DPCA Elections

[Elaine]

Many of you are members of the Doberman Pinscher Club of America and therefore are probably also members of the DPCA members email list. If so, you are no doubt aware of a mess brewing, which we should discuss here. This mess is yet another example of an oft-repeated dynamic within our club, that is proving absolutely toxic to the DPCA. I will let a few others explain what is going on.

[Kissntell]

Regretfully, there have always been messes in this club. I became a member back in 1987 and then dropped out in my own protest in 1997. I thought there was too much fighting within the club.

Later, I found that to be a mistake; because, now I cannot be back on the "Breeders" directory for three years since I just renewed my membership last year.

This club has always been riddled with problems.

The bottom line is its really about power and money. Its that way in the entire world.

My dropping out in protest years ago did nothing but cut off my nose in spite of my face. Now I am treated like a "brand new" member.

I'll let others brave enough to speak out as to what's going on.

Right now I have no idea.

But I remember years ago getting letter after letter sent by regular mail the fight had gone so bad with each side's position. A real "he said, she said" game it was. I wasn't envolved then in positions; but, I thought the club was not going in the right direction then; so, I stopped supporting it. Others didn't take that course.

[Athy]

"Organizations, which have for their professed aim the improvement and welfare of the Dobermann, are only mentioned herein in connection with their stud books and registration records. Thirty years of experience has taught me that such organizations do less for the professed purpose of their existence than for the individuals composing their management. They are frequently turned into arenas for the riotous exaltation of personages and a brand of politics most oppressing and damaging to the breed. The best proof of this can be found in the demonstrable fact that with few exceptions the leaders in these organizations have never produced anything worth recording."

Philipp Gruenig 1934

[pretty dobe]

How right you are right on the politics that are going on right now...You have Cheri with her pitbull starting it and sweet Cheri offering her opinions. Then you have her minions writing what she wants or what she stirs them up to do.... Good folks get hurt with that brand of garbage going on. It's a pattern that she has down pat....

The treasurer was stepping down and they had another gal running. Something showed up that made her step down. Roger decided to step up and fill the gap. Then Robin was back in running and Cheri hates Eve so Roger gets trashed.

You could say politics, the dirty kind.....

I don't know anything about Robin but some have complained about the lack of accounting for the Nationals. Just know that a breath of fresh air is needed in several areas of the DPCA......We have a chance to start putting that fresh air in there this year. People that don't follow the leader or get intimidated too easily.

I find thes type of attacks really smell to high heaven....

[Kissntell]

Funny how my email box is getting the election "materials."

Now I notice that not all "materials" are being sent to everyone. So I am also getting "forwarded materials." Why are some getting emails and others not? Shouldn't it be that all get the emails? So are these being aimed at those who might sway the vote?

This is what I have to say:

Really, I don't know a lot of the people. So you have to take that with what I am about to say.

Long ago when Joe Chaccio was alive, he took it upon himself to mentor me. He really knew his standard and wanted to pass on his knowledge. I remember him saying, "If you are going to be in the breed you might as well know the breed." He came to my house and spent the entire day grading my puppies and explaining the why's. He would take no money. He didn't even eat or want lunch.

Joe was friends with the Auch's. He bought some dogs from them. So I have always felt close to them even though I have not ever bought from them nor even met them. Joe was always a good man who knew who was on the ups and honest. That is why I felt the Auchs must be on the ups.

Thus, when I am in a quandry re anything of this breed, being that Joe is no longer here, it is them that I go to. I believe that birds of a feather flock together.

I have found that they were always there to help me. It didn't matter that I never physically met them, nor had one of their dogs.

I recently spent and hour and ten minutes talking to Eve on the phone. Bless her for the time out of her day. It was the love and concern for the breed that she too took out the time, just as Joe.

So Rodger has my vote. They really don't know me except that I have told them that at one time Joe Chaccio helped me and mentored me.

How much better can you get? They are there even though there was no money envolved. They both give freely of their knowledge.

