Obama for president

I'm finding the reasoning behind your choice of "no" on question 3 to be perplexing.  It's declining in popularity, so it may die a natural death?  It "may"?  When exactly?  Is it worth it to take that gamble that the tracks may close on their own?  How many more dogs will suffer & die in that time?  (not to mention the fact that if the state approves slots to be placed at tracks they will no longer be a dying industry) The fact that this is a declining industry is all the more reason to vote yes on 3.  The track owners realize it.  The public realizes it.  Lawmakers realize it.  A lot of the workers are part time.  And quite frankly, should we be that upset that a few people might lose some income if they are participating in a cruel and unethical profession?  The "efforts to clean up this form of wagering" have NOT been notable, actually.  Just yesterday in a newspaper ad, the tracks claimed to have a 100% dog adoption rate, when in fact state records show the rate is 14%.  Dogs spend 20 or more hours a day in stacked metal crates barely big enough to stand up or even turn around in (even so many are too large to).  Since 2002, over 800 dogs have been injured, many seriously.  80% of those are broken legs.  They are fed class 4-D meat from sick, diseased and downer cows, labeled unfit for human consumption.   I'm sad that the Phoenix, for claiming to be such a progressive publication, won't take a stand on this issue.

I am stunned that the Phoenix is suggesting a no vote on question 3.   If you're no friend of dog racing, then VOTE YES ON QUESTION 3.   I am so disappointed in my favorite publication.

I am shocked that The Pheonix is recommending a a no vote on Question 3!  I thought that the Pheonix looked at the facts, unlike the Globe and the Herald!  Apparently I was very wrong!   Would you leave your dog in a rusty cage too small for your dog to stand up and turn around?  If you are no friend to greyhound racing, why would you recommend perpetuating this cruely?

I am very disappointed that the Phoenix would recommend a "no" vote on 3.  The dogs are confined for 20 hours/day on average to very small cages and there have been over 800 injuries in the past few years.  Does a "down" economy justify cruelty?  I thought we were better than that as a society.

I cannot believe the Phoenix would not come out firmly on the side of animal welfare.  The only people who have voiced support for the tracks' side are the people who will need to find new jobs.  Loss of jobs is no more a reason to support the dog racing industry than it is reason to support the tobacco industry or any other industry whose time has passed.  Your readership is comprised of rational, humane and educated people whoknow this.  Start reflecting that in your opinions or plan to lose readers.

Even with regulation, the greyhounds will still break bones and injure themselves while racing.  With respect to the jobs lost, this is a phase-out, and people would have ample time to look for another job.  The status of our economy right now does not excuse the inhumane treatment of the greyhounds. 

I am disappointed that such a "progressive" newspaper as yours would recommend voting no on question three.  Eleven states have greyhound racing and their economies are not booming because of greyhound racing.  Cruelty to animals is not acceptable because people will lose their jobs.  Dogs are the animals that we revere most in our society and all dogs deserve to be treated  humanely.  Vote YES on question #3.     

A "no" vote on 3 condones the miserable conditions that these  DOGS are bred into (slavery), and must endure, and are subjected to til they no longer generate money for the gamblers, the tracks, and the "trainers".   A "no" vote says that it's OK that over 800 dogs have SUFFERED serious injuries in the past 6 years so that a few ctiizens of our state can go bet some money and maybe make a few bucks. (or as Mr. O'Donnell said on 96.9 today - no big deal)  The trainers/tracks/track vets do not take care of the injuries as they claim - they wrap the leg and then see if a shelter will take the dog and let the shelter pay for the treatment.  (if no shelter will take the dogs, they're euthanized)  "Broken dogs" that do make it to a shelters often arrive with their broken bones poking out of their legs.  Some care the trainers provide.  All this so less than 700 people have common part-time and full-time jobs?  All this so gamblers can go sit in the stands and bet on the backs and lives of dogs???????  Let's see the pro-racers take a month of this type of life.  The people with these jobs that will be phased out can and will find equivalent jobs in the broader world, outside of the track.  Tellers, parking lot attendants - wake up people - these jobs are not exclusive to dog tracks.  Dogs suffering broken legs, cardiac arrest, "dead at finish line", crushed skulls - is it really worth it?  Of course not.  VOTE YES ON 3

Congratulations on abandoning your journalistic integrity to become the mouthpiece of the tracks' lies and misrepresentations.  A multi-million dollar bailout in 2002 failed.  Raynham's revenue declined 37% between 2002-2007.  Wonderland's revenue declined 65% between 2002-2007.  Wonderland also has the audacity to owe $800,000 in back taxes.  Phoenix, when the track owners come knocking on Beacon Hill's door for another handout, we should expect YOU to pick up the tab, not law-abiding taxpayers.  All for a couple of bucks made on the backs of dogs?

