[ SHOWGSD-L ] Turning Mandeville âInside Outâ (My response to Mandeville article...
- From: RihadinK9@xxxxxxx
- To: showgsd-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 08:01:38 EDT
PERMISSION TO CROSS-POST FREELY
Turning Mandeville â??Inside Outâ??
by Donna Malone
The August 19, 2005 issue of Dog News included an article entitled, â??Inside
Out - Our Fathersâ?? AKC...â?? by John Mandeville (aka John â??2Bâ??
Mandeville).
This is my response:
Mandeville writes, â??This time Donna Malone . . . stands in for all those
people whose Internet blather is seldom if ever called to account.â?? I am
amused that olâ??2B (or 3B or was that another time?) threw the gauntlet down
on
what he alleges to be â??Internet blather,â?? but pleased to have an
opportunity
to speak on behalf of the THOUSANDS upon THOUSANDS of members of the Fancy
opposed to PAWS.
Mandeville says my â??dissection of Sari's PAWS column is the usual anti-PAWS
rhetoricâ?? and that â??And after untold renditions it is really boring. And
trite. And not worth getting exercised about.â?? Except he does.... He
chides,
â??Someone should tell Donna Malone her zealotry and bombast work with the
committed. That is hardly the way to make converts, especially among those of
us
who have a jaundiced view of the entire PAWS debate.â?? My parody of
Sariâ??s
article was widely read and well-received. Considering andevilleâ??s, uh, â??
passions,â?? it is surprising that he would mistake my passionate objections
to
Sariâ??s article for â??zealotry and bombast workâ?? but, well, apparently his
best work is not done with the head on his shoulders. More about that
later...
; -)
Mandeville suggests I â??take note of Carmen Battaglia's widely circulated
Internet memoâ?? or â??Charlotte McGowan's August 5 DOG NEWS article "Pausing
to
Understand Objections to PAWS." (Both are excellent works. If you haven't
read them, I encourage you to do so. Google for them.) However, I am in a
unique position compared to most of the other parties to the PAWS debate.
I
don't show. I don't breed. I am not, and do not aspire to be, a judge.
As such, I am at liberty to say things that neither McGowan nor Battaglia
dare say for fear of retribution.
Back to Mandevilleâ??s article, â??Malone resorts to McCarthyism.â?? How
about
another perspective on McCarthyism? â??Thirty years after the death of
Senator Joseph R. McCarthy . . . the term "McCarthyism" is still widely used
as
a convenient and easily understood epithet for all that is evil and
despicable in
the world of politics. . . . Despite the frequency with which the term is
invoked, however, it is quite clear that not one critic of McCarthy in a
hundred has the slightest idea of what he said and did during that
controversial
period from 1950 to 1954.â?? Quoted from:
_http://www.thenewamerican.com/focus/people/vo03no10_mccarthy.htm_
(http://www.thenewamerican.com/focus/people/vo03no10_mccarthy.htm)
Did McCarthy make mistakes? Yes. However, in the aftermath of 9/11, when
so many Americans are questioning the decidedly un-American activities of
Al Qaeda members, it is interesting to note that (type of â??ismâ?? aside)
those
are the very type of activities that McCarthy sought to forestall.
McCarthyâ??
s Alien Registration Act (also known as the Smith Act) made it illegal to
advocate, abet, or teach the desirability of overthrowing our government. It
also required all alien residents over 14 file a comprehensive statement of
their personal and occupational status and a record of their
political beliefs. Does any of this sound familiar? But, enough of the
history lesson Mandeville obviously missed....
Mandeville demands names of all the â??attorneys and those active in the
legislative forum have contradicted his [Holtâ??s] interpretation for
years.â?? Letâ??
s start with the names of attorneys, off the top of my head, including but
not limited to, Sharon Coleman, Cindy Cooke, Jeffrey Helsdon, and Jerald
Tannenbaum. Names of others active in the legislative forum, again off the
top
of my head, including but not limited to, Mary Beth Duerler, Charlotte
McGowan, Kelly Wichman, Anne Edwards, Norma Bennett Woolf, Karen Strange, Tere
Woody, Linda Chance, and Cherie Graves. ALL OPPOSED TO PAWS... (Please
Google these names folks! And, my apologies to those of you whose names did
not
spring as readily to my mind as those listed when I was writing this.)
