The First Puppy has been chosen! - Page 6

Although with this dog if the girls are allergic to it or have a problem with it they can return it to the responsible breeder. If they had gotten on from a pound and the girls couldnt handle it how would you feel if they had to take it back to the shelter? And while yeah I'm sure the dog would be adopted out in no time since it was owned by the president but what are the chances it would be adopted for the right reasons? And when someone else showed up, found out that dog was gone how many would just turn and walk out the door instead of staying around to look at the others?

Wrong again. I posted it on this very thread but somehow it gets ignored.
http://www.thecatsite.com/forums/sho...&postcount=105

If you don't belive it, watch the video for yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uHn6ydl6TM

First I am having trouble with the idea of him breaking her "promise." I'm not seeing how you can break someone else's promise at all.
Second, since ther is presumably some evidence of what she said could you please provide some proof word for word?

This is absolutely not true. Top-of-the-line breeders who sell prospective show dogs do NOT make sure the animal is spayed / neutered before it is adopted, because that would eliminate the possibility of it ever being shown. Then there are breeders who want to ensure that the animal reaches its full physical potential and avoid the health risks associated with early spay/neuter who adopt out on contracts. There are some breeders who speuter before the animal leaves their care, but to say that a breeder is nto "good" unless they only adopt out speutered animals is simply false.

First off, no one will ever convince me that Barack didn't say what he did to get votes.


Second, regarding the post above, I should have made myself more clear.
I wasn't talking about "show quality" animals. Those would not be neutered.

But any "pet quality" animal that is not spayed or neutered before they leave the breeder is wrong and said breeder is NOT a good breeder.

Spaying and neutering at six months has no "health risks". A good breeder keeps their "pet quality" animal until they spay or neuter, nothing less.

hee hee - you mean when he was making his NCAA college basketball picks?

sorry - couldn't pass on that one.

It's common knowledge that in fact it does have health risks and some very serious ones at that.

http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/LongT...uterInDogs.pdf

I was under the impression he first mentioned that the puppy was coming to the white house on his speech when he won the elections, and that the comment about him wanting to get a shelter dog afterwords. So, how was that said in order to get votes, if he had already won the elections?

I think he talked about getting a dog when he won the nomination. ?
Maybe someone else knows - I'll google it and see if I find anything ...

Yeah, that's what I though too... I followed his campaign pretty closely, and the first time I heard him saying anything about a puppy was on his nomination speech - he had evidently already won the elections by then. I don't understand how people can say that he said that to get votes, if he had already won the elections?

Good point. I think some people are just plain confused.

Oh goodie, it has started, calls pouring in to pet stores, people wanting PWD.

http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/M..._Bo_Miami.html

Hey, count me in the "confused" category here.

Nomination speech: meaning ? Dem's convention in Denver?
Elections: did you mean democratic nomination for president to run in the National Elections for President?

I have to admit that you called this one from the start.

As soon as one of those dozens of new PWD puppies is left in the house all day and eats the sofa, they'll start turning up in shelters.

This is why the type of dog Obama selected was important.

There are people who are naming their children after the members of the Obama family. Some women are dressing like Michelle Obama. There is a school on Long Island, NY which has been renamed Barack Obama Middle School. Is anyone surprised by the sudden demand for PWDs?

Those who think the subject of the "first puppy" was much ado about nothing have never been to a county shelter. Perhaps they've never been to Petsmart when local organizations are bringing their lovable, mixed breed pups and dogs in for adoption, weekend after weekend. I don't know how people have come to believe that so many dogs in shelters are "mentally ill". Talk to a shelter worker and ask about some of the "reasons" they've been given as to why a dog was turned in to the shelter - they've heard it all... including "doesn't go (as in match) with the furniture".

Remember when the first Spay/Neuter stamp came out a few years ago? It was so important to people who were on the front lines of caring for the never-ending stream of homeless and abandoned animals to get that stamp printed with the simple S/N message. They had to work for years campaigning and gathering petitions in order to make that stamp a reality. Advocating and working on behalf of animals has never been an easy job.