Phoenix, you disappoint.  What you fail to see but the voters will realize on November 4th is that the people of Massachusetts do not want their economy based on cruelty to dogs.  One kennel owner at the track has stated that a dog breaking its leg in a race "...is no big deal."  Why would the Phoenix support an industry that results in dog injuries on average every 3-4 days?  Change your opinion and VOTE YES on 3.

What a wimpy (and lame) rationale...  highly uncharacteristic of The Phoenix.

I always considered the Phoenix to be a progressive paper, but you really dropped the ball on this one.  Even a casual observer over the last month or so would have seen the arguments you provided ripped to shreds.  The suffering of the greyhounds has not been "cleaned up" due to any non-specific "notable" efforts.  The racing industry does not adopt out 100% of the greyhounds who can no longer race.  That piece of misinformation surfaces every time attention is drawn to the number of racing greyhounds spirited out of Massachusetts and euthanized annually.  As far as jobs are concerned, the total number of jobs involved is less than 1,000; in fact, it's just over 700 many of which are part-time and non-union.  Even if a substantial number of people face job loss should this initiative pass, that would not trump the cruelty to which these dogs are subjected.  Question 3 provides for the tracks to operate until January 2010.  That's 14 months more job security than most people (including myself) enjoy in this "time of economic trouble" and it's plenty of time to secure another part-time, non-union job.  The voters of the Commonwealth have an opportunity to improve the plight of greyhounds on Election Day and I encourage everyone to vote Yes on question 3.

I am stunned that the folks who work in the editorial department of the Phoenix came to the consensus that it's ok to subject thousands of dogs in Massachusetts to confinement in small cages they can barely turn around in for up to 20 hours a day when they're not risking their lives racing around a track for the benefit of a few hundred jobs.

Does the Phoenix also support taxpayers subsidizing this dying industry and the illegal procurement of a liquor license while the "Wonderland" track owner was in arrears for nearly a million in back taxes and utility bills?

As Senior Managing Editor, I ask Mr. Clif Garboden to review the comprehensive Report on Commercial Dog Racing in Massachusetts at www.ProtectDogs.org and reconsider your stance on animal cruelty vs. job phase-out.

In 1641 Massachusetts put forth our body of liberties which includes, possibly, the first animal protection law in the world: "No man shall exercise any Tirranny or Crueltie towards any bruite Creature which are usuallie kept for man's use."   Yet, here we are more than 450 years later subjecting animals to tyranny, cruelty, and sometimes death for the almighty dollar.  You can see some of the injuries from the track' own video footage at the above site.  

The Phoenix needs to get back to the stated mission of "reach[ing] people who share a similar lifestyle" because you are way off the beaten path of your readership regarding animal cruelty within the Massachusetts economy.

In memory:

Grace’s leg snapped and she was euthanized.

Caminiti locked muzzles with another dog, spun out against the wall, and suffered a broken hock.

Zeulyn fell, could not walk, and had to be carried off the track.

Keep on Trying collided with another dog.

Action Jackson was destroyed with “severe, open fractures.”

Breathless Again,Vital Contract,Big Al, Sue, Smarty Time, Raquel, Kesmas, Curly lun, Echo, Basila, Haley, Perry Lee, Country, Fuzzy’s Kono, Just Peaches, All My Exes, and Starz Voice, all were euthanized, at their trainers’ request, after breaking their legs.

Carolina Alarm had a heart attack at the finish line.

Die Cut was struck by other dogs, suffered spinal trauma, and was paralyzed.

Code Red wobbled, fell, and collapsed at the starting box with a seizure.

