Posted by
Dave Kooker on Tuesday, October 23, 2007 11:10:55 AM
I always tell people, ‘Everybody is a Liberal (Socialist) until they have to pay for it or they have to live by it. Ellen DeGeneres just learned a cruel lesson of Liberal interpretation of law.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071017/ap_on_en_tv/people_degeneres
Ellen DeGeneres adopted a Terrier dog through a dog adoption agency named ‘Mutts and Moms’. The dog did not get along with her cats so Ellen gave the dog to another loving home which had two children (daughters) ages 11 and 12. Unfortunately with most Liberals, they believe that all things are equal and everything could be worked out so everyone (including the pets) could bark and meow Kumbaya together. In reality Iggy the dog and the cats didn’t see the world the same way as Ellen.
I have always wondered if Animal rights activist think that can make vegetarians out of meat eating predators? But that is another story.
The contract that Ellen signed specifically stated no children under the age of 14. ‘It's for the protection of the dog’ stated the animal agency ‘Mutts and Moms’.
Why should not a child have a dog under the age of 14? A child has plenty of time to spend with the dog and has plenty of affection to give to the dog. How much time is a hormone crazed teenager wanting to party or a working adult going to give to a pet dog? Does neglecting the dog provide the dog protection? Reducing the number of parties legally able to adopt doesn’t help the chances of the dog to live either. Eventually the remainder of the dogs will have to be euphemized because the agency cannot find homes for all the pooches. Now that is protecting the interest of the dog.
What is it with Liberals (Socialist) that they tend to have arrogant self-righteous intentions and the intention weighs heavier than the actual outcome of the intention?
Why did Ellen even the contract in the first place? From the viewpoint of a Liberal (Socialist), who cares about signing your name to a contract that specifically has terms in it? Liberals like to derive meaning out of contracts (or the Constitution for a matter of fact) that is not explicitly written on paper and like to ignore/disregard explicitly written words on paper that does conflicts to their worldview.
You made one big mistake Ellen, Liberals place the life of animal prior to the life of a human so yes the contract is going to be enforced. You lose. You should have realized that. Liberals really don’t like children unless children promote the Socialist expansion of government and/or for the recruitment of young participants in alternative sexual activity.
As much as you want to cry about how the contract is unfair, it still is enforceable. This is a good wake up call for you Ellen to understand that your Liberal worldview is not child friendly.