I cannot say more for this couple. I hope that they get into the DPCA. They are honest, and most helpful, to everyone, including me, who really is a nobody who has hung around the breed for some time now.

Rodger has been so good and helpful everytime I have called up there. There is never any blaming, just sound mentoring and advice to the breed.

Thanks, this is what I wanted to say re Rodger's desire to Treasurer the club.

[Athy]

I have always found the Auchs to be good people as well.

I read the DPCA's position paper on DPCA_on_Line. Then I read someone's post about the "lawsuit". All I can say is this: some members of the current DPCA board have an inordinate desire to control, control, control. So they do things that I believe put the DPCA in a dangerous position.

The white paper that Cheri published (and that's all it was) went on about how lawsuits are bad for the DPCA. Well excuse my French but no shit. Lawsuits are bad all right. So any board worth its salt will deport itself in a way that is risk averse - instead some members of the current board will push an issue until the recipient finally sues in order to back them. That is not the behavior of a responsible board - that's bullying behavior.

I agree with many others who have stated that it's time for change. I believe that Jan Van Wormer will be a good president for us. I have spoken to her many times and I think she's a good person. I would like to see more change on the board and maybe, just maybe, the DPCA can get back to the business of protecting the breed instead of the constant back biting and infighting we see right now.

My vote is going to Roger and Mimi. It's time for new blood on the board, plain and simple.

JMHO.

Athy

[perfdogs]

It keeps being reported that Robin decided to run when Nancy dropped out. That's not exactly how I interpreted the timing. Nancy dropped out--Robin is on the BoD, so she knew as soon as anyone. However, she did not submit a petition until AFTER Roger submitted his petition. If no one had run, Robin would have been perfectly happy to let someone be appointed. Therefore I have to believe she would have been happy with anyone except Roger.....or was OK with who was being proposed to be appointed. Anone but Roger....does that have a bit of Cheri vendetta ring to it?

Point 2: Robin learned to do the IRS forms somewhere. Roger is a smart man--at least 2 degrees that I know of. He certainly could learn the forms just as Robin did. OR he could consult the IRS---the offer assistance as well. or God forbid, he could follow last year's forms or get help from the exiting treasurer if all documentation is turned over.

Point 3: In this economy, any money we can save is a good thing. Roger has the time to devote to the job. Robin says she did not, so we hired someone to do the day-to-day job at a cost of $9600. That's almost $10,000 a year that can go back into other causes if Roger is elected.

Point 4: A grievance was not heard against Roger, nor was he sued. His guilt in this case was simply be associated with Eve and we all know how much Cheri hates Eve, therefore she and her followers will attack Roger for that reason only.

Point 5: We need an audit. It is obvious there is no intention to give the info to the membership--otherwise we would have had it already. The thinking seems to be if the IRS is satisfied we should be too. NOT!!!!!! I and others want to see an accounting.

Point 6: It's simply time for a change! For the last several years we've been only given one nominee for each position. In effect, a hand picked committee has chosen the next set of officers for you. There is no real election/choice unless someone runs from the floor. It's time to select our own officers---not simply accept those that are chosen for us. With almost 1500 members, I'm sure there can be at least 2 candidates for every office if an effort is made. This time we at least have a choice on 2 positions because 2 people are willing to endure the wrath of the internet Queen--and it can be brutal, painful and untruthful!

Please Vote!!! This time it is possible to generate a change!!!!!
Sharon

[pretty dobe]

Sharon you are spot on in your take in this. I find it sad that because of having their own forum they can keep spreading their form of hate and nastyness against a decent person.... I don't want to open my DPCA posts anymore because I've had enough it....and if that isn't bad enough, they are now on the other dobe sites doing it....

There is a fellow on the DPCA forum that has been asking good questions and no one is answering them. Ignoring him like he isn't there. His name is Ken Herrmann. I don't know him but he seems to have a good level perspective of things. I think his questions have merit.

