- STICKY POST
- I'm done, close this
We’re giving away a limited edition Modern Warfare 2 Xbox 360 bundle!
We are kicking off our holiday giveaways with a bang! We’ve teamed with our friends at shoot it! to bring you this Modern Warfare 2 Xbox 360 limited edition console, a $400 value. The bundle includes a custom Xbox 360 console with exclusive design, a 250GB Xbox 360 hard drive, Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2, a pair of black controllers, and more. It hits stores on November 10th, and we’ve pre-ordered one that we’re giving away to one of you. Be sure to check out the giveaway rules to see how to enter!
Latest Video: FilmCrunch 067: Hairspray, Chuck & Larry, Premonition reviewed
Veronica Santiago and Neil Estep review Hairspray, Chuck & Larry, and Premonition in this episode of FilmCrunch.Play Video
Thursday October 18, 2007 12:11 pm
All Dogs Go To Ellen: An Opinion
Posted by David Onda Categories: Comedy, Daytime, Talk Shows, Syndication, Editorial, Features, News
When I first started writing this, I had every intention of trashing Ellen DeGeneres’ talk show meltdown from earlier this week. My thoughts on the subject have, however, changed somewhat. Despite this, I do still feel that Ellen’s sob story during the opening moments of her daytime talk show were ridiculous. To tell your audience that you can’t be funny and do your show as usual because “things are going so terribly wrong right now” seems to be a little - er - melodramatic. This isn’t the week following September 11, 2001. There hasn’t been some horrible death in your family. You haven’t been stricken with an incurable illness - deal with it. More horrible things have happened.
With that said, I move on with my thoughts.
Read More I have been reading a lot about the events that led up to this doggie-drama and here is the gist of it: Ellen adopted this dog from the Mutts and Moms rescue agency. Ellen paid to have the dog neutered (Bob Barker would be proud), trained and cared for until the dog arrived at her home. Upon receiving the dog, Ellen realized she could not handle the added responsibility and decided to give the dog to a good family - her hairdresser’s family, who already has one pooch and a couple kids. The family took the dog, giving Ellen constant updates on the dog’s progress with the family, and had cared for it for about a month. The Mutt Moms called Ellen to see how little Iggy was doing. Ellen explained what she had done and - oh, the horror - the dog was sent to a loving family? Well, this would not do as the Moms had not adequately researched into what kind of home this dog was given to. Nevermind that Ellen had bought the dog, cared for it, and as legal owner, decided to give it up because she could not care for it. Nooo, that’s apparently not how these things work. You see, Ellen signed a paper stating that if she couldn’t care for the dog that it had to be given back to the dog Moms. In a stroke of, “how convenient” for the Mutt Moms, they somehow “forgot” to add Ellen as the new owner on the micro-chip imbedded in Iggy’s neck. So when the frumpy Mutt Mom showed up at Iggy’s new home, she busted in and scooped up the dog saying that the family was not the rightful owners. Of course, when the cops show up at the family’s home and scan the chip, it lists this Mutt Mom cow as the owner - not the family OR Ellen. So this lady is allowed to take the dog and bring it back to her little puppy prison where she tosses it back in a cage instead of the fluffy pile of pillows it could have enjoyed at this family’s home. Did Ellen kind of F’ up? Yeah, she missed some fine print. But there just comes a time when the normal, good, genuine, logical human-beings are separated from the absolute scum of society. And the moment of clarity in this story, the moment where I genuinely felt for Ellen and this family, came when I watched the video of this freakin’ self-righteous, attention-seeking bitch from Mutts and Moms holding the dog in this family’s backyard. At that moment, the hairdresser’s daughter, the one who supposedly cared for the dog most, approached the woman in an attempt to see the dog. What did this F’ing cow do? Like some pouty toddler, she turned her back to the little girl and walked around the yard, turning her back to the kid each time she approached as if she would do some harm in looking at the dog. The nerve of a grown woman to barge into a family’s home, take the dog they had grown to love and then proceed to prevent a child from even looking at it. Are you kidding me? And in one of the most laughable quotes since Miss Teen South Carolina, this Mutt Mom beast told Access Hollywood: “My life is being threatened, this is horrible. I rescue dogs. I can’t believe this.” Are you insulting my freaking intelligence? Really? What did you rescue this dog from? From a loving, caring (and wealthy from the looks of it) family? Maybe you are getting death threats because you are a self-important, heartless beast who wouldn’t know the difference between a dog rescue and an evening of entertainment at Michael Vick’s. You should be ashamed of yourself you fat-faced phony. And although I still generally disagree with Ellen’s over exaggerated cry-fest on her talk show, I think it’s good that it happened to her because maybe it will put a dumb pig like this Mutt Mom out of business. This dog has every right to be cared for by someone who is going to give it everything it needs to live a long and healthy life. If Ellen was deemed an eligible candidate to begin with, you are - in effect - saying to her that you trust her judgment enough to care for this animal. If Ellen was good enough to give a dog, and thus, is sensible enough to care for it, why is it not acceptable for her to choose new owners when she (was responsible enough) to realize she was not up to the task? This Mutt Mom woman doesn’t love to rescue dogs - she loves to be able to look herself in the mirror at night and tell herself, “you’re a good person, you can sleep well tonight.” You don’t love animals, you pig - you love you. And guess what? Nobody else does. Sleep on that.
