Comments (14)

• Yancey Ward

  Cages, electric shocks, bureaucrats......this gives me an idea!

  Published: January 18, 2007 8:23 AM

• Brad

  At the risk of starting a whole animal rights thread, the notion that Animal Welfare Laws are good intentioned and we leave it at that is losing half the battle. Animals do not have rights, and any Law to preserve their life or welfare is a bad Law from the get go, regardless of the eventual abuse and distortion by the bureaucracy. We have enough good Law distorted and abused, which need to be fought against, we don't need fundamentally bad Laws at the start.

  Published: January 18, 2007 8:37 AM

• Vic

  This might be mildly amusing were it not for the fact the the USDA claims not to have adequate resources to prevent the introduction of exotic agricultural pests and diseases through our porous borders. Clear misuse of public resources.

  Published: January 18, 2007 9:29 AM

• Paul Marks

  I wonder which dodge the supporters of the U.S.D.A. use to pretend that it is constitutional.

  Perhaps it is "interstate commerce" on the grounds that not all the visitors to the house come from Florida (an absurd definition of "interstate commerce" of course, but I would not put it past "modern" "progressive" people).

  Or perhaps they use the old trick of pretending that the PURPOSE of the powers granted to Congress "the common defence and general welfare" is somehow a "general welfare power" in-its-self allowing the Feds to spend taxpayers money on anything and to pass whatever regulations they feel like.

  Published: January 18, 2007 9:46 AM

• Ryan Fuller

  Bureaucrats are a breed of cat? Such harsh words, what did cats ever do to you?

  I think Terry Pratchett once said that the bureaucrat shares some striking similarities with the octopus, such as the tendency to try to hide behind a cloud of ink when they feel threatened.

  Published: January 18, 2007 10:19 AM

• Francisco Torres

  Animals do not have rights, and any Law to preserve their life or welfare is a bad Law from the get go, regardless of the eventual abuse and distortion by the bureaucracy.

  Well, my wife would probably want to gouge your eyes out (she is a cat lover), but I agree with you completely: The Animal Welfare Act actually violates private property rights by making the Federal (or State) government become the steward of what is in principle a person's property - their animals or any animal within their property.

  I am not in favor, of course, of mistreating furry and cute animals, but that is MY opinion - forcing people to live up to my standards or to cater to my sensibilities is a form of violence against a fellow human being, and that is infinitely worse than the mishandling of an unthinking animal.

  Published: January 18, 2007 10:21 AM

• Mark Brabson

  Of course, it is perfectly acceptable to the USDA for Tyson and other poultry processors to cram chickens six to a cage so tightly they can never move during their entire miserable lives, but heaven help us if a few six toed cats run loose. Oh, I forgot. Tyson has the big bucks to contribute to their government masters. Never mind.

  Published: January 18, 2007 10:56 AM

• Keith

  If I was in charge of the museum, I'd either sell all the cats or have all of the cats killed, stuffed and put on display with a big sign thanking the USDA and that judge.

  Published: January 18, 2007 12:06 PM

• Bill

  Paul:
  Sorry, but the current Federal Government has totally abandoned any constitutional restraints. They, the President, Congress and Courts have completely ignored the wording and spirit of the constitution.

  But at least we have Social Security, Medicare, Domestic Spying, the IRS, etc. Aren't you glad?

  In this particular Cat Case, I think that the Federal Government wants it hands in all museum like activities and is just causing trouble for these folks because they are a "Private" organization.

  Published: January 18, 2007 12:29 PM

• Brad

  ***I am not in favor, of course, of mistreating furry and cute animals***

  Neither am I. I have two dogs myself. I certainly don't have to like what people do to their animals, but I am a disinterested party. Of course our problem is precisely that third of society, the squeeky wheels, who have no concept of interest, what makes the so or not.

  And I think I finally got the meaning of the headline....I'm a bit of a count...ry bumpkin I guess....

  Published: January 18, 2007 2:35 PM

• Peter

  Totally off-topic, but there's a rather interesting poll here: http://zohopolls.com/us/pres. I assume everybody here is aware by now that Ron Paul may run for President in 2008 - he's leading (by a long way) in this poll!

  (If you're going to vote, be sure to give one star to the candidates you don't like - not voting (zero stars) is better than a one star vote!)

  Published: January 18, 2007 7:10 PM

• Sudha Shenoy

  'Bureuacrats have striking similarities with the octopus..' (comment above.) I protest on behalf of all octopoids everywhere. They are intelligent & respect all other creatures -- only killing when absolutely necessary for food. They shoot out ink to escape & _avoid_ fighting. Why demean them? Bureaucrats are the creatures of (human) _legislation_ -- 'more dangerous than gunpowder'.

  Published: January 19, 2007 9:17 AM

• banker

  When people stop eating cows and pigs, then maybe, for a single solitary second, I will consider animals as having rights remotely close to that of humans.

  Published: January 20, 2007 10:24 AM

• Daniel M. Ryan

  Put the shoe on the other foot, banker. The gators are still smilin'...

  Published: January 20, 2007 12:11 PM