Mesa Tony’s tail was skinned off.

Who Wants to Know collapsed and died instantly at the finish line.

Sebastian Cabot stopped and died on the third turn.

Let’s Roll died from “spinal shock.”

Rising Sun, described as “DOA,” broke her neck coming around a turn at Raynham Park.

RHF No Doubt broke her neck after she was “bumped hard.”

Renkar suffered a head trauma and died on the first turn of a training race.

Serapis hit the rail twice, on opposite sides of the track, suffering multiple head fractures.

Sherman Tank died of “cardiac insufficiency.”

Hibbert crushed his skull on New Year’s Day 2005. Kiowa Wish Dot crashed into a wall, suffered severe injuries to both front legs, and was euthanized.
 

AE’s Dare Me to Win “dropped dead” at the finish line.

I am greatly disappointed that the Boston Phoenix endorses a no vote on ballot question 3.  Our reasoning about dogs is founded in a history of cruelty masquerading as a need to further human interests.   In the 17th century, Rene Descartes, considered a great thinker of his time, worked with dogs as part of his scientific research.  He convinced his students, in an era before anesthesia, that it was perfectly humane to nail fully-conscious dogs to boards by their paws. Descartes explained that the cries from the hanging dogs were merely mechanical responses. His practice was common among scientists at the time.   Today, dog track owners – although not considered great thinkers—would like us to believe that living the majority of life in isolation and being confined to a small warehouse cage 20 or more hours a day is a happy life.   They also let us know that broken legs, ruptured organs, cardiac arrest, broken spines and sudden death are just par for the course.   I truly hope, as an intelligent species, we have evolved well beyond this type of reasoning.    I urge us to end the masquerade and vote Yes on 3.   Jacquie Gambarini  

I am greatly disappointed that the Boston Phoenix endorses a no vote on ballot question 3.  Our reasoning about dogs is founded in a history of cruelty masquerading as a need to further human interests.   In the 17th century, Rene Descartes, considered a great thinker of his time, worked with dogs as part of his scientific research.  He convinced his students, in an era before anesthesia, that it was perfectly humane to nail fully-conscious dogs to boards by their paws. Descartes explained that the cries from the hanging dogs were merely mechanical responses. His practice was common among scientists at the time.   Today, dog track owners – although not considered great thinkers—would like us to believe that living the majority of life in isolation and being confined to a small warehouse cage 20 or more hours a day is a happy life.   They also let us know that broken legs, ruptured organs, cardiac arrest, broken spines and sudden death are just par for the course.   I truly hope, as an intelligent species, we have evolved well beyond this type of reasoning.    I urge us to end the masquerade and vote Yes on 3.   Jacquie Gambarini  

I am greatly disappointed that the Boston Phoenix endorses a no vote on ballot question 3.  Our reasoning about dogs is founded in a history of cruelty masquerading as a need to further human interests.   In the 17th century, Rene Descartes, considered a great thinker of his time, worked with dogs as part of his scientific research.  He convinced his students, in an era before anesthesia, that it was perfectly humane to nail fully-conscious dogs to boards by their paws. Descartes explained that the cries from the hanging dogs were merely mechanical responses. His practice was common among scientists at the time.   Today, dog track owners – although not considered great thinkers—would like us to believe that living the majority of life in isolation and being confined to a small warehouse cage 20 or more hours a day is a happy life.   They also let us know that broken legs, ruptured organs, cardiac arrest, broken spines and sudden death are just par for the course.   I truly hope, as an intelligent species, we have evolved well beyond this type of reasoning.    I urge us to end the masquerade and vote Yes on 3.   Jacquie Gambarini  

I am greatly disappointed that the Boston Phoenix endorses a no vote on ballot question 3.  Our reasoning about dogs is founded in a history of cruelty masquerading as a need to further human interests.   In the 17th century, Rene Descartes, considered a great thinker of his time, worked with dogs as part of his scientific research.  He convinced his students, in an era before anesthesia, that it was perfectly humane to nail fully-conscious dogs to boards by their paws. Descartes explained that the cries from the hanging dogs were merely mechanical responses. His practice was common among scientists at the time.   Today, dog track owners – although not considered great thinkers—would like us to believe that living the majority of life in isolation and being confined to a small warehouse cage 20 or more hours a day is a happy life.   They also let us know that broken legs, ruptured organs, cardiac arrest, broken spines and sudden death are just par for the course.   I truly hope, as an intelligent species, we have evolved well beyond this type of reasoning.    I urge us to end the masquerade and vote Yes on 3.   Jacquie Gambarini  

Another one to an increasing list. Thank you for weighing the issue and coming to the conclusion that the rhetoric and sensationalism aside, no abuse exists  and people are important too.

