For the third time this week, an extremely sweet piece of legislation crafted by Mike Gatto has found its way to the trash heap. First, Mike’s attempt to protect Native American lands stalled in committee. Then, Kevin “Douchebag” De Leon yanked his support from the Film & TV Tax Credit bill that he himself co-authored with Mike Gatto. And now it looks like AB2343, a bill designed to fund animal shelters and decrease the number of euthanizations, has been withdrawn after an online protest from a mere 5,000 people, most of whom aren’t from California.
Who were these ass-clowns, and why did they pull such a douchey stunt? Those ass-clowns were a bunch of well-meaning but mentally unbalanced pet lovers whose excessive love for their pets was channeled into an equally potenet hatred for anyone or anything portrayed as a threat to their fetid homes full of diseased, transient cats.
The douchey stunt was perpetrated by fringe ideologue Nathan J. Winograd, who ostensibly portrays himself as an animal rights activist, though the plight of his furry friends seems to be a proxy crusade for Winograd, who is clearly more interested in promoting himself. Just check out this extremely douchey post on the establishment of Nathan J. Winograd Day. Or purchase this feature film by Nathan J. Winograd. Or one of these books by Nathan J. Winograd. Or catch one of these live appearances by Nathan J. Winograd.
Gatto’s original bill would have allocated $10 million for overburdened animal shelters in California. Part of the overcrowding issue stems from a decree that rescued animals can only go non-profit adoption services. AB2343 would have allowed for-profit adoption services to help facilitate in the adoption of lost and scared animals. But true to his fear-mongering, ideological, grandstanding self, Winograd whipped up a tempest-in-a-teapot by misrepresenting the bill, making wild accusations, and manipulating the nobel intentions of gullible pet lovers. By inventing an extremely unlikely worst-case scenario, Winograd convinced his readers that a for-profit adoption service could, possibly, technically, maybe be sold to an evil pharmaceutical company seeking to test their products on feral cats.
Now, I’m no evil CEO, but if I wanted to test chemicals on some cats, I wouldn’t try to adopt them one at a time from FOR-PROFIT shelters — because that would be fucking retarded. Not to mention extremely time consuming and needlessly expensive. Instead, I’d just put some cats in a room and let them do what they naturally do… fuck and make tons of annoying babies. PRESTO! A decade of free research — which by the way, has led to critical breakthroughs in the treatment of cancer, heart disease, AIDS, diabetes and a number of other diseases that would change Winograd’s mind about AB2343 in a second.
Winograd had another minor quibble with a provision in the bill mandating shelters hold animals for 72 hours before making them available for adoption. That was meant to allow owners a chance to reclaim their lost pets, and applied to dogs and cats with identification tags and dogs without tags. But to Winograd, the fact that this provision didn’t also cover cats without tags was such an abortion of justice that it was worth torpedoing the whole damn bill and stranding CA’s stray pets up shit creek without a paddle.
So hooooo-raaaaaaay for Nathan J. Winograd, President of the Nathan J. Winograd Appreciation Society. California animal shelters lost $10 million, but he got a lot of profitable clicks on his website!