Wooing the Animal-Lovers Vote: Romney straps dog to roof of car, for 12-hour drive

C

Cypress

Well-known member
Romney Strapped Dog to Car Roof
June 28, 2007 8:45 AM

ABC News' Jake Tapper Reports: Republican presidential candidate former Gov. Mitt Romney, R-Mass., has angered animal rights activists for strapping his dog to the roof of his car on a family trip from Boston to Ontario, Canada.

According to the Boston Globe, in one of the family's 12-hour drives to their family's cottage in Canada over 25 years ago, Romney strapped a dog carrier to the roof of the car for the whole trip -- with the family Irish setter, Seamus, inside.

Seamus protested in a scatological way, going to the bathroom on the roof of the car.


http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/06/romney-strapped.html
 
Darla said:
Wow! Are you kidding me? Is this common practice?
Click to expand...

Not with any dog I've had.

Having it ride in the back of the pickup, for a trip to the hardware store is one thing.

Strapping it to the roof of the car for a twelve hour drive to canada, is beyond the pale. To me, anyway. I love dogs. ;)
 
It was 25 years ago.

It was a stupid thing to do.

I am not a Romney defender but 25 years ago people were pretty stupid about animals.

Most would toss them in the back yard and leave them.

I am so glad most people now understand a dog is a pack animal and needs company all day long.

As far as Im concerned a dogs place in the family is by your side on the couch the bed IN the car or where ever you go.

It makes for the best dog in the world too because they learn so much.
 
I grant that this was 25 years ago, but even then people weren't quite that stupid! At least most weren't. Then again, I've seen horrors within the past year volunteering for the Humane Soc. This says a lot about Romney's attitudes I think.

It's against the law here, in the city at least, to drive with a dog loose in the back of a pickup. A pre-vet volunteer at the Emergency Vet Clinic told me that injuries arising from dogs jumping or falling out of pickup beds still are the greatest cause of injuries that they treat.
 
Bad, but I tend to agree with Desh, people were a lot less careful with pets back then than they are today.

When my dad was young he said dogs always stayed outside and if they were sick, they'd shoot them if gasoline didn't do the trick. We've come along way.
 
Desh said:
It was 25 years ago.

It was a stupid thing to do.

I am not a Romney defender but 25 years ago people were pretty stupid about animals.

Most would toss them in the back yard and leave them.

I am so glad most people now understand a dog is a pack animal and needs company all day long.

As far as Im concerned a dogs place in the family is by your side on the couch the bed IN the car or where ever you go.

It makes for the best dog in the world too because they learn so much.
Click to expand...


Desh, even in 1982, I don't think I knew anyone who would strap a dog on the roof of a car, for a 12 hour drive on the interstate highways.



"As the oldest son, Tagg Romney commandeered the way-back of the wagon, keeping his eyes fixed out the rear window, where he glimpsed the first sign of trouble. ''Dad!'' he yelled. ''Gross!'' A brown liquid was dripping down the back window, payback from an Irish setter who'd been riding on the roof in the wind for hours.

As the rest of the boys joined in the howls of disgust, Romney coolly pulled off the highway and into a service station. There, he borrowed a hose, washed down Seamus and the car, then hopped back onto the highway.
 
Thorn, the least he could have done was stop every couple hours to walk the dog, so it could relieve itself.

I mean, just letting sit in it's cage and poop on the roof of a car? Inhumane ;)
 
Cypress said:
Thorn, the least he could have done was stop every couple hours to walk the dog, so it could relieve itself.

I mean, just letting sit in it's cage and poop on the roof of a car? Inhumane ;)
Click to expand...

Not only that, what speed was he travelling, anyway? Could you or I withstand winds of that speed, especially focused further through the holes in a crate? Not only is this thoughtless and inhumane, it shows a complete lack of forethought -- not a failing we'd want in a prospective CIC.
 
Thorn said:
Not only that, what speed was he travelling, anyway? Could you or I withstand winds of that speed, especially focused further through the holes in a crate? Not only is this thoughtless and inhumane, it shows a complete lack of forethought -- not a failing we'd want in a prospective CIC.
Click to expand...
But you are junping to conclusions, andf suggesting a lot of conditions that are not stated in the article. that is why I said there could be both pros and cons to the situation
 
doniston said:
But you are junping to conclusions, andf suggesting a lot of conditions that are not stated in the article. that is why I said there could be both pros and cons to the situation
Click to expand...