Since there has been no abuse or cruelty reported in 75 years, the only conclusion I can come up with is it doesn't exist. Just because Grey2K, The Committee to Protect dogs and Carey Theil says it happens, doesn't make it so.   If they were really trying to protect the dogs wouldn't they have reported the cruelty they saw to make their case stronger. Don't you have to wonder about this? I couldn't vote to put over 800 hundred people out of work on someones hearsay. I would think these people have never seen walked inside a racing kennel. I'm voting NO on 3 to save people's jobs and save the dogs. Thanks Phoenix for thinking this through.   

As a member of the Grey community, I've always been impressed with antis who know more than legislators, inspectors and the like.  What a great world you must live in.  What will be your next target.  Children aren't allowed on swings or allowed to play football?  Look, a few short decades ago, no dogs were adopted out, now over 90% are.  You told us to clean up our act and we are.  What more could you want?  The cruelest thing that you can do to a grey is to not let it run.  Ask the folks with grey pets if they want the breed to become extinct.  I wish that all industries were perform the changes that we have to become better people.  What will happen when all people think alike.  Robots?  Orwell?  How many of you will let the new jobless folks move in with you.  Oh no problem, there are plenty of jobs aren't there.  Priorities?  How many of you should be making people literate, safe.  Feed children,  get perverts offline, help with disease charitys...oh no, let's end greyhound racing.  Of course, now your favorite newspaper is wrong.  Everyone's wrong that doesn't agree with you.  Nice life.  

The Boston Phoenix joins the Patriot Ledger, Harvard Crimson, Boston Globe and Boston Herald on a well thought out opinion. If one is still on the fence about Question 3, go to www.protectdogsandjobs.org and read the article "They advocated jackrabbits" by Dennis McKeon. This article will answer all of your questions about dog racing, the American greyhound, and the people who want to destroy the breed. Bravo to the Phoenix, VOTE NO ON QUESTION 3!

The Boston Phoenix joins the Patriot Ledger, Harvard Crimson, Boston Globe and Boston Herald on a well thought out opinion. If one is still on the fence about Question 3, go to www.protectdogsandjobs.org and read the article "They advocated jackrabbits" by Dennis McKeon. This article will answer all of your questions about dog racing, the American greyhound, and the people who want to destroy the breed. Bravo to the Phoenix, VOTE NO ON QUESTION 3!

Nice to see that the Phoenix has joined the legion of papers whose editorial staff can see through the charade. Meanwhile, we have hundreds of thousands of adoptive owners of retired Racing Greyhounds, who are , to say the least, nearly unanimous in their enthusiasm about the wonderful temperament, disposition, and sweet, loving nature of the Racing Greyhound.  When dog-fighting rings are busted, the unfortunate canine participants are routinely destroyed. This is because their breeding, their training, their handling and theircollective experience has made them aggressive, dangerous or potentially dangerous, and poor prospects as pets. 
The idea that anyone in their right mind would purchase VERY expensive Racing Greyhound athletes, and then deliberately subject them to living quarters that are too cramped and claustrophobic, to casual and routine abuse, and to an inordinately high risk of catastrophic injury, simply makes no sense.It costs anywhere from 12K to 20K  to raise and train a litter of greyhounds up to the point where they can begin to earn back the owner's investment.So the most logical narrative that Grey2K and their ilk can concoct,i nforms us that at this stage of the game, where the greedy owners can finally begin to get back what they have spent and realize a profit, these shamelss pimps begin that process by cramming their Greyhounds into tiny little compartments and keeing them there so that their muscles cramp and atrophy----they compound that indignity by feeding them food that is inadequate to their athletic demands----and then they subject these dogs to inordinately high risks of catastrophic injury, by allowing them to race. Yes, that makes perfect sense.  Meanwhile, we have hundreds of thousands of adoptive owners of retired Racing Greyhounds, who are , to say the least, nearly unanimous in their enthusiasm about the wonderful temperament, disposition, and sweet, loving nature of the Racing Greyhound.
When dog-fighting rings are busted, the unfortunate canine participants are routinely destroyed. This is because their breeding, their training, their handling, their function and their collective experience has made them aggressive, dangerous or potentially dangerous, and poor prospects as pets. It's not that they're "bad dogs" we are told----"IT'S THE WAY THEY WERE BRED, RAISED, HANDLED AND TREATED THAT MADE THEM THIS WAY-----THEY HAD BAD HUMAN OWNERS!!!"When retired Racing Greyhounds literally "charm the world" as a fantastic companion and family pet, with their abundant good-nature, their beguiling, mysterious charm, and their loving and gentle dispositions, we are told....it's NOT the way they were raised, handled and treated that made them this way. They had bad human owners.Someone is lying.  No on 3.