A good lively debate should be happening on the DPCA site instead of the stuff they are letting through. Also the folks should be answering the questions that are being asked. Nothing should come through with the personal stuff..... I don't think an accounting for the nationals is out of line...I feel it is way overdue.

Judie

[perfdogs]

With permission to cross-post from Bill Garnett

<<Dear DPCA and List Members,
Over the passed week or so I have read various posts regarding the
Treasurer nominee of the DPCA and for whatever reason, it has bought the attack dogs
out in force. God! What's happening to us? We are fast approaching a point
where no one would dare run for a position on the DPCA's Board for fear of
character assassination and being publicly humiliated. What's wrong with us?
Why are we so angry? Why do we treat one another the way we do? It's a damn
dog club . . . pure and simple. Life is too short and friendships are too
hard to come by.

Over the years I have watched the same thing that's going on now repeat
itself over and over. The big dogs . . . in these scrimmages . . . as usual,
hold forth while the little dogs circle the camp snipping and snapping and for
the most part doing whatever they think will curry favor with the big dogs.
I could go on and on with this dietribe but in the interest of brevity and
hopefully some apperance of nutrality I'm going to attempt to cut to the
chase and try to make sense of a pitiful situation.

As we all know the DPCA's nominating committee came up with a list of
nominees to fill the various DPCA offices. One office in particular, the
Treasurer, has caused a great deal of interest or as one might put it . . . debate.
Now . . . follow the bouncing ball . . . if you can. The Board of Director's
original nominee for Treasurer for whatever reason, after accepting the
nomination, at the last moment withdrew her name. That action momentarily left
only the write in or petition candidate to pursue the office. But not for
long. Surprisingly or not so surprising the retiring Treasurer, who opted not
to run because of the heavy work load at her place of employment, reentered
the fray and that is where we stand at this moment.

As usual, in these matters, the fur has begun to fly and the attack dogs
are snapping and baying, all the while, predicting the demise of the DPCA . .
. if we don't follow their lead.

So this is the situation . . . as I see it. The first write in or petition
candidate lost favor with the big shots because some years ago his wife was
part of a group of people that sued or countersued the DPCA. For that
reason there are those who say, and have suggested, that the first petition
candidate is guilty of something, if only through association or possibly osmosis
and have gone as far as labeling him " a fox in the hen house." As I
understand it, the suit did cost the DPCA a lot of time and money defending
itself. I think to the tune of $10,000.00 or more, because of a deductible clause
in it's insurance policy. I personally have a problem with the DPCA having
to spend that kind of money defending itself against, what I considered a
frivolous law suit that should have never been brought to bare in the first
place. But, be that as it may, I make mention of this because it appears to be
the primary sword that is being dangled over the head of the write-in
candidate who is the husband of one of the litigants. Has anyone out there ever
heard the old saying, "the sins of the farther should never be vested on the
son." I think not.

Any way, some years later the husband of one of the accused has decided to
run for the office of Treasurer of the DPCA and all hell has broken loose.
The attack dogs are out in force and have made it their personal crusade, for
whatever reason, to marshall all their forces to see to it that this man is
not elected to the position of Tresurerer. His credintials have been
questioned, and in a sense denigrated, even though he gradurated with a business
and an accounting degree from a University that one would not consider chump
change in the field of acadimic excellance. If this man has an Acilles heel
one would have to suspect it would be along the lines of being a gluton for
punisment. So, at this point, I find myself asking. What could possibly be
his motivation to put up with this mess? Could it be that he just wants to
serve the DPCA and in so doing save it the $9,600.00 dollars a year that we
are presently paying an outside accountant to do the job that our elected
Treasurer. by her own admission, has not the time to perform? By my calculation,
we have already spent well over $20,000.00 to an outside accountant to take
care of the business that we elected her to do. For some reason . . . that
keeps being glossed over in the majority of the post that I have read.