I am assuming, based on many, many years' owning pets and carriers, what the nature of the carrier construction would have been. I'm familiar with what was available, both then and now. The crate would have to have been ventilated or the animal would perish. Further, there obviously were openings in the carrier because the effluent, (for courtesy's sake) was clearly visible to the occupants of the vehicle.

The article did state that the carrier was strapped to the roof of the vehicle. There's no way that airflow could have been avoided, especially not in 1982. That poor dog.

I'd be interested to hear your pros and cons, though.
 
Thorn said:
I am assuming, based on many, many years' owning pets and carriers, what the nature of the carrier construction would have been. I'm familiar with what was available, both then and now. The crate would have to have been ventilated or the animal would perish. Further, there obviously were openings in the carrier because the effluent, (for courtesy's sake) was clearly visible to the occupants of the vehicle.

The article did state that the carrier was strapped to the roof of the vehicle. There's no way that airflow could have been avoided, especially not in 1982. That poor dog.

I'd be interested to hear your pros and cons, though.
Click to expand...

I can see doing that myself, while providing adequate protection.

1. I would have provided protective covering on the Car making it poop proof (plus haveing adequate rest stops along the way.) Then:

2. I would provide adequate wind protection to the front and sides, and a convertable top in case of rain. however,

3. I would allow the dog the freedom of facing the wind thru the top if he preferred. pehaps you have noticed that dogs often stick their heads out of an open window because the enjoy the wind.

Now just what is wrong with that???

Course none of these things were mentioned in the article, so none of it happened---- RIGHT??? (Referencing a past discussion I had on other threads with other detractors. HEH HEH)
 
Don,

For any ride that exceeds an hour, the dog always rides with me, not on the roof...

I have always put the welfare of my woman and my dog, above my own ;)
 
The only thing I can say is that when I was a kid, we had a dog. She was a really great dog, and I never had another dog because they get sick and are in pain and then you have to kill them. We got her when I was 8.

None of us ever even thought of tying her to the roof of the car. No way.
 
Thorn said:
Not only that, what speed was he travelling, anyway? Could you or I withstand winds of that speed, especially focused further through the holes in a crate? Not only is this thoughtless and inhumane, it shows a complete lack of forethought -- not a failing we'd want in a prospective CIC.
Click to expand...
People withstand that wind all the time. It's called a motorcycle.
 
Damocles said:
People withstand that wind all the time. It's called a motorcycle.
Click to expand...

But with a motorcycle you have a windscreen. One other big difference is active vs. passive involvement in the whole thing. Please don't ask me for refs because it's been quite a while, (I did my undergrad and master's research in stress) but in both mechanical and passive restraint stress studies, as well as psychotropic drug studies, it was established repeatedly that control (i.e. choice) over a situation was a critical point in whether the stress or drug effects would have adverse physiological effects.

I don't want to get too graphic, but remember Cypress' quote about when they learned that the dog had excreted on the roof. Apparently it wasn't, um, logs. The nature of that excrement was consistent with what occurs under significant uncontrollable stress.
 
Thorn said:
But with a motorcycle you have a windscreen. One other big difference is active vs. passive involvement in the whole thing. Please don't ask me for refs because it's been quite a while, (I did my undergrad and master's research in stress) but in both mechanical and passive restraint stress studies, as well as psychotropic drug studies, it was established repeatedly that control (i.e. choice) over a situation was a critical point in whether the stress or drug effects would have adverse physiological effects.

I don't want to get too graphic, but remember Cypress' quote about when they learned that the dog had excreted on the roof. Apparently it wasn't, um, logs. The nature of that excrement was consistent with what occurs under significant uncontrollable stress.
Click to expand...
Not all motorcycles have a windscreen and most people don't wear helmets either.

Seriously, 50 MPH winds are easy to withstand. It wasn't the wind that did that to the dog.
 
Damocles said:
Not all motorcycles have a windscreen and most people don't wear helmets either.

Seriously, 50 MPH winds are easy to withstand. It wasn't the wind that did that to the dog.
Click to expand...

Probably not, it probably was being strapped to the roof of a car not knowing what the hell was going on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top