Ellen DeGeneres' Doggone Nightmare

31. It's not fair that anyone had to get in the middle of it. The dog had a good home and taking it away isn't right. Even though Ellen should have contacted the place it's not like she really did anything extremely wrong. She gave a dog a home that it'll be happy and joyful, the people who removed the dog from Ruby should rethink the whole situation. It's no difference if Ellen kept the dog or not. It's not like she abandoned it back to the streets.

I don't get people.

Posted at 4:49PM on Oct 15th 2007 by Tedra

32. Ellen would NEVER purposely do anything to hurt an animal or child.

she's not mean spirited like rosie.

Posted at 4:50PM on Oct 15th 2007 by truth bites

33. The person who thinks the contract should stick is nothing but a miserable a**hole who probably doesn't have any friends. Maybe they should get a dog!!!

Posted at 5:00PM on Oct 15th 2007 by Cinnamon Jacobs

34. Mailing address:
PO Box 50393
Pasadena, CA 91115

Email: pawboutique@yahoo.com

Website URL: www.muttsandmoms.com


Email/Write them and let them know what you think of their tactics....I did!

Posted at 4:52PM on Oct 15th 2007 by tgeorges

35. you know u try to do something good for the animals and people get all power trippy! they think they will previal bc they told off a celebrity. what a piece of crap organization pulling this on a 12yr old.

Posted at 4:52PM on Oct 15th 2007 by kiki

36. I have had to deal with the dog adoption "rescues" before and these people are insane. They practically want to take a blood and stool sample from you to prove that you'll be a good dog owner. When I questioned them about their practices they said things like "you don't deserve a dog" and " you'd probably kill it". I have had dogs all my life and I always adopt from shelters. My last dog died of old age at 16 yrs. These asses had the nerve to question my ability to own a dog. They are doing a diservice to all loving people who would adopt from them and they are denying a loving home for the dogs. CRAZY! That's what they are!

Posted at 8:45PM on Oct 15th 2007 by Dino

37. Talk about bad press for the dog adoption agency. How stupid can they be? Their actions seem be be bias in action. Pulling a pet from a loving environment is not only devastating for the family but for the pet itself.

Posted at 5:33PM on Oct 15th 2007 by Fran

38. " Celebrity lesbians don't have to follow the rules! " I cant believe you said that !!!!!!
I feel sorry for you -
The dog was placed into a loving home and because of some
bureaucratic rule that needs to be changed, you come out with a personal, small minded response like that? You should be ashamed of your self.

Posted at 5:54PM on Oct 15th 2007 by Donna

39. Sorry, wrong call on this one. Adoption agencies have contracts that are binding. Ellen should abide by the contract and let the adoption agency select a new home. The new family could apply immediately and probably pass the interview. If they don't meet the criteria for the dog's needs, then unfortunately they need to respect the agency. The child's disappointment is Ellens fault, period. If the agency makes an exception in Ellen's case, they can't fairly enforce adoption contracts on others. You would understand if you worked at a shelter, and had the responsibility of placing these pets. If a child adoption doesn't work out, the adoptive parents don't just pass the child to someone else. It is the same thing for the animal.

Posted at 4:55PM on Oct 15th 2007 by mia

40. Ellen knew she did wrong by not complying with the terms of her contract. Now she wants to avoid responsibilty by trying to re-direct it to the agency who decided to enforce their agreement. If Ellen had complied with the contract I'm sure the agency would have been thrilled to let the girl keep the dog. What her majasty seems to have forgotten is that our actions come with consequences. Sometimes innocent people get hurt but those are the breaks. Next time Ellen do the right thing and maybe you wont have to worry about other people getting hurt for your stupidity.

Posted at 4:56PM on Oct 15th 2007 by Heartless Greg

41. Bottom line is what's best for the dog.

Posted at 4:58PM on Oct 15th 2007 by swell

42. The level of stupidity this pet agency has reached is unbelievable. If Ellen signed a contract she should have let them know she had placed the dog in another home, but what they did is the tragedy. Taking the dog out of a good home without even bothering to assess the situation and see that the dog is in a good home and they should leave well enough alone. And dragging the police into it - get real people.

Posted at 5:20PM on Oct 15th 2007 by j

43. This is the stupidest crap I have ever heard. Were the cops really necessary? This adoption agency really needs to get it priorities in order. Taking a pet from a loving home to put it back in a shelter just because this agency didnt approve it is ridiculous.

Posted at 5:02PM on Oct 15th 2007 by HoneyBee

44. i have personally adopted a wonderful dog from this same agency. my experience was nothing but positive and my dog has been a wonderful addition to my home. this agency happens to be quite protective and very cautious when it comes to finding a home for all of their dogs, as ALL agencies should be! why would this case be any different than any other adoption? because it's ELLEN DEGENERIS?????? i think not! the bottom line is the dog's care and welfare. the contract was broken and is being handled as would any other case. all agencies should be so caring!!!

Posted at 5:07PM on Oct 15th 2007 by SHANNON

45. So, the dog would be better off dead than have a family adopt him? The agency just wants more money. They don't care about the dog either. Ellen will probably have to readopt the dog for the family. Basically, paying for the dog twice.

Posted at 5:06PM on Oct 15th 2007 by PC 4U