I read the article, but didn't bother to read the comments, as they're usually always the same, he's a saint, he's saved thousands that no one else could have, he's the last hope for so many dogs, he saved my dog, he's a genius, blah blah blah. Sure, for this author, under the circumstances mentioned, his techniques work. The author now goes into the shelter realizing that all dogs do not just need to be hugged immediately (no dog does, it's rude, esp to hug a dog you don't know, and most dogs just tolerate it), he now acts like a benevolent leader (well, good for him), and realizes that instead of being coddled, lots of shelter dogs need a walk or exercise (well, tah-dah!, he finally 'gets' dogs, they're not stuffed animals). What I find amazing is that it took Cesar to make him (and all his cult followers) realize that. Thing is, if exercise and bounderies were the only issues at hand, I'd have no problems with Cesar. In fact, I do agree with Cesar on those issues. So many dogs that people have troubles with are underexercised, undersocialized, and have no bounderies. So, in that light, I'm glad that author has taken those good points from Cesar's show, learned that no, he should not just assume all dogs need loads of affection. Especially in the case of shelter dogs, they're confused, sad, upset, fearful, nervous, etc - the last thing they need is a lunatic coming at them trying to hug them up. I think most would much prefer a nice quiet walk with a human who seems stable, and knows what they're doing. If that were all that people were taking away from Cesar, I don't think controversy would reign supreme.
Am going to attempt to 'retrain' her next time I see her - she's my hairdresser - we do not agree on dog training at all!
Not so great comments.
You probably wouldn't think that s/he would be seeking to dominate that child or would you? 
So, making decisions for dogs doesn't relate to dominance.