Hurray Phoenix!  Another source who can see through the lies of these no-profits extolling lies to kill an industry.  I work in greyhound adoption and see NO abuse in MA.  I have been to the racing kennels and seen  for myself that there is no cuelty or abuse involved.  Have any of you voting yes seen a racing kennel?  Do we need to see over a 1000 people lose their jobs in this economy?  Entire families, some generations of them will be left without their livelyhood and profession. I am voting NO

Have we alread forgotten?:

In the Spring of 2005 nineteen greyhounds died at Wonderland Greyhound Park from a mysterious illness that caused dogs to die suddenly, including some apparently healthy dogs who died in as little as four hours. It was later proven that the dogs had died from a strain of influenza that had previously only afflicted horses. This marked the first known case in which the influenza strain had jumped species.  Although this new dog flu was first discovered in dogs at commercial tracks, it has since spread beyond the racing industry to other dogs. 

References:

Scott Van Voorhis, Greyhound deaths dog the future of racing industry, May 27, 2005.

Rob Stein, Dog flu jumped from horses, Washington Post, September 27, 2005.

When the illness first struck, state regulators publicly dismissed the possibility that it was the same illness that was causing dogs to die in other states, instead insisting that it was a form of ‘‘kennel cough.’’ Only after thirteen dogs died at Wonderland Greyhound Park did the State Racing Commission finally acknowledge that dogs in Massachusetts could be suffering from a far more serious disease. This recognition came at least two weeks after the illness first struck.  Finally, even after the Commission suspected that dogs were dying from a new form of influenza, it failed to impose a mandatory quarantine at Wonderland.

 No abuse or cruelty here.

Dogs play an important role in our lives and deserve to be protected. VOTE YES ON 3

In late 2003 and early 2004 a greyhound named Reese twice tested positive for cocaine, an illegal stimulant, at Wonderland Greyhound Park. As a result of these positive drug tests, greyhound trainer Carl Petricone was fined $1,000 and suspended for ninety days.

At roughly the same time in 2004 that Reese tested positive for cocaine at Wonderland Greyhound Park, the State Racing Commission cut the number of mandatory drug tests in half.

References:

Scott Van Voorhis, Hackles rise over cocaine found in dog, Boston Herald, December 1, 2004.

Scott Van Voorhis, Doggie dope tests trimmed to save money, Boston Herald, December 2, 2004.

No abuse or cruelty here.

Dogs play an important role in our lives and deserve to be protected. VOTE YES ON 3

Obama is the an unknown: 1. Occidental College records –Not released
2. Columbia College records – Not released
3. Columbia Thesis Paper – “Not available”
4. Harvard College records – Not released
5. Selective Service Registration – Not released
6. Medical records – Not released
7. Illinois State Senate schedule – “Not available”
8. Law practice client list – Not released
9. Certified Copy of original Birth certificate – Not released
10. Embossed, signed paper Certification of Live Birth – Not released
11. Harvard Law Review articles published – None
12. University of Chicago scholarly articles – None
13. Record of baptism – Not released or “Not available”
14. Illinois State Senate records– “Not available”