What a boost it would have been to shelters across the nation if the Obamas had rescued a pup. Imagine the message that would have been sent: "Don't believe that shelter dogs are damaged goods. A shelter pup is "good" enough to live in the White House." And suppose with those first pictures of the new shelter pup Obama had said just a few words to encourage others to do the same. What invaluable publicity that would have been for homeless dogs and puppies! No shelter has a budget for advertising (if they have one at all) that would come anywhere close to the impact that would have made.

Folks who believe this is just another attempt to bash Obama have missed the point. If the Obamas had not mentioned anything about their desire to get a shelter pup, there would obviously be no issue.

With millions of Americans out of work, shelters and grassroots organizations are getting increasing numbers of abandoned pups and dogs. I think the disappointment felt at Obama's decision is entirely understandable. The Obamas gave those who care for and about shelter dogs a reason to hope, and that hope has been dashed.

Yep. ^ That's what I was talking about. Many serious "dog people" (not normal pet owners) are not keen on spay/neuter, and believe that only irresponsible yahoos who can't keep their dogs properly contained need to have their pets fixed. Personally, I'm just not up for the constant vigilance having an unaltered pet calls for.....but I did wait to neuter my boys. They were both about 4 when neutered (not by my choice---I would have had it done when they were 18-24 months. But they were adult rescues). Even if the serious dog people want to call me irresponsible.

The current PWD breeders are VERY protective of their breed, and any breeder who sold to a pet store would be kicked out of the breed club. I hope they can keep that up and preserve the purity of the breed. I'm sure some BYBs will get ahold of a few unaltered PWDs, but hopefully they can keep them away from puppymill operators.
As I said, I'm all for adopting shelter dogs. One of my dogs is from a high-kill city shelter, and the other 2 would have ended up in a shelter if I hadn't taken them. And all would be considered "undesirable" by most people (2 are big, dark, hairy mutts, 1 is a BIG Rott with resource guarding issues). And ALL of my pets are altered, most never having mated (and if they did, it was before I got them). I have only raised one litter in my entire life, and that was from a VERY pregnant stray cat I picked up. And I've never bought an animal from a breeder. So I have no personal stake in defending breeders, if that's what anyone wants to think. But I do think responsible breeders need defending. If there were more of them, there would be fewer bad breeders, because people would know what to look for, and many would avoid the bad breeders. As it stands now, most people don't know what to look for in a breeder.

I think it would have been great if the Obamas had adopted a shelter dog, but I don't know if it would have been THAT great. I still think people would have been calling the local pet stores (especially if their local shelter didn't have enough of the "right kind" of dogs), wanting a dog "JUST like the president's dog", even if it was the muttliest mutt ever. And the puppymills would have obliged by producing some kind of mix that looked JUST like that dog. No matter how this scenario played out, you can't stop greedy people from getting $$$ signs in their eyes and capitalizing on that.

More people adopting from shelters won't stop nitwits from surrendering their dogs because they don't match the furniture (or whatever idiotic reason they can come up with to justify a decision they made long ago and have no intention of changing). Truth is, MOST adoptable dogs in shelters get adopted, and if adoptable dogs are being PTS, it's due to shelter mismanagement/underfunding/etc., NOT due to responsible breeders selling to responsible people. Shelter reform is needed, not more restrictions on responsible breeders.

I mean when he won the presidential elections. That's when it started - that's when he first mentioned a puppy would come to the white house for the girls.

And it is a known fact that any female cat or dog's risk of mammary cancer goes through the roof with each heat they go through.

I have personally known uspayed female dogs die of mammary cancer but I haven't heard of any dogs die of bone cancer.

Here is a few links for you
http://www.bestfriends.org/archives/...pediatric.html
http://www.spayusa.org/main_director...enefits_sn.asp
http://earlyspayneuter.blogspot.com/ list of groups that endorse early S & N

and my favorite: http://www.psnp.org/pdfs/pediatric_spay.pdf

Okay, thx.