Now, the posting that really slays me is the one that the big dogs don't
want to discuss . . . the nominating committee's first choice. The one who
took a high school course in accounting. It certainly wouldn't be a stretch to
think that the committee oviously felt she was qualified or they would not
have nominated her. Is that not a fair assumption? But the attack dogs want
to discount this person all together, remove her from the equation, as if she
never existed. Why? And this is only my speculation. Because, not to do so
would draw attention to the question or concerns as to what criteria or
screening process does the committee use in nominating candidates in the first
place. Plus it would make the first petitioner's qualifications look all that
more imposing.

Now the plot thickens. Once, this person with the high school accounting
course withdrew her name form consideration (again for reasons no one has yet
to elaborate on) it appears that the old Treasurer, who didn't have time to
do the job in he first place suddenly found the time and has asked to be
reinstated as a candidate. But, it is also my understanding, if elected she
will only serve long enough for the Board to find her replacement. Not the
membership . . . you understand . . . but the Board! I find it interesting that
no one seems to have a problem with that. But then again politics and
personal sentiments have a way of glossing over issues.

At this point, I realize that nothing I have written in this post is going
to change the way we operate. But in some fashion it may open the eyes and
minds of a few. Our club is . . . what it is . . . a gathering of a lot of
good people . . . a hand full of devotees . . . and a fist full of controlling
. . . self-serving big shots. I really don't have a dog in this hunt. If I
vote, I most likely will vote for the guy that's getting butchered . . .
for he may be he most honarable of the whole pack.

To comment on how Mimi Brown was mugged would only serve to raise my blood
pressure. And since I had a four way by-pass two years ago I will refrain
from such action . . . only to say that I most defiantly will vote for her.
For the love of Dobermans,
Bill Garnett >>

[Elaine]

I have largely stayed out of this mess… but I wonder why Bill is so reluctant to name names here.

I really do not want to wade into over 300 emails in my inbox, most of which that seem to be from McNealy or her buddies. I read a few early on, where Cheri McNealy is quoting Jeff Helsdon’s summary of the Eve Ach lawsuit. In typical attorney hyperbole (a.k.a inflammatory bs), Jeff rants on and on, but never once indicates that he even remotely grasps Ms Auch’s side of the issues (and of course she had her side, though I doubt that Helsdon's ego would allow him to see it). Instead Helsdon is a fear monger, blaming Auch for just about everything but Kennedy’s assassination. What would have happened back then if Helsdon had dropped his line of hype and bs and simply tried to understand the issues in a calm dispassionate manner? Maybe the problems would have been resolved without the destructive litigation. Who knows? It seems to me that all Helsdon did was fan the fumes of an incendiary situation and make things worse. And McNealy (using Cyberdobes) made an even bigger mess of it all. We have seen this dynamic again and again, where Sam Burke, Jeff Helsdon and Cheri McNealy use Cyberdobes to pursue some myopic, petty, self-serving agenda. It’s enough already! Good, bad or indifferent, these three have done enough. They need to move on down the road. The club will survive without them… it will probably flourish without them. Who knows, we may even find some middle ground of unity, where DPCA members can all work together to serve the breed. Hey, there’s a novel idea… that the DPCA could focus its energy on building unity and serving the breed.

Frankly, if McNealy, Helsdon, and Burke owned Dobermans and/or were actually engaged – hands on – day in and day out - in all the glamorous things it takes to breed, own and show Dobermans in 2009, which includes the really fun stuff, like tending to the whelping box, taping a litter of puppy' ears, doing toe nails, scrubbing food bowls, scooping poop… and standing with your puppies out on the lawn at 2:00 am waiting for the precious bundle of love to finally take a dump so that you can get back to bed and be fresh for the morning’s onslaught of fun… if they were doing these things, they’d have a lot less time to cause such unnecessary turmoil in everyone’s else’s life.

At some point, hopefully sooner than later, these three will be gone. It’s easy to see what their legacy to the DPCA will be. These three will leave behind years of chaos and dissention… that has proven absolutely toxic to our club. Fast as McNealy can type, if she started now, she would not live long enough to type all the apologies she needs to send. Sadly, some of the wonderful people she and Burke maligned are no longer even with us. I imagine that they are watching over this all from above.. utterly amazed at the ugliness and utter waste of humanity.