Have you even HEARD of these people Mandeville? Many are principals in
state federations that do the â??hands onâ?? legislative work in the cities,
counties and states around the Country AND THEY OPPOSE PAWS. They protect
your
right to own and breed! AKC counts on most of them, like it counts on me, to
oppose legislation restrictive to the rights of owners and breeders! BTW,
you are aware the AKC counts on US to interpret those laws, right?
As for your allegations that I am â??exaggerating, if not lying,â?? and your
demand for dates and places and â??what they said, independently verifiable,
of
course, where their contradictions of Holt's interpretations have appeared â??
for years.â??" I'll do you one better than that, let me refer you to the
SOURCE
MATERIALS! See the legislative intent behind the AWA (federal records),
the
enforcement history of the AWA (available from the USDA), and case law, most
notably, Doris Day Animal League v. Veneman, see:
_http://www.nabr.org/animallaw/caselaw/ddalvsveneman2003.htm_
(http://www.nabr.org/animallaw/caselaw/ddalvsveneman2003.htm)
as that is the material that WE (see above list of attorneys and others
active in the legislative forum) have been quoting non-stop since AKCâ??s
insane
endorsement of PAWS.
Mandeville also wrote, â??as someone who has the utmost regard for the legal
profession, sleeping with an attorney as I do, rather than citing attorneys to
give your assertion heft you are better advised to cite their legislative
and lobbying credentials - in Washington, please, this is Federal legislation
we're concerned about.â?? Admittedly, I am not an attorney and I have not
slept with one. I am a paralegal (graduated top of my class) and have worked
for
attorneys 20+ years. I have researched case and code and prepared all
types of legal documents. When Memphis proposed BSL, I advised the City it
would not withstand challenge. Two of the top law firms here assured our City
Council and County Commission that it would. GUESS WHO WAS RIGHT? ;-D
Mandeville also demands â??legislative and lobbying credentials - in
Washington, please. . .â?? Sir, Will Rogers pretty much summed up what most
folks think about Washington when he said, â??I don't make jokes. I just watch
the government and report the facts.â?? (You aren't seriously suggesting that
only Washingtonians are capable of drafting/understanding legislation and/or
lobbying are you?)
Mandeville next attempts to justify his and Sari Tietjenâ??s demands for the
resignation of two or three of the AKCâ??s board members who opposed PAWS
alleging a â??conflict of interest.â?? Correct me if I am wrong here, but
rumor has
it you are the same Mandeville that got FIRED from the AKC for....? (Isn't
that where ya got that nickname â??2Bâ?? or â??3Bâ?? or whatever it is? (You
know,
the number of the room where you were doing what you do best?) Come to
think of it, seems like there was a rumor that Sari has her own demons...
something about being on the AKCâ??s payroll and showing maybe? Neither of
you
appear to have the ethical/moral authority to be pointing a finger at anyone!
(For the general audience reading this, conflict of interest arises
whenever the personal or professional interests of a board member are
potentially
at odds with the best interests of the nonprofit). If anyone is acting in a
conflict of interest, it is the board members who voted for PAWS. Members of
the board have a fiduciary responsibility to act in the best interest of the
Fancy but what are they doing? Spending time and $$$ promoting PAWS, a
law so at odds with the purpose of the AKC that they are having to REWRITE
the
AKCâ??s statement of purpose! Mandeville further attempts to justify his
conflict of interest assertion by alleging that so and so says he is right.
I
can see it now. Mandeville calls them, gives them his rendition of the â??
factsâ??, and hey say something along the lines of IF you are right and IF
thus
and such
actually happened the way you said it did, THEN it MIGHT not be ethical
behavior. Any â??attorneyâ?? stupid enough to do otherwise should not be
practicing law!
