Ellen DeGeneres' Doggone Nightmare

91. Maybe Ellen realized the dog was not Gay and didn't want it, ever think of that?

Posted at 5:58PM on Oct 15th 2007 by RST

92. First of all I am sure that being a Pet Lover and having adopted before from the Agency , the Agency knew that Ellen is a Animal Lover and would never hurt or put an animal in harms way. I am sure she would not have given it to this little girl if she thought it would not being taken care of. So they come in and take , they could have just inspected the home while they were there, but no that would be to much trouble for them, but it was no troule at all to get the cops involved ( Like they have nothing better to do then take a little girl's dog away) and these people wasted their time. Maybe they knew it would get them in the news, or maybe yet they were a little peeved that if Ellen would have taken it back they could have gotten a second adoption fee..........So they make a little girl cry by taking her dog away, but yet these people are suppose to be compassionate people , or they only compassionate for animals and don't care about humans and their feelings?

Posted at 5:59PM on Oct 15th 2007 by TwistyTristy

93. When you adopt a dog from an agency such as the one Ellen adopted her dog from, you sign a legally binding CONTRACT. Often times the contract states that if the dog is to be given up, it must be returned to the agency. What Ellen should have done is just that, and said to the agency I have a friend who is interested in this dog.. Then had her friend contact the agency. That would have avoided this mess.

The language is there in the contract to protect the animal, from further heart ache. If the friend met the agency's criteria .. they would have adopted it out to her.

This isn't about a12 year old losing her dog, it wasn't hthe child's dog to begin with!

This is about the protection of the dog and Ellen not complying with the contract she signed.

Posted at 7:18PM on Oct 15th 2007 by Sandy

94. I didn't have time to read all the comments, but I am thinking this...... What did the adoption agency do, run to the press with the info on Ellen just because she is a celebrity? If it was you or me nothing would have been said. I really think Ruby and her family should be able to have the doggie and the adoption agency should be thrilled someone else was able to give love to the pouch! Thanks for letting me make a comment here. I like Ellen very much and what if she didn't give it to anyone for 6 months, would there still be the same reaction? I doubt it.

Posted at 6:10PM on Oct 15th 2007 by Phylla Dilla

95. Okay, so we can give children to pedophiles and lunatics as foster kids, then when something terribly goes wrong we take them away again and give them to someone else who could be just as sick. Does anyone get the idea that freakin dogs are not people!

Posted at 6:02PM on Oct 15th 2007 by Where is the common sense

96. i always saw ppl from animal shelters encourage ppl to give the animals a GOOD HOme where they can grow old and probably die; Ellen succeeded in doing that but theyre still against it im sure its just a way to see how much money she can dish out to have Ruby keep her dog i mean sure she shouldve not violated the contract but sometimes helping out other beings is more important than pieces of paper

Posted at 6:03PM on Oct 15th 2007 by i vote for ellen

97. Wait a minute... Ellen is GAY???? I didn't see anything about that in the video. Wow, I wonder if the adoption agency found out and that's what all the fuss is about. What is with people making crazy comments over Ellen's sexual preference. I thought this was about a girl and a dog, and some power happy, attention seeking adoption agency. I'm glad that the cops went to reclaim the dog. Maybe the kid was a ninja, or a terrorist, and would not have allowed a home visit?? Cause I bet a home visit would have been all that was needed. Well that and another "minimum donation"
LOL

Posted at 6:13PM on Oct 15th 2007 by ridiculouzz

98. One of the agencies where I live has you sign a similar contract. They want to be certain that, if you get tired of the pet you adopt, you don't just dump it or give it to people who will use it as bait for dogfighting, etc. The contract is for the protection of the pet. However, in this case, the agency could have given the new family the paperwork to fill out to make certain they qualify to adopt, and left the dog with them as a "foster family" temporarily until the paperwork was completed. It sounds like a case of an overzealous adoption agency worker looking for his/her "15 minutes of fame." Certainly the worker was not looking out for the best interests of the dog. Bringing the police?!! Surely, even in southern California, they have better things to do......

Posted at 6:25PM on Oct 15th 2007 by Bonnie, Concord, CA

99. Those people are so dumb, give the little girl back her dog!!

Posted at 10:18AM on Oct 16th 2007 by kay

100. I adopted my dog from a rescue lady on petfinders. I signed the same type of agreement. I would never have given the dog back to the rescue lady . She was obsessed with saving dogs from shelters and could not properly take care of them. I spent several hundred dollars nursing my dog back to health. She was infested with worms, ticks and fleas. I don't have anything positive to say about animal rescue groups.

Posted at 6:15PM on Oct 15th 2007 by jf

101. Just go to a breeder next time problem solved! shelters suck

Posted at 6:30PM on Oct 15th 2007 by Deelicious

102. You've got to be kidding me. What the hell was that woman trying to prove? Why couldn't the family just fill out the paperwork and keep the dog? A sensible person would reason that a family that WANTED the dog and already HAD the dog would be a GOOD HOME for the dog.... and then there's the CRAZIES that show up on that family's doorstep with the freakin' COPS to take it back because they didn't have complete and utter CONTROL over said animal. Some "Rescue" people really need to get over themselves.

Posted at 6:19PM on Oct 15th 2007 by deanna

103. Give the girl back the dog! Poor ellen, she was just trying to find the dog a good home, the police have to ruin everything

Posted at 7:52PM on Oct 15th 2007 by Velissa

104. On their website it says "Mutts & Moms does not place little dogs with children under the age of 13." Maybe that has something to do with it.

Posted at 6:17PM on Oct 15th 2007 by Muffin

105. Why didn't Ellen just call and tell the adaption agency she was giving the dog away? She couldn't have know it was in the contract. Or did she;( That would be sad for the little girl, because then Ellen set her up for this disappointment. I doubt Ellen did this on purpose.

Posted at 6:24PM on Oct 15th 2007 by DCD