Those of us who actually own, breed and show this marvelous breed, and deal day-in-and-day-out with the infinite minutia of joys, sorrows and challenges that go along with producing mentally and physically happy healthy Dobermans, seem to connect to the single most important reason we are members of the DPCA. For us, our DPCA membership is about the dogs, and about serving the breed we own and love. Our DPCA membership is not about our endless ego driven schemes; rather, our energies are spent on the Dobes, on the thousand and one things we do each and every day expressing in a tangible manner our devotion and commitment to this wonderful breed. We do not waste our time on endless schemes, attempting to undermine or destroy some perceived enemy in pursuit of a very petty agenda. AS a club, the DPCA needs to put the Helsdons, McNealys and Burkes of this world far behind us and move forward, united in the single purpose of advancing the true interests of this amazing breed in every possible way.

[Athy]

Elaine wrote: "AS a club, the DPCA needs to put the Helsdons, McNealys and Burkes of this world far behind us and move forward, united in the single purpose of advancing the true interests of this amazing breed in every possible way"

Well said, Elaine. We as a club have spent far too much time chasing after political vendettas and in many cases putting the club itself in precarious situations. Time to refocus on the business of protecting and enhancing the breed and the sport of showing dogs.


Athy

[Kissntell]

I've only gotten about two emails re the running for office. They did not look inappropiate.

So this war must be going on with a few chosen enemies.

I know nothing about these internet strings; and most of the people I have spoken with do not follow what's going on with the DPCA. They are members and show their dogs and that's it.

I never knew the Auchs had a lawsuit. I know nothing about it. I voted on what I did know. They have shown me intergerity. That's what I voted on. The others running I know nothing of. Maybe I'm out of the link....maybe others are too because the people I know are totally unaware.

So that leads me to a question: How many people are really following this crap? Most people I talk too don't know any of this stuff.

This stuff was/has been going on I believe since the history of the club. It is after all about money and power; that's the bottom line.

[Elaine]

I've only gotten about two emails re the running for office. They did not look inappropiate.
... Most people I talk too don't know any of this stuff.



You’re joking right. :eek: That’s about like saying you aren’t aware there is a war in Iraq.

There are roughly 300 emails in my inbox right now from the DPCA members only list on this frickin topic. Are you a member of the DPCA_on_line members only list?

Don’t know what sources you rely upon for information, but I have an inkling based on your posts here. You are like many people in dogs who have been in the sport (or at the fringes of it) for years and years, and still haven’t a clue what is really going on, who is runniing things and who’s agenda is actually being pursued. Too many people rely on ring side gossip (from folks like Moe and his wife)... which is fun and all, but these sorts of people are not known for understanding complex issues that relate to the governance of our sport. The most you’re likely to get from a handler like Moe is who is going to win under a certain judge... and why. Handlers like Moe know one narrow aspect of the sport, but they do not follow topics that are not directly related to a win on the day. Heck, at the Brown Trial Board Moe could barely remember his own name.

Humans are assessment machines. We act on (vote on) the assessments we make. When our assessments are based on ignorance (or, to be more polite, on our utter lack of accurate information), the quality of our vote suffers accordingly, which directly impacts the quality of leadership we have representing us. We should all become informed on this issue and other important dog-related issues that impact our breed, our club and the sport in general. There is really no excuse for not knowning what is going on... these sorts of things impact us all.

As a club, we need to be informed and then be active. The control that McNealy has, through Sam Burke, has been absolutely toxic to the DPCA. Regardless of whether you are sick to death of them or you still get a warm fuzzy feeling from them, their influence has lasted far too long. We need fresh leadership. We have a depth of untapped talent within the membership of the DPCA. The McNealys and Burkes of the world (and of the DPCA) need to move on down the road. I can’t think of one person I respect in the DPCA who has not said so in private.

