reported in Sports Illustrated, the Washington Post, and at HumaneWatch.org, Vick’s former dogs have been rehabilitated and have even gone on to be re-homed.  The Washington Post noted that,

“Of the 49 [Vick] pit bulls animal behavior experts evaluated in the fall, only one was deemed too vicious to warrant saving and was euthanized.”

So, really?  Who was more humane and ethical?  Animal welfarists who argued to save Vick’s former dogs, or the likes of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and the Humane Society of the United States who were pushing for these innocent dogs to be killed?

And who decided radical animal rightists should be judge, jury, and executioner anyway???  The media that colludes with these radicals and just takes their word for it that they’re humane and ethical?  With 48 of Vick’s former dogs going on to be rehabilitated, could you imagine the carnage that would have resulted had animal welfarists not argued their case effectively enough to save these dogs?  Oh, but 48 dead dogs is probably nothing to PETA or the HSUS; PETA who took shelter animals under false pretenses and “euthanized” them in their deathmobiles or the HSUS who don’t run shelters and who push for onerous, rights-negating legislation behind the scenes, which, where passed, amounts to a lot of unnecessarily surrendered and “euthanized” animals.

For now I can staunchly say to the doggy death merchants that they can stop slandering the dog lobby now.  You’ve already exposed yourselves for what you really are, no matter how many sad pictures of abused animals you show in your commercials.  Yes, and where are the sad pictures of Vick’s former fighting dogs that you lobbied so hard to have killed?  Hmm?   You can stop telling people that the dog lobby argues against “pit bull” bans only because they are supposedly in league with dog fighters and you can stop making up other “dirt” simply because you have no moral, ethical, or legal leg to stand on when it comes to killing innocent people’s animals en masse and negating people’s constitutional rights.  And keep this in mind: When you move, we move.  So for every slander, lie, and wicked psy op you pull, the dog lobby will leak a little more truth about you to the public.

And to our dear readers, consider this: All of what the dog lobby does is out in the open for the world to see.  Can these radical animal rights groups claim the same?  Are they above-board about their lobbying techniques, their fund-raising tactics, or the elected officials they purchase to push their unconstitutional legislation?  Remember, those who do evil do so in the cover of the shadows.   And it’s well past time to shine a light on the malfeasance, lies, and killing done by these radical animal “rights” groups.

*And yes the dog lobby got flak for standing up for the victims, like Floyd Boudreaux, of radical animal rightists’ abuse  because animal rightists and their pawns think that anyone fingered as a dog fighter must of course be one.  Why?  Because they say so.  They don’t wait for the acquittal or the results of the civil lawsuit.  Yet, like the hypocrites they are, they are the first ones to cry for their constitutional rights when they get nabbed for blowing up labs, funding domestic terrorists, or putting explosive devices on research scientists’ front porches.  Oh but wait, the HSUS and the prosecution couldn’t make their case against Boudreaux could they?  So I guess they went all militant and killed the majority of his dogs for no good reason other than to, you know, hide the evidence.  Again, here’s us in the dog lobby arguing that the sheer carnage from the Boudreaux case — Mr. Boudreaux’s failing health resultant of the stress and of course a mountain of dead dogs thanks to some very inhumane treatment — was inhumane to both the people and animals involved.  Yet somehow the animal rightists can call us in the dog lobby “dog fighter defenders” for simply telling the truth about Boudreaux while they, the killers, are supposedly the humane ones?  Dry that one out you can fertilize the lawn!

Related:

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*