Sen. Mitt Romney criticized South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem for shooting her dog and rejected comparisons to his own controversial dog incident during the 2012 presidential campaign. Romney emphasized that he did not eat or shoot his dog, but rather loved his pet. Noem shared an anecdote from 20 years ago in which she shot her dog, claiming the dog was untrainable and dangerous. Despite facing criticism, Noem defended her actions, stating that she followed the law and was being a responsible dog owner. Other lawmakers on Capitol Hill, including Sen. Thom Tillis and Sen. John Cornyn, expressed confusion over Noem’s decision to include the story in her book.
Tillis, a dog lover who hosts a annual bipartisan dog parade in Washington, suggested that Noem could have found someone to train or rehabilitate the dog instead of shooting it. He described the situation as strange and not beneficial to anyone except for those who support killing animals. Sen. John Cornyn joked that the advice for Noem would be to not write books at all. South Dakota’s congressional delegation, however, defended Noem, stating that putting down animals is a private and personal decision, especially in rural America where it is not uncommon for farmers and ranchers to euthanize their own animals.
Despite the criticism, Noem stood by her decision to include the story in her book and maintained that she did what she believed was best for her family, her dog, and her neighbors. Lawmakers in Washington, however, questioned her actions and suggested alternative solutions for dealing with a difficult pet. Romney, in particular, distanced himself from the comparison to his own dog controversy, emphasizing the love he had for his pet and the care he took in their relationship. Ultimately, the debate over Noem’s actions highlighted differing perspectives on animal welfare and personal responsibility, with some defending her decision while others criticized it as unnecessary and extreme.