[Kissntell]

I am unaware of what went on over the last 10 years since I dropped out of the club for awhile. So really...I keep asking what happened with McNealy and no one will tell me. Really, it doesn't matter to me. I've met her long ago. I don't know her that well.

I was involved very much in the putting on of the National once. I saw the "politicing" going on. I saw what people were doing to become "President" of the club and watched the "wine parties." So...I think I do know. And...I know the importance of status and power in the club. This is what the fight has always been about. Its really nothing new.

No one influences me in my thoughts and decisions. I am a real good observer though. That is someting that just comes naturally for me.

I do have some respect for some members that have been in longer than me and showing longer than me. Some of these people believe it or not know their stuff. Eve Auch is one of them.

I think your group is very spoiled because you have access to some of the best handlers in the Nation. Its not that easy here. That of course is my opinion.

For me part of the fun of showing is watching what people are doing and planning what will happen according to who may show up. I guess I got that left over from the horse show days. You see for me, the show is really the end result of what has been going on far before the entry. It is a lot of training; but it is also a lot of who's doing what. Its sort of like a poker game and its full of bluffs and surprises. This is the fun of the game for me.

I enter in a show in a different mode than is overtly spoken of. Everybody does. You think I don't know what these handlers are up to? It is hard to find an honest one that will really work for you. That is why so many people have dropped out of showing dogs. I remember the entries were really large at one time. I found some of my old entries and was surprised at the number of people showing and the number counts.

So it is not just hire a handler. It is what the handlers are doing. That is what I am watching. Who is the priority dog and who is just wasting money? Who has the ethics? There's a lot of money being wasted. That's why the commoner dropped out.

In answer to your question, I am probably out of the loop because I never joined those internet groups. I received an invitation but never walked through that door. I chose to stay out of that room. I saw this same problem years ago and dropped out of the club. How many others made this strong of a statement? Nobody...just me.

But really...I don't know all the people that you do. I'm not sure I would want to because it just may spoil the sport for me.

By the way...I just spoke from someone from Argentina and that was a wealth of information about the SA stuff. Now I understand my girl much better.

Isn't it intersting how some people can blow things up and make issues with them? I really get tired of it. Look at that poor woman who made a 911 call trying to look out for her neighbor and got caught in a "racist issue war" that they found out later never existed.

I'm not saying anything is right or wrong. I don't know what's going on with the DPCA members. I think they have some wierd rules. But what I also think is that they don't even enforce them.

So I am glad to not be any part of the power wars. I think a good dog with an honest handler should be able to hold its own. That's all I look for.

[Elaine]

I am running down to the barn for my daily Glamour Routine/ Mud Spa treatment. :D:o:rolleyes: Just had to comment on one thing you said that really hit a chord with me. I am so so so sick of people with egos and agendas making everyone else’s life a living hell with their idiotic, petty, malicious schemes, that continue, one-after-another-after-another ... all of which hurts good people and drives them away from our club and our breed. I am so tired of good people (e.g. Ann Lanier, Eve Auch, Athy, etc. etc. etc. ) being maligned and attacked by creatures like Burke and McNealy.

Ann is gone now, but her positive contribution to our breed will live on forever. She leaves a legacy that reflects positively on who she was… i.e., a bright, warm, thoughtful, compassionate woman devoted to the best interests of our breed. She is greatly missed by those who knew her. Creatures like Burke and McNealy will leave a legacy of chaos and derision. I can’t think of a soul who will miss either of them.

If McNealy, Helsdon or Burke actually spent time - hands on - with Dobermans they would connect to what the rest of us know. It is an honor and a privilege to have our marvelous Dobermans share our lives… they require our total love and devotion. Those of us who are attending to our dogs (horses, goats, chickens, guppies or whatever) simply don’t have the time or energy for the McNealys and Burkes of the world.

We need leadership in the DPCA made up of true Dog People… who, own, breed, show and love the dogs. We do not need these other nasty destructive morons who have proven to be so divisive over the past decade or so.

