This is a very interesting question, because pet ownership does make a statement about a person. Pet ownership is strictly voluntary, unless you are in the public eye. As a rule of thumb I tend not to trust people who do not like dogs. In my experience, such people are cold, calculating, and very likely to cheat someone, somewhere. I truly do not understand those who are scared of dogs, although I can sympathize with the fear. So my answer is no, I do not trust people who do not own and love a dog. I would bought dog abusers like Vick and child abusers into this catagory.
Until the Obama train wreck, this nation has never elected a President who has not had a dog. Like me, those with common sense do not trust those without a dog. So how does one explain our recent electorial train wreck. Obama is not a dog lover, nor was he a dog owner before the White House. In fact research seems to show, as does his own book; that Obama has never had a pet of any kind. One has to assume that pet ownership is too great an emotional commitment for the Barry Soweto of old and from a nation that eats dogs, (yes it is politically incorrect and yes I said it anyhow). Kenya, his other homeland, is not to big on pets either. Today one of the biggest tourist draws in Kenya is "bush meat" with includes primates, our closest relatives in the animal world. People that close to cannibalism generally are not known to be pet lovers.
So is Obama a converted pet lover? He acquired Bo the Portuguese Water Dog because as President he had a social obligation to own a dog. Has anyone ever seen him taking care of Bo? Ever seen taking a walk with the dog, or playing with him? The answer is no. Bo was an obligation, but not a beloved member of the family. Now he is on hold as a potential photo op in the future, but he is not a loved pet.
Should we really trust a person who can not commit to a pet? I would say no.
Comments (0):