Dan Mahoney has Conan's Fate in his Hands

It is not up to Monica. Dan is the one who adopted him as far as the Orange
County Shelter is concerned, so he is Conan's owner. Dan is the one who
boarded Conan at the kennel near his house.

It is entirely up to Dan what happens to this cat, so we might as well leave
Monica out of it.

Mary wrote:

It is entirely up to Dan what happens to this cat, so we might as well leave
Monica out of it.

If Monica never had a say so, she sure milked the notion that she had
control.

She sho never corrected anyones thinking; she coulda said, "it's outta
my hands".

On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 19:38:27 -0400, "Mary" wrote:

It is not up to Monica. Dan is the one who adopted him as far as the Orange
County Shelter is concerned, so he is Conan's owner. Dan is the one who
boarded Conan at the kennel near his house.

It is entirely up to Dan what happens to this cat, so we might as well leave
Monica out of it.

Monica is in control because she paid for it. Dan is just the hired
ape who does the legwork. He's got no money, remember? That's how
come he takes charity from people on the Internet.

Charlie

Charlie Wilkes wrote:

Monica is in control because she paid for it. Dan is just the hired
ape who does the legwork. He's got no money, remember? That's how
come he takes charity from people on the Internet.

Charlie

yeah, any old monkey could do his job,lol.

Charlie Wilkes wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 19:38:27 -0400, "Mary" wrote:

It is not up to Monica. Dan is the one who adopted him as far as the
Orange County Shelter is concerned, so he is Conan's owner. Dan is
the one who boarded Conan at the kennel near his house.

It is entirely up to Dan what happens to this cat, so we might as
well leave Monica out of it.

Monica is in control because she paid for it. Dan is just the hired
ape who does the legwork. He's got no money, remember? That's how
come he takes charity from people on the Internet.

Charlie

Think of it not as taking charity, but as taking a non refundable deposit.
This qualifies the potential buyers.

On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 14:20:31 GMT, "Philip"
wrote:

Charlie Wilkes wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 19:38:27 -0400, "Mary" wrote:

It is not up to Monica. Dan is the one who adopted him as far as the
Orange County Shelter is concerned, so he is Conan's owner. Dan is
the one who boarded Conan at the kennel near his house.

It is entirely up to Dan what happens to this cat, so we might as
well leave Monica out of it.

Monica is in control because she paid for it. Dan is just the hired
ape who does the legwork. He's got no money, remember? That's how
come he takes charity from people on the Internet.

Charlie

Think of it not as taking charity, but as taking a non refundable deposit.
This qualifies the potential buyers.

I'm referring to the veterinary bills for his other cat.

I am very careful about who I accept money from, Philip. How about
you? My experience has been that people who are careless about
accepting money from strangers are careless about personal
responsibility in general.

Charlie

Charlie Wilkes wrote:

I am very careful about who I accept money from, Philip. How about
you? My experience has been that people who are careless about
accepting money from strangers are careless about personal
responsibility in general.

Charlie

You still goin round and round with Philip.

I figured him out. He'll agree with you one something, and then raise a
"New Objection", there's got to be a word for this.

It gives one the impression they have changed his mind, so now, onto
the "New" objection..

Sukerrrrrr

Charlie Wilkes wrote:
On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 14:20:31 GMT, "Philip"
wrote:

Charlie Wilkes wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 19:38:27 -0400, "Mary" wrote:

It is not up to Monica. Dan is the one who adopted him as far as the
Orange County Shelter is concerned, so he is Conan's owner. Dan is
the one who boarded Conan at the kennel near his house.

It is entirely up to Dan what happens to this cat, so we might as
well leave Monica out of it.

Monica is in control because she paid for it. Dan is just the hired
ape who does the legwork. He's got no money, remember? That's how
come he takes charity from people on the Internet.

Charlie

Think of it not as taking charity, but as taking a non refundable
deposit. This qualifies the potential buyers.

I'm referring to the veterinary bills for his other cat.

I am very careful about who I accept money from, Philip. How about
you? My experience has been that people who are careless about
accepting money from strangers are careless about personal
responsibility in general.