The topic of this thread is the "First Puppy", Bo, so please refrain from making any more off-topic posts. Should you wish to discuss the pros and cons of early spaying/neutering, please start another thread, though that topic more properly belongs in another forum. Thank you.

I feel compelled to add some more thoughts.


President Obama has enormous standing in regards to social politics. This is only enhanced by the fact that our last President was extremely disregarded and demoted as a social and political influence.

Any and all actions and statements are seen/heard by the public, as well as international parties. Therefore, the President and his family must be aware of and understand the results/reactions/influences of all of these actions and statements. This is clear, and in an extreme example, there are laws, such as impeachment, that are there to allow the ruling that the President can possibly be removed from office if an illegal action is committed.


Taking a step in a different direction...Domestic animal euthanasia or claims of overpopulation.
Now...Some may argue overpopulation is a myth.

I agree, most of the stories pro-kill shelters and animal control centers tell you ARE myths, ways to justify euthanasia of millions of animals. Lack of resources and people interested in stepping up to help as well as lack of responsibility as pet owners are the issues here.

However, that does not change the fact that millions of animals ARE euthanized, starved, dumped, shot, beaten, etc. every year. That is a verifiable fact.

How do we fix these issues and/or save these animals? Provide responsible, safe homes for these unwanted animals. Fact is, that is the ONLY 100% sure fix.



I'd like to point towards yet another subject. Responsible verses irresponsible breeding.

In theory, there is nothing immoral or 'wrong' with responsible breeding of cats, dogs, and other domesticated animals. This is how different breeds stay alive and separate. This is also how standards and developments in breed types are set/made.

It is my personal opinion, however, that breeding of any kind should not be considered an 'occupation.' I feel it is extremely immoral to treat an animal like an item to be made money off of, in a similar regard to why slavery is immoral. Animals feel a large and similar range of emotions that we feel, and therefore should be treated accordingly. They do have opinions about where they live, what they eat, who they're around, who they love, what they want, what makes them irritated, and so on. I'm sure anyone with a cat can hurriedly assure you of that fact.

Breeding is a respectable thing to do when done responsibly and with the best interest of the animals involved are considered and upheld. Otherwise done, it is illegal within the U.S.A. and immoral by default.

(Just as a tidbit...Many PWD breeders of a respectable nature have made statements that made it clear they wished the First family would choose another breed of dog because of the rarity and likelihood that illegitimate breeders will pick up catering to the coming trend).


When the Obamas were searching and considering which breed and specific dog to adopt, it appears that the two daughters' allergies were the only factors in consideration. Portuguese Water dogs are not ideal first-time dog owners' ideal.

As most of us know, there are plenty of different breeds that are 'hypoallergenic.' Also, as many of us know, there are many, many pure-breds in shelters and rescues. Twenty-five percent when last studied, to be clear. Also, as another tidbit, mix-breed dogs can have blood tests run to determine which type of mixture they are...Therefore providing information as to whether allergies would be an issue or not.

Now, factor in that the Obamas, (the President and his wife, to be specific), mentioned adopting from a shelter or rescue. Imagine the happiness and excitement involved in shelters/rescues at the idea that the President might adopt an animal from their shelter/rescue. They, in theory, would be more than happy to try to assist the President and his family in any way to find the right dog, wouldn't you think? It's very likely the Obamas would have had the first pick or extra consideration. Also, lest we forget, the Presidential family has nearly unlimited resources available to them to easily accommodate anything required to find this perfect dog. Travel ability, money, power, influence, connections, favoritism, etc.

It would have been fairly easy, (considering as well, the large, nationwide amount of selection), to find a:

-Hypoallergenic shelter/rescue dog
-Hypoallergenic shelter/rescue dog around the right age
-Hypoallergenic shelter/rescue dog around the right age, with a good temperament
-Hypoallergenic shelter/rescue dog around the right age, with a good temperament, and who was cute.


I can call around, visit shelters/rescues, and verify that statement as fact if I need to.