| TMZ
- Related Tags:
- access hollywood, animal adoption, controversy, daytime, dog, editorial, ellen degeneres, mutts and moms, opinion, talk show
Digg ThisAdvertisement
Advertisement
Recent Galleries
TV Programs
Recent Users
Statistics
- Total Posts: 4241
- Total Comments: 2143
- Total Trackbacks: 58
- Total Members: 18476
- Members Online: 0
- Guests Online: 94
- Anonymous Members: 1
- Most Visitors Ever: 5394
- Current Members Online:
Advertisement
© Gear Live Media, LLC. 2007 – User-posted content, unless source is quoted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Public Domain License. Gear Live graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, videos, articles, blogs, forums, scripts and other service names are the trademarks of Gear Live Inc.
Comments:
You hit the nail on the head! This seems to have been more about the Mutt and Mom’s owner’s ego, and very little about the dog. Add to the fact that the family did apply to adopt the dog and the owner created this ruse of inspecting the home just to snatch the dog all along. And I suspect all the microchips in all the animals that this “rescue” organization have placed convienently go back to Mom and Mutts. Ladies, it’s called fraud.
Reply to this: comment | thread
I can’t say it better. You are right. This is all about ego and the “rescue” organization—not the dog and true concern about the dog.
I read somewhere, one agency tried to defend their policy about not letting family with children under 14 adopts. The reason behind: parents may get a divorce and the pet got abandoned. The rescue agency do not want to experience another heartbreak if in the end some shelter call them and ask if they want it back (or else it will be put down).
They don’t want heartbreak? Geez…. What about the animal? What kind of cynics would just assume young family would end up separated? (or young children would be abusive to children?) I just can’t understand these people. The only reason they would think like that is if they feel they are better than any other human being on the planet.
Reply to this: comment | thread
The video of the Mutts & Moms woman picking up the dog did it for me too! What a witch! She NEEDS to be put out of business so she can understand what it is like to lose something you love. I just don’t understand how someone could be so heartless.
Reply to this: comment | thread
It’s plain inaccurate to say “Upon receiving the dog, Ellen realized she could not handle the added responsibility” if (as she claims) the case is that the dog just didn’t get along with her other pets—after being there for 10 days. Other than that, I generally agree with you.
Reply to this: comment | thread
PLUS. I read that the “rescue” never even neutered the dog. They just took the money.
Reply to this: comment | thread
Peter - As I’m sure you are aware, Ellen has given several interviews on this subject. However, during her talk show meltdown Ellen says that caring for the dog was “too much energy and it was too rambunctious.” I don’t think it is a stretch to translate that into her being unable to handle the added responsibility. It is unreasonable to assume that the interview you saw was the only one she gave and thus, unreasonable to assume that my statement is “plain inaccurate.”
Reply to this: comment | thread
Yes, but in that initial interview, “too much energy and it was too rambunctious” was given in context “for her cats.” I’m done—you can have the last word.
Regarding the microchip, I’ve adopted a pet that was chipped, and it is the new owner’s responsibility to update the pet owner information with the company that tracks the chip.
Reply to this: comment | thread
Regarding the chip: It may be the pet owners responsibility, but I bet you dollars to donuts that Ellen or Portia was not told how to do that or was promised that the adoption agency would take care of it. Otherwise, how would Marina from Moms and Mutts know that the microchip didn’t go to Ellen/Portia, but back to them?
Sounds like a scam.
Reply to this: comment | thread
Chris, I really doubt this was the case. And I don’t think it even mattered what owner was registered on the chip. Sure, the chip initially would’ve been registered to Moms and Mutts (and rightly so).
This clause in the adoption agreement is pretty standard (I’ve adopted 4 cats from 3 different shelters under the same terms). The fact is that Ellen violated the terms of the contract. But I think the shelter handled it very poorly—they went by the rule hard and fast instead of the intent of the rule. In doing so, I suspect they will become less effective at what they do.
Reply to this: comment | thread
I don’t know. The fact that this woman waited 2 hours for the police to show and that she knew that the chip would register back to Moms and Mutts is very suspect in my book.
I’m pretty sure that shelter will be out of business as well as her pet store by the end of the month.
Reply to this: comment | thread
I’ve adopted twice from a rescue/pound and the last time we wanted to add a second pet, I thought, gods, why deal with the control freaks at the pound and run their cia interview guantlet for an afternoon when there are plenty of ordinary individuals who are happy to have you take an extra pet off their hands.
Those rfid chips cause doggie cancer, so how responsible was leaving it in anyway?
Reply to this: comment | thread
Interesting update…
http://www.tmz.com/2007/10/20/lapd-may-have-erred-in-ellen-dog-case/
Reply to this: comment | thread
Comments: Page 1 of 1 pages