Sunday, August 9, 2009

Boycott Rachael Ray

I love the Food Network but Rachael Ray is another story. Although I feel she is working from sheer ignorance, I also feel she has an obligation to educate herself as a role model.

I was watching one older show where she spoke of her first dog, a pit. Seems the vet gave her a lecture on feeding the dog, she actually admitted she was ignorant of what and how to feed dogs. Her dog was on the heavy side when the vet admonished her.

Ray is being used by the pit nutters of the world. She is being used to promote the "nanny" dog misconception by the pit breeders and dog fighters. This must stop. So I have written the Food Network to let them know I will no longer watch her show and will contact her sponsors that I am boycotting them as well. Yeah, I know, what is one person. But I know that one person can make a difference so I try anyway. I ask that those of you who read this blog will take your time and do the same.


Melissa said...

What is the desired outcome for this? That she will dump her dog at the pound or have it killed? I don't think that will happen. She can't control the crazy and criminal people.

HonestyHelps said...

The desired outcome, Melissa, is obvious. And no, I don't expect her to dump her dog or have it killed and I resent your saying that. No one is asking her to control crazy or criminal people, just to not participate in their campaign of misinformation that is leading to pits killing people on average one every 21 days. And I for one will not support anyone that misleads the public about these dangerous breeds.

I expect someone in her position to research a subject before supporting it. She is influential and I am sure many a person has adopted a pit because of their admiration of her.

Surely the case of Michael Vick teed you off, then why not Ray? She is lending her voice to those like Vick. I find this unacceptable. She was ignorant about how to take care of her first dog according to what she has said on air and she remains ignorant of what she is doing in her support of pits.

Anonymous said...

Rachel Ray is advocating for dog fighters, and the dog fighters are laughing at this foolish bimbo. Pit bulls are getting tortured because of Rachel Ray.

HonestyHelps said...

Exactly, that is why I posted this and have written to the Food Network expressing my boycott. I want others to do the same. For someone so smart, she is so dumb on this one. Then again, all she ever was is a glorified waitress.

Anonymous said...

OMG. Did you really just say Rachael Ray is advocating for dog fighters? I'm sure the gang-banging dog fighters really look up to Rachael Ray and put her on a pedestal.

Do you think any of them really even know who she is?

And you wonder why everyone out there thinks you're crazy.

HonestyHelps said...

Anon, yes, RR is advocating the myth that pits are nanny dogs with her ignorance. The "dogmen" (dog fighters) are throwing her name around everywhere as if that proves their point that pits are fine for pets. And your last statement seems odd, why would people think I am crazy when it is Ray that is promoting families adopting dangerous dogs?

LibraryRat said...

Your contention that "pit bulls" kill an average of one person every 21 days in this country is patently false, and your blog title is very misleading. If you were working to help animals you would not disseminate such hurtful and ridiculous misinformation regarding an entire group of dogs. Such mentality leads directly to the abuse and destruction of perfectly sound and wonderful animals. Please do yourself, and everyone else, a favor and read the following research and reports:
National Canine Research Council 2007 Fatality Report

National Canine Research Council 2008 Dog Bite Fatality Report

Dog Bite Injury Comparison

Perhaps if people such as yourself stopped labeling an entire group of dogs, that consists of many different breeds, as inherently dangerous, then dangerous people wouldn't be so inclined to abuse them. Good day.

HonestyHelps said...

Keri, you are a foolish, foolish person siting the NCRC. That big sounding name is nothing like it sounds, no credibility. Ask to see the raw data from that group to back up their contentions, it ain't there. Whenever there are "accidents" per the pit bully nutters that don't fit the NCRC agenda, those are left out of the stats. Why don't you go to and figure it out for yourself? You won't because you already know the truth and are in denial like all the other pit nutters. I stand by my statement about the killing epidemic of pits. As long as people like you stay in denial about the pits, the more harm will come to them, their blood is on your hands for being so fucking ignorant.

LibraryRat said...