Charlie

I GRACIOUSLY accept all contributions to my private foundation and to Hip
Pocket Bank. Lending money is another matter. Never lend money you cannot
afford to lose. I agree with your closing premise. In particular, lawyers
are always out to screw a lender and accountants are always upside-down.



Never borrow money except where the interest is deductable on your taxes,
ie, a house.

Charlie Wilkes wrote:

I am very careful about who I accept money from, Philip. How about
you? My experience has been that people who are careless about
accepting money from strangers are careless about personal
responsibility in general.

For the record, as I was following the Harri thread because it
initially sounded like she had what one of my cats has, Dan never asked
people for money. It's just a thing they do on rpca, *a lot*, I've
noticed. They even have a standing PayPal account set up to donate
money to any of the regulars on the group who need help, and not just
veterinary help but any sort of help...plane tickets to visit family,
etc. I assume Dan has probably donated to other people in the past.
But, actually, in his case with his sick cat recently, no one kept a
list of who donated specifically. From what I read, when people called
the vet's office to donate, they weren't even asked their names, just
their credit card number so he doesn't even know who donated and they
all know he doesn't know. At least that prevents the "being beholden"
thing. He does have a job and all, he just had some bad luck lately
work and personal problems. People *wanted* to donate.

I don't know what his involvement with Monica was Conan and I admit
it's odd that he didn't initially respond to Mary's emails after the
rescue but, if I were him, I don't think I would respond now. It's too
lame to try to defend yourself, especially if you think you were right,
and it just sounds like weak, BS excuses, so it's best to take the
"high ground" and let people deduce what they may. Some will always
think he was involved; others will never think he was involved. I
doubt we will ever know what really happened that day no matter how
long we talk about it and try to figure it out. It's an entertaining
little mystery and I do feel bad that Conan is not yet placed but as
for Dan's "double agent" duty, we will probably never know what
occurred.

Candace

"Candace" wrote in message
ps.com...


Charlie Wilkes wrote:

I am very careful about who I accept money from, Philip. How about
you? My experience has been that people who are careless about
accepting money from strangers are careless about personal
responsibility in general.

For the record, as I was following the Harri thread because it
initially sounded like she had what one of my cats has, Dan never asked
people for money. It's just a thing they do on rpca, *a lot*, I've
noticed. They even have a standing PayPal account set up to donate
money to any of the regulars on the group who need help, and not just
veterinary help but any sort of help...plane tickets to visit family,
etc. I assume Dan has probably donated to other people in the past.
But, actually, in his case with his sick cat recently, no one kept a
list of who donated specifically. From what I read, when people called
the vet's office to donate, they weren't even asked their names, just
their credit card number so he doesn't even know who donated and they
all know he doesn't know. At least that prevents the "being beholden"
thing. He does have a job and all, he just had some bad luck lately
work and personal problems. People *wanted* to donate.

I don't know what his involvement with Monica was Conan and I admit
it's odd that he didn't initially respond to Mary's emails after the
rescue but, if I were him, I don't think I would respond now. It's too
lame to try to defend yourself, especially if you think you were right,
and it just sounds like weak, BS excuses, so it's best to take the
"high ground" and let people deduce what they may. Some will always
think he was involved; others will never think he was involved. I
doubt we will ever know what really happened that day no matter how
long we talk about it and try to figure it out. It's an entertaining
little mystery and I do feel bad that Conan is not yet placed but as
for Dan's "double agent" duty, we will probably never know what
occurred.

Candace


I know that Dan was involved, Candace. I cannot imagine anyone
having any doubt. But you are entitled to your opinion, too. Still,
you know that the response of an innocent person would have
been an instant reply to the effect of "No, no, no! This is what
happened." That is what common sense dictates. He is guilty.
He is a liar, and he is responsible for that cat still being in a
cage. Once one knows that someone is capable of this kind
of deceit it changes everything. (He is the man reflected in Conan's
left eye--his build and the shape of his big Irish head are
unmistakeable.)