The Obamas made the choice to 'receive' a 'present' from Ted Kennedy. Then, to patch things up, (because Pres. Obama apparently felt there was SOME need to), the President made a large donation to the D.C. Humane Society.


Unfortunately, money does not equal a permanent, responsible home for any of the animals located at that Humane Society. As mentioned above, only those ADOPTING the animals are the ones who actually, finally save the animals they choose. The expected example was not shown and now the Portuguese Water dog is a new trend in the U.S.A..

Not quite a beneficial situation to anyone, and that DOES include responsible breeders of the PWD.


But, so what? This isn't really a big issue. Why should we be pissed over something so small and unimportant?


Agreed, why should we worry about treatment, well-being, and rights of the animals who share the world with us? It's not REALLY that big an issue, is it? Neither is loss of different cultures, resources, environmental habitats, certain species, and so on.

Who is supposed to worry about those issues? Someone has to, and it may not be you, but someone DOES have to promote change, because otherwise, nothing will change.


But ignoring that view, what about the fact that this was a chance to prove why I voted for him? I want change...And I would have really been happy with a step in the right direction in regards to this issue, because it's important to ME. However, the step wasn't taken.

It is a small thing, for now, but it is also a demonstration of Barack Obama's decision making process, one way or another.


All in all, bottom line is that time will tell what type of man Barack Obama is and how he'll deal with all the 'little' issues that face us each day.

Someone else posted that the only reason President Obama even mentioned a dog and shelters is to get the animal vote. When the fact of the matter is he had a much better record than John McCain in regard to animal issues. All animal issues not just single ones. I checked back in October 2008 on different animal sights. Will I can understand your dissappointment is that the reason you voted for him. To adopt a shelter dog? Reality says that he will not be able to please everyone. When it comes what I expect from any politician is not that I will get what I want all the time but what was the big picture. Bo was a personal choice for his family and I leave it at that. So my concern is what he will do with legislation and the federal agencies that protect our companion animals and wildlife.

He supported:

Allowing creation of pet trusts
Upgrading penalties for cruelty to animals
Require psycological counseling for animal abusers
End federal funding of horse slaughter and exportation for human consumption
Upgrading federal penalties for dogfighting and cockfighting
Ban posession of fighting dogs and being a spectator at a dogfight
Increased funding for enforcement of Animal Welfare Act, Humane Methods of Slaughter Act and federal animal fighting laws

He repealed the anti-endangered species regulations that were put in motion that weakened the Endangered Species Act.

Then another poster said they wished President Obama never mentioned shelters animals. Which is wierd to me considering how much attention has been brought to this issues just by him mentioning it. I consider some advocates just not taking advantage of the opportunity which is more than any other person gave them to get thier message out there.

I can understand the disappointment of shelter advocates that the final step of adopting from a shelter was not taken but we are never going to get everything and exactly what we want. Time will tell if he is an animal friendly president. And frankly, as for the problem of companion animal overpopulation will never go away. There just are not enough homes for as fast as cats and dogs can reproduce. A comprehensive spay/neuter program and people acting responsibly is the key. The problem and the reason it will never go away is that some people will never be responsible enough.

If there was a public outcry over our own personal choice of a pet, we'd be screaming about our rights to choose being violated. I know I would hate for disgruntled voters to dictate what kind of pet I am allowed or not allowed. Wouldn't it be nice if we treated people as we ourselves would wish to be treated! It would be a much nicer world.

I honestly don't give a hoot what kind of dog he got or where he got it. He got his little girls a dog because they wanted a dog and he got what he thought was the best type for their health issues - period!

Don't actions help us see what's in the heart of a man/woman?

Not always. I've seen people do good deeds for the recognition rather than because they truly cared. I see and hear of people who go to church every Sunday to create the impression they are good living people and then Monday through Saturday behave in a manner unfit to be called human.

I've seen and heard of folks who do wonderful things anonymously and were later "outed" because their heart dictated it - that's where actions denote what's in the heart of a man/woman.