I admit, I haven't watched Oprah in years, but I did watch today. Is it
just me or was anyone else disappointed in the program? Years ago I saw
Oprah do shows on other issues, and it seemed she showed a bit more passion
for her cause back then. I really came away from the program feeling
disappointed. It seemed to me, had she really wanted to encourage
rescue/adoption over pet store puppies, she could have/should have perhaps
included some shelter dogs. People get a bit more passionate when they see
animals right there, in person. Yeah, she did say she gave 10 grand to a
rescue in Calif., but it seemed like just a drop in ;the bucket for somebody
like Oprah. I don't know, I just didn't really feel a true sense of support
for the cause. JMO.

Did anyone else watch?

td

In article ,
tiny dancer wrote:
People get a bit more passionate when they see
animals right there, in person.

That's it? She spends an hour on a topic and you have no
opinion on her guests, the content, what they actually said,
but instead you comment on her *passion*? The chief concern
here seemed to be that she'd be passing out misinformation.
Did she?
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis -

Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community

In article ,
(Melinda Shore) wrote:

The chief concern
here seemed to be that she'd be passing out misinformation.
Did she?

Oprah and Wayne Pacelle hammered on the S/N thing. Oprah conveniently
didn't mention her own ventures in dog breeding. There were a few
momentary mentions of responsible breeders (i.e. that their puppies
aren't the ones showing up in shelters), but nothing about the reason
for most dogs winding up in shelters being irresponsible dog ownership.
Just "if you S/N, all of these dogs don't have to die". If it were
only that simple. Kind of like BSL. The people who propose/push such
things don't seem to get the underlying problem - idiots.

--
Janet Boss
www.bestfriendsdogobedience.com

In article ,
Janet Boss wrote:
The people who propose/push such
things don't seem to get the underlying problem - idiots.

Well, people always seem to prefer solutions that push
responsibility onto others and typically won't take
responsibility or accept that they've done (or are doing)
something wrong, themselves. It really bugs me. You can't
fix anything if you don't take responsibility for it.

BTW, some months ago HSUS hired John Balzar as its
communications director. He's the sort of guy who could
write a book about a 1000 mile dogsled race in the one of
the coldest, remotest places on the planet in the dead of
winter and manage to make it all about himself ("Yukon
Alone") and just seems to be a massive, selfish asshole, but
he's positive about dog mushing and that's a change for the
organization.
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis -

Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community

elegy wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 06:51:21 -0400, Janet Boss
wrote:

In article ,
(Melinda Shore) wrote:

The chief concern
here seemed to be that she'd be passing out misinformation.
Did she?
Oprah and Wayne Pacelle hammered on the S/N thing. Oprah conveniently
didn't mention her own ventures in dog breeding. There were a few
momentary mentions of responsible breeders (i.e. that their puppies
aren't the ones showing up in shelters), but nothing about the reason
for most dogs winding up in shelters being irresponsible dog ownership.
Just "if you S/N, all of these dogs don't have to die". If it were
only that simple. Kind of like BSL. The people who propose/push such
things don't seem to get the underlying problem - idiots.

I didn't hear them advocating S/N legislation - did I miss that?

i didn't get to see it, but i wondered how that was going to go. i
heard there was lots of footage of lancaster county. i wonder if there
was anybody on there i would have recognized

They showed quite a bit of footage from puppy mills, talked about
the awful lives the puppy mill dogs have, showed dogs with
mammary tumors and matted fur and a dog having difficulty walking
on a floor because he'd never been out of his cage. They
highlighted one guy who specializes in rescues from puppy mills
(and whose billboard was the impetus for the show) and hammered
on getting dogs from shelters and rescue orgs, not from pet
stores. Oh, and these were the 'good' puppy mills, who had a
relationship with the rescue guy, who allowed the camera crew on
their properties, who call the rescue organization an hour or so
before they shoot dogs, so that the dogs can be rescued. The
rescue guy said that others were worse, if that's even possible.

The guy told one anecdote about how he mentioned that he had
personally adopted one dog, and that he told the mill owner that
the dog was happily playing in his kitchen. The mill owner was
astonished that he allowed the dog in his house; they view the
dogs like livestock. (Which raises a whole 'nother topic, but I
won't go there.)

She did mention that the show was not pointing the finger at
reputable breeders, but didn't distinguish them except to say
that they will interview you and take the dog back if things
don't work out. Didn't mention BYBs.

It will be interesting to see what kind of an impact the show has
(bearing in mind that the law of unintended consequences may come
into play), and if Oprah gets sued by puppy mill owners or pet
store owners.

FurPaw

--
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched,
every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense
a theft from those who hunger and are not fed,
those who are cold and are not clothed."
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

To reply, unleash the dogs.

"Janet Boss" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Melinda Shore) wrote:

The chief concern
here seemed to be that she'd be passing out misinformation.
Did she?

Oprah and Wayne Pacelle hammered on the S/N thing. Oprah conveniently
didn't mention her own ventures in dog breeding.


Thanks, I thought I remembered Oprah used to breed her Goldens, but as said,
it's been such a long time since I watched her program.