I have gone to I sent a long and detailed message to them asking for more information about who they are, whether they have animal behavior experts and scientists doing research for them, what they propose a good solution to the dog bite issue that would protect all victims of attacks by all breeds of dog would look like, etc. I never received a response from anyone. This tells me that they are either not serious in their mission, or that they do not wish to expose themselves to scrutiny because they have something to hide. The NCRC is a thousand times more credible than Dogs Bite, who seem to get most of their statistics from news stories.

I was savagely bitten by an Australian Shepherd. The attack left me scarred. I had two reconstructive surgeries on my face, and a skin graft to replace part of my nose. I had 40 stitches. Was that attack in the paper, even the local one? No. Do I call for the extermination of all Australian Shepherds, knowing that they are capable of such savagery? No. Because I am a reasonable person. I understand that each and every dog is an individual. As someone who claims to want to help animals, I would expect that you would understand that, too. I don't think you really understand anything about dogs or dog behavior.

HonestyHelps said...

When will you nutters realize that DBO is for PIT VICTIMS??? They don't need to listen to another nutter's story of how they were bitten by some other breed. And you can get whatever information you could need with what is on the web site, it is all there.

Get it thru your head that being bitten by a dog is not the same as being attacked by a pit, a breed that has no off button, a breed that just keeps attacking. I've been bitten by other dogs and I will tell you, that it is just not the same thing.

Use some fucking common sense, how do you think the NCRC comes up with their information concerning attacks? You think they have a hotline to every place in the country?? No, they get it from the papers. That's why I said look at their raw data, they lie about it, they make you think they are allowed to look at confidential investigative files. Not just anyone is privvy to certain types of reports yet NCRC tries to make you believe they have "reviewed" the evidence. It's bullshit. There's no copies for you to "review" and make your own determinations. And try to find those cases that don't prove the agenda for NCRC, they overlook those.

And tell me how many fatalities are done by Australian Sheperds every year? You are drowning in the koolaid of the pit nutters, excuses without any common sense behind them. And your continued denial is the reason 58% of the euthanization in shelters are pits and mixes. You are the enemy of the pits, not me.

LibraryRat said...

Your credibility is further destroyed by your constant name-calling and offensive language. On the Dogs Bite site, at the bottom, the following is stated: " is a national dog bite victims' group dedicated to reducing serious dog attacks.
Through our work, we hope to protect both people and pets from future attacks."
I took this to mean that this organization cared about all victims of all serious dog attacks. Ask them to change it to "serious pit bull attacks" if that is what they mean; I would do it myself but they have not responded to any of my inquiries in the past. Apparently they do not care about any of the people who are maimed or killed by dogs who do not fit the "pit bull" profile. The information I am interested in is not on the site. The founder is a woman who had an unfortunate run in with a dog and was hospitalized. She chose to blame the incident solely on the breed of dog involved. That's her problem. Until we start to focus on solutions that will make everyone safer, attacks will continue to happen by dogs of any breed.
How dare you or anyone else trivialize the pain, anguish, and trauma of my experience, or of anyone who has been mauled by any breed of dog. I find it horrifying that you would suggest that a victim of a non-pit related maiming or fatality is less important than those that are pit-related.
On the NCRC site, there is a detailed and extensive explanation of the research methodology used by Karen Delise. I'm sure your conspiracy-theory addled mind believes that it's all a lie, and there's nothing I can do to change that. But the information is there for you and everyone else who is interested in real, thorough, scientific research based on reality. It goes quite beyond simply finding an article in a paper. If we are going to come to name calling, then you, sir, are the nutter.

HonestyHelps said...

Staying true to the pit nutters with your lame excuses as if I haven't heard it all before. Like I said, find me those fatalities by Aussies, compare them to their population, then come back an talk. A recent study released by a major hospital in Philly had 30 breeds listed with pits and rotties doing 73% of the injuries out of those 30 breeds. Use a little common sense here, do the math. It adds up to priority, which ones to address and quickly. I'll take an attack by an Aussie before a pit bull, duh.