Ah, Nicole. You really have missed your calling. If you just had better writing and grammar skills, you could have gone to work for the Trump campaign, spinning shit.
Somebody “started a smear campaign.” They “started a rumor” that Nicole had shot Ranger.
So she is producing the oft-demanded photo of Ranger, “in his new home.”
Is this Ranger?
I don’t know.
If it is Ranger, is it current?
I don’t know that either.
And it doesn’t matter.
You see, this isn’t about whether Ranger is okay or not. Of course, that little detail is very important to Ranger, and probably pretty important to the rescue people who did what they do so well, and offered to come to the rescue, but it’s not very important to me.
The story isn’t about what actually happened to Ranger. That is just Nicole’s deflection. It’s her changing the subject. It’s her turning herself into a victim.
The story is about a woman who is such a jerk, such a horrible piece-of-shit scrap of protoplasm, that she goes on social media and makes this threat.
He has one week to find a new home or he will have to be put to sleep.
That’s what she said. Notice how she words it? “He has one week to find a new home. . .” He has to find the new home? How is he supposed to do that? They kept him chained all the time. He couldn’t even go next door to the nice neighbor who feeds Maggie, the escape artist.
She does not say, “We have to find him a new home soon or he will have to be put to sleep.”
That would have been better, although still bad.
How about “We have to find a new home soon or we’ll have to take him to the animal shelter”? Far better.
Furthermore, I said it in the original piece I did about this, and I meant it. Nicole doesn’t do veterinary care. There is no way in hell they were gonna take that dog to the vet and have him put to sleep. “Put to sleep” meant “shot in the head in the woods.”
Everyone understood that.
And when somebody on her page objected, she retorted.
I can tell you how steers and pigs are killed. They are killed with a stun gun, by a professional who does that all day every day. (What an awful job, by the way.) They drop on the spot, unconscious. Lights out.
They are not shot in the back woods by amateurs who are children.
But you get the point.
Anyone with more than two brain cells understood that Nicole was justifying the fact that her threat was indeed to shoot Ranger.
As I pointed out in the other essay, she did this to herself. She let these dogs breed indiscriminately (and amazingly admits that Angel was pregnant again when she was abandoned and subsequently shot for being aggressive, pregnant with more puppies that nobody wants and nobody needs and that more than likely were carrying a genetic propensity that Nicole was aware of to be livestock killers). She created the entire problem.
They chain up those dogs. They used to let them just run loose, but the courts decided that wasn’t a great idea, so they now cannot. They cannot because they proved themselves to be irresponsible animal owners. That’s what happens when you don’t take care of your animals.
So they chain them up. And ignore them.
And then she acts like she’s being victimized when she goes on social media and tells us all about it and we respond with criticism.
But as far as this current situation is concerned, she put out a plea. Ranger had to find himself a new home (by golly, she was too God-damned busy to be bothered finding one for him) in a week, or pow.
People, being kind and basically decent, responded. A rescue stepped forward. Lots of suggestions were made, and even though she was too busy to do anything for the dog and demanded that everyone else do it for her, she found time to nix every suggestion.
And then she suddenly turned on the rescue people and banned the primary person.
These are not people I know. These are not people who knew anything at all about the Blessed Naugler Crap. They are just dog rescue folks.
After being rude as hell to these people, she quite off-handedly announces that Ranger has been “placed.” And then changes the subject.
And she wonders why this was not seen as enough. She wonders why people who she purposely and deliberately got all worked up by playing with their emotions and got them all invested in this dog and his tenuous future would be rather taken aback when they get no denouement. And she wonders why people who love to troll (the real kind, not her critics that she’s so fond of calling “trolls”) decided to descend up on her business page and give her back as good as she dished it out.
I wish I could feel sorry for this woman. However, I just can’t muster up any sympathy. She asked for this.
Regardless of Ranger’s current situation, she is an irresponsible animal owner and shouldn’t be trusted with anyone’s animal at any time, for any length of time.