Finally, Mandeville recognizes my "we want OUR FATHER'S AKCâ?? â??is â??a
rhetorical plea for a time when AKC's legislative perspective was in harmony
with
hers,â?? but calls it â??delusional.â?? He knows, as well as I do, that I am
talking pre-PAWS. He does bring up an interesting point though â?? that the
AKC
has only â??botheredâ?? (his word not mine) with legislation for the last 15
or
so
years. And, â??botheredâ?? generally means they call or email someone in the
trenches (LIKE ME) to get out and oppose it. Yes, they serve a purpose BUT
it is not the same as being there, hands on.
Speaking of the AKC lobbying... Folks, you have now seen what the AKC can
do when they WANT TO compliments of PAWS. What did the AKC do when
restrictive legislation was last proposed in your area? They probably did not
travel
all over the applicable area lobbying clubs to help you oppose the
legislation, did they? Hmmmm... They probably also did not take out, much
less pay,
for a FULL PAGE AD in local papers opposing the bill, did they? Unh,
unh... They probably also did not make a personal appearance before elected
representatives, much less hire a lobbyist to oppose the bill, did they?
Tisk,
tisk.. Yeah, they mailed a â??packageâ?? to applicable elected
representatives,
if you supplied the names and addresses to them. Oh, and, letâ??s not forget
that
handy dandy one page (front and back) brochure on how to plead your case to
elected representatives! Although that really isn't a substitute for the
other, is it?
My intention is not to discredit the legislative department or its
employees (I like them) BUT there is another side of this story that is not
being
told. The people opposing PAWS are not a bunch of inexperienced and
legislatively ignorant yokels. Most of us have MUCH MORE expertise on
legislative
issues than the AKC has or will have in the foreseeable future and, taken
collectively, the AKC may never be able to catch up with us on the issues. WE
ARE
THE
EXPERTS AND PAWS IS NOT IN YOUR BEST INTEREST! PAWS IS A "BACKDOOR"
MANDATORY SPAY/NEUTER, BREEDER LICENSING LAW! And, if PAWS is any example of
what we can expect legislatively from the AKC in the future, the AKC needs to
GET
OUT OF LEGISLATION ENTIRELY!
To read more about WHY YOU SHOULD OPPOSE PAWS visit:
_http://www.dfow.org/paws.htm_ (http://www.dfow.org/paws.htm)
_http://www.naiaonline.org_ (http://www.naiaonline.org)
_http://www.naiatrust.org/NAIA_Trust_Opposes_PAWS_S1139.htm_
(http://www.naiatrust.org/NAIA_Trust_Opposes_PAWS_S1139.htm)
_http://www.ncraoa.com_ (http://www.ncraoa.com)
_http://www.saova.org_ (http://www.saova.org)
VISIT THIS SITE TO WRITE YOUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES:
_http://capwiz.com/naiatrust/home_ (http://capwiz.com/naiatrust/home)
Ginger Cleary, Rome, GA
"Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security, will not
have, nor do they deserve, either one." Benjamin Franklin.
_http://www.rihadin.com_ (http://www.rihadin.com/)
============================================================================
POST is Copyrighted 2005. All material remains the property of the original
author and of GSD Communication, Inc. NO REPRODUCTIONS or FORWARDS of any kind
are permitted without prior permission of the original author AND of the
Showgsd-l Management. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
ALL PERSONS ARE ON NOTICE THAT THE FORWARDING, REPRODUCTION OR USE IN ANY
MANNER OF ANY MATERIAL WHICH APPEARS ON SHOWGSD-L WITHOUT THE EXPRESS
PERMISSION OF ALL PARTIES TO THE POST AND THE LIST MANAGEMENT IS EXPRESSLY
FORBIDDEN, AND IS A VIOLATION OF LAW. VIOLATORS OF THIS PROHIBITION WILL BE
PROSECUTED.
For assistance, please contact the List Management at admin@xxxxxxxxxxxx
VISIT OUR WEBSITE - http://www.showgsd.org
============================================================================
Other related posts:
- » [ SHOWGSD-L ] Turning Mandeville âInside Outâ (My response to Mandeville article...
