Thursday, October 7, 2010

Latest Conspiracy: Packs of Wild Dogs Will Eat Your Children if you Pass Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act

Readers of this blog know that I'm not a big fan of tea party blogger Jim Durbin of But I gotta give him one thing: he's got an amazing imagination! As far as I can tell, the main difference between Durbin and most people is that most people don't think that merely being able to imagine a story with plot twists, Noble Patriots, and Supervillains, thereby makes that story true. Durbin on the other hand seems to follow a simple rule: "If I can imagine it, it must have happened."

The latest in Durbin's free association ranting, or as he calls it, "investigative journalism," is a list of all of the apocalyptic catastrophes that will befall the state of Missouri if voters approve Proposition B, the Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act. One of the most mind-boggling parts of his recent theorizing is that he simultaneously claims that the new laws won't be enforced and that the new laws will cause all kinds of calamities. In fact, Durbin claims that these laws that "won't be enforced," will cause 86,000 dogs to be killed and Chihuahuas to be forced to freeze to death in the cold. Needless to say, these claims are idiotic. The breeders can sell many of the current dogs as they have done (i.e. they won't be forced to "put them down"); they just won't be allowed to continue keeping large, unmanageable numbers of breeding dogs. And Durbin's claim about Chihuahuas freezing to death simply proves that he didn't even bother to carefully read the ballot language since one of the things the new law would require is that dogs have:
unfettered access to an indoor enclosure that has a solid floor; is not stacked or otherwise placed on top of or below another animal's enclosure; is cleaned of waste at least once a day while the dog is outside the enclosure; and does not fall below 45 degrees Fahrenheit, or rise above 85 degrees Fahrenheit.
Some more absurd claims: Durbin says that this will cause "less people to buy dogs." Apparently no one ever informed him of the fact that animals shelters have huge numbers (3 - 4 million) of perfectly wonderful pets that have to be put down every year. Oh, but Durbin claims that shelter and pound dogs are scary and dangerous. The guy is seriously clueless.

Durbin also claims that the new law will prevent people from being able to buy dogs like Golden Retrievers. Actually, the new law limits how many breeding dogs there can be at a location; it doesn't eliminate breeders. Another fail.

But I think my favorite conspiracy of all is his claim that all of the dogs will have to be released into the wilderness, forming wild dog packs that will eat our children:
4) The wild dog population will increase
Dogs are beasts. Noble, but beasts. Like all animal populations, they will increase when left on their own, and in the backwoods of Missouri, when you let hundreds or thousands of dogs go free, you're going to see an explosion of their population in a way that is not at all controlled. Domesticating animals isn't something we solely do for joy.
Anyway, just goes to show you how far the tea party will go to fight against a bill that really should have nothing to do with whether you're "conservative" or "liberal." The decision to provide dogs with sufficient food and clean water, necessary veterinary care, sufficient housing, sufficient space, regular exercise, and adequate rest between breeding cycles should just be about basic compassion.

Vote Yes on Prop B.

1 comment:

  1. Sometimes I just want to scream at the lies, the absolutely appalling lies, being told by the anti-proposition B people.

    Don't they have any integrity? Any ethics at all? No morality?