Actually very simple: Romney's dog on top of the car and Obama's dog inside the car.
From: Felvtalk [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Maureen Olvey Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2012 1:52 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Felvtalk] President Without endorsing either candidate here's some thoughts I had on deciding between the candidates: I don't think either candidate will directly influence animal cruelty laws or humane practice laws. They've got too much else to worry about, especially right now. Even if they love animals it will not be their priority. So, for this particular election I'm not even considering it. Now obviously if the candidate was a known animal abuser that would be different and would impact my decision. When it comes to animal issues I tend to focus on the legislative branch like Congress and state reps, etc. that would have more influence passing legislation and laws. So, regarding animal welfare I'm basing my decision on who can best help me and other people help the animals and continue our work in animal welfare. It's not what they will do, it's what they will allow me to do. Right now the economy is a problem. People are losing their homes and can't keep their pets. Donations to animal welfare organizations are down so they can't do as much either. Many people like myself feed a bunch of feral cats. It is hard to keep doing that when you can barely afford to feed your family. I volunteer with a local humane society so even in our small part of the world I've seen a major increase in the number of pets surrendered by owners who lost their homes or just left their pets behind. People have to spend more time trying to make ends meet and don't have time to volunteer with animal rescues etc. Just lots of things like that. Considering those kinds of things I'm looking at who can help the economy the most. Each candidate has very different economic policies and very different approaches to boosting our economy. So that's one thing I'm looking at hard - which economic policy do I think will work. I lived in a third world country for two years a long time ago. Their animals were a lot worse off than ours and it wasn't because the people weren't compassionate they just didn't have anything to be able to help their animals. So right now I'm looking at which economic plan will help the country get back on it's feet so we can keep our pets and have time to donate and volunteer to fight for animal protection legislation. Healthcare is definitely something to consider but that's also part of the economic crisis so I'm not going to directly contribute any thoughts on that. I would suggest not looking at just what the candidates say they will do for the animals but look at what will help us do for the animals. They've got too many other issues to tackle. I'd be surprised if either one of them took up one animal issue whatsoever. It's people like us who are working for the animals that make the difference so see what they can do for us and we'll do all the legwork to help the animals. Take a look at the economic plans and that will help influence your decision. I had a few basic economic courses in college so I understand the basics but not all the details. I think if you just look at the basic models without going into too too many details it would be enough to make a decision. But hey, there's lots of other things to consider but that's where I'm at when I think about what will help the animals the most. "I am not interested to know whether vivisection produces results that are profitable to the human race or doesn't..the pain which it inflicts upon unconsenting animals is the basis of my enmity toward it, and it is to me sufficient justification of the enmity without looking further." - Mark Twain
_______________________________________________ Felvtalk mailing list [email protected] http://felineleukemia.org/mailman/listinfo/felvtalk_felineleukemia.org