I will give you this… it is not easy to be "in the loop." There are all sorts of road blocks to knowing what the heck is going on. Sometimes at the heart of “the loop” is a big secret that you simply can’t share. Sometimes there are good reasons for not secrecy (e.g., AKC Trial Boards are largely conducted privately, and witnesses are sequestered, so very few people really know or understand what goes on and the privacy allows some measure of protection for those wrongly accused). Lots of people rely upon gossip, which, even if initially based on truth, is distorted exponentially as it is passed on from one person to another. Many in dogs don't understand who is in control and/or what control they actually have. The very structure of the AKC’s Delegate Body (and the Board) is one of secrecy (e.g., the press are not allowed in Delegate meetings). Many club members of AKC member clubs haven’t a clue how their delegates vote, or even what the issues are. And many delegates have historically used the Delegate meetings merely to advance their judging careers. The Delegates have a members only chat list, which everyone else is barred from viewing or participating in (this, for a Non-profit dog registry). People who don't use the top professional handlers, or have never specialed a dog with a handler, usually haven't a clue what is going on in and out of the ring, with trading judging assignments for wins and all sorts of other favors passing back and forth in exchange for wins. Worse still, many key positions at AKC are held by former handlers, who are not necessarily suited (by virtue of their life experience or education) for the positions they hold. For example, I can’t think of a bigger disasters for AKC than Mark Threlfell (sp?) and Pete Gaeta. But then, who ever hired Sam Perry should have been smacked in the head too. In a very real sense, we have the leadership we deserve.

[Kissntell]

You are right. Dog shows are not fair. I see all the time dogs/bitches getting a championship which are really totally pet quality. Why is this? We all know why. Its either the handler or the owner and their stake in the dog. It then goes to future stakes. (Judging assignments etc.) It makes me sick because then the breed suffers because they say Ch so and so. To me the dog is not a champion. But it is bred again like it is. This ruiens the breed standard. No wonder we are seeing U Necks, Stove Pipe Necks, Keel Bone Fronts, Croopy Butts, etc. A major one right now is the Keel Bone Front.

Its really about money and power.

I am older than many here. I think I am even older than you too Elaine. So my life is not so much time left as before. But I have seen many things during my lifetime. If I had known these things I would have approached things differently.

I too built organizations. As soon as they really took hold, here came the people wanting to take it over. They never put in the work that I did. It hurt me too very much the lies that ensued. The problem was that most of the membership in the group couldn't see what was going on. There are many people out there that want to do that to a good group, whatever interest it may represent, for power. I never really realized it until it happened to me.

But it all goes back to this INTERERGITY! That is what I have. That may be all I have. People who know me know that I call things as I see them and am very real in my answers. I am one of the few who doesn't bend things around. I simply hate that. So when I meet others who are of my same following I cherish them. I think that the word HONESTY and its meaning has left the American culture. It is truely a thing of the past.

I am sorry for you to be caught up in this nastness. I've been there and done that. That is why I never joined that internet group. But you know, I know others too who have never joined the group. They are voting and voting without knowing the trash. Maybe they can help change this problem in the club.

I have to qualify my eariler statement. My dear friend Lois who is now in her mid 80's and had some nice dogs in many peoples' pedigrees dropped out of the club with me at the same time. She too felt that to continue supporting the club via money was not in the benefit of the breed.

Have fun and be glad you have the strength to muck stalls. I dearly miss the use of my arms. They are so weak now, quite frankly, this is not the breed for me to handle. They are too strong and powerful. Yet I still love them.

[Lou's mom]

Wowsa.

I thought fire department politics were bad, but then I read the last few posts.


...Humans are assessment machines. We act on (vote on) the assessments we make. When our assessments are based on ignorance (or, to be more polite, on our utter lack of accurate information), the quality of our vote suffers accordingly, which directly impacts the quality of leadership we have representing us....


Elaine's words could illustrate so many things.... I suppose it's all politics in the end, eh? Or is that how the Devil keeps him/herself entertained?