There were a few
momentary mentions of responsible breeders (i.e. that their puppies
aren't the ones showing up in shelters), but nothing about the reason
for most dogs winding up in shelters being irresponsible dog ownership.
Just "if you S/N, all of these dogs don't have to die". If it were
only that simple. Kind of like BSL. The people who propose/push such
things don't seem to get the underlying problem - idiots.


Agreed, spay and neuter doesn't address the issue of back-yard breeders or
puppy mills, which I thought was the topic of the program. We might not
like it, but Oprah has the power to take an obscure book and turn it into a
best seller/number one on the NYT list, with one program. I had hoped she
would do the same thing with the subject of puppy mills. The program I saw
left me feeling rather flat. No passion, no call for legislation, no real
horror at the conditions of the puppy mills. In the past, I've seen Oprah
exibit more passion about a steak or hamburger than she did at the sight of
all those poor dogs in cages and crates.

As an aside, the way she was screeching over that little pup the man on the
program rescued, I was afraid it might panic and snap at her. To me anyway,
she didn't seem to have a *natural* instinct at how to greet/meet/approach a
new dog at all.


td



--
Janet Boss
www.bestfriendsdogobedience.com

In article ,
tiny dancer wrote:
Agreed, spay and neuter doesn't address the issue of back-yard breeders

*What*?
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis -

Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community

tiny dancer wrote:

Agreed, spay and neuter doesn't address the issue of back-yard breeders or
puppy mills, which I thought was the topic of the program.

Only puppy mills, not BYB. Were BYB even mentioned? The web
site does have a bare-bones list of things to look for in a good
breeder:
http://www2.oprah.com/tows/pastshows...080404_d.jhtml

We might not
like it, but Oprah has the power to take an obscure book and turn it into a
best seller/number one on the NYT list, with one program. I had hoped she
would do the same thing with the subject of puppy mills. The program I saw
left me feeling rather flat. No passion, no call for legislation,

At the end she said to write your congressman about banning puppy
mills. Also mentioned it on her web site.
http://www2.oprah.com/tows/pastshows...080404_c.jhtml

no real
horror at the conditions of the puppy mills.

I think the videos of the puppy mills spoke for themselves. And
I disagree w/r/t her emotion - she wasn't screeching and jumping
up and down, but I thought she was plenty horrified.

In the past, I've seen Oprah
exibit more passion about a steak or hamburger than she did at the sight of
all those poor dogs in cages and crates.

As an aside, the way she was screeching over that little pup the man on the
program rescued, I was afraid it might panic and snap at her. To me anyway,
she didn't seem to have a *natural* instinct at how to greet/meet/approach a
new dog at all.

Instinct? Don't most of us have to _learn_ how to greet a new
dog? I also thought her approach was uninformed, that someone
who had had multiple dogs would have used a less direct,
intrusive approach.

I burned out on Oprah several years ago, but while I thought that
there could have been better approaches to some of the points
that were made, I thought the horror of the conditions of puppy
mills, and that the vast majority of pet stores get their puppies
from puppy mills, was communicated effectively.

FurPaw
--
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched,
every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense
a theft from those who hunger and are not fed,
those who are cold and are not clothed."
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

To reply, unleash the dogs.

"Melinda Shore" wrote in message
...
In article ,
tiny dancer wrote:
Agreed, spay and neuter doesn't address the issue of back-yard breeders

*What*?

Honestly, the show was very clear that you should *not* breed your pets.
So, yes, spay and neuter does address the issue of backyard breeders. They
could have come down a whole lot harder on back-yard breeders than they did.
(Actually, outside of discussing your personal pets, it wasn't mentioned at
all.)

And I'm willing to bet (JMHO) that Oprah did not consider it a bad thing
that she bred her goldens. After all, the homes were carefully screened and
the dogs probably didn't end up in shelters. It did sound like she would
not be doing that again.

In fairness, the show was not as bad as it could have been. It was
primarily how horrible puppy mills are, don't buy from pet stores (because
they are all puppy mill dogs), spay and neuter your pet, adopt from a
shelter and support them with your donations. All reasonable points. There
was even a mention or two that responsible breeders did not have dogs end up
in shelters.

I could have done with a whole lot less of HSUS and the fact that their
organization is up there on the website to send your donations to.

There was a call for legislation but it was never made clear just what sort
of legislation Oprah thought was needed.

I have to wonder about a rescuer who is in and out of puppy mills and yet
doesn't ever file complaints with the state. Instead we get to see pictures
of the "good" ones (good partly because they are willing to give him their
cast-offs) and are told that there are many worse. (Which is certainly
true.) So why not shout out that these places need to be turned into the
authorities?

Instead, we are already listening to Ed Rendell talking about pushing his
new laws through to protect dogs. I would have liked Oprah and the Mainline
Rescue group to mention that there are already laws on the books that are
not being enforced.

Judy

On 2008-04-05 09:45:10 -0400, FurPaw said:

The mill owner was astonished that he allowed the dog in his house;
they view the dogs like livestock. (Which raises a whole 'nother
topic, but I won't go there.)

Welcome to the Ohio Amish puppy "farms". They must be good because
they're Amish.