Political & Elections

catahoula · Guru

RE: WTF? CC just deleted the Thank You New York Thread

DonnaL · Senior Member

That's pretty awful. I hope people don't promote this kind of thing just so they can enter their dogs in ugly dog contests.

Just returning for a moment to the original subject of this thread, I took a look for the first time yesterday at the "are colleges racist" thread on the parents' forum, which is all about affirmative action and whether asians are discriminated against. It's about a million pages long, with a billion comments, and people are being vicious to each other all over the place.

That's not "political," and that's just fine, but a perfectly civil thread celebrating something that made a great many people very happy gets deleted? I'll never understand the decisions the moderators make sometimes.

-- Edited by DonnaL on Thursday 30th of June 2011 11:04:28 PM

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

Breeding over the years has caused the fur to disappear- which leads to acne, burns, and other major skin problems (which is why a lot of their skin looks so terrible). They are also have bad dental problems because of breeding as well. As with all breeds, if they are inbred they will have genetic problems same as humans. It's not just this breed. And a lot of the "ugly" characteristics of those dogs are the result of inbreeding (skin problems, the dental problems, etc). A tell tale sign of inbreeding and careless breeding is the severe under bite (obviously it can happen to any dog but it's very common in inbred dogs). I am not sure of the reason why (I am not a vet...), I have just learned from years of dog rescues the signs of inbreeding. My own doggie was a rescue with a bad underbite. Gives her one of the cutest faces I've ever seen, but such a tragic way to get it.

DonnaL · Senior Member

You mean people make dogs look like that on purpose? I never even heard of that breed. I wasn't even able to bring myself to look at all of them, but I do feel sorry for them, as horrifying as they look.

-- Edited by DonnaL on Thursday 30th of June 2011 09:24:51 PM

-- Edited by DonnaL on Thursday 30th of June 2011 09:27:21 PM

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

That just makes me sad. All of those characteristics are the result of inbreeding. Please people, adopt your babies at a shelter.

ETA: I know some of those dogs were from streets/shelters, but that whole breed is the result of inbreed IIRC. Just makes me so sad.

-- Edited by romanigypsyeyes on Thursday 30th of June 2011 09:14:33 PM

DonnaL · Senior Member

Well, I hate to do this to all of you, but here's a link to a gallery of the last 10 years of winners of the "World's ugliest dog" contest.

Be warned.

http://jezebel.com/5815904/10-years-of-the-worlds-ugliest-dogs/gallery/1

Of course, for all I know, you'll think they're cute. Me, I'm a cat person.

-- Edited by DonnaL on Thursday 30th of June 2011 09:11:50 PM

catahoula · Guru

Well, I thought people could take sides, express an opinion, either for the mutt or the clueless one... doesn't really matter.

Besides, I've come to the conclusion that a few pictures might liven things up a little: Ya'll might have one or two I haven't seen.

(Keeping with the dog theme is worth extra points, btw.)

-- Edited by catahoula on Thursday 30th of June 2011 07:27:17 PM

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

Why cat?!?! Cannot be unseen....

catahoula · Guru

I can't lay my hands on the picture of my sedated, soon-to-be barfing, English Setter but this is one unhappy and PO'd dog so maybe he'll do in the meantime.

Edited to add: Found him and, hey... the vet said he could have a whole pill if he saw a Obama/Biden sticker on the road.

Lost Puppy

-- Edited by catahoula on Thursday 30th of June 2011 04:27:50 PM

-- Edited by catahoula on Thursday 30th of June 2011 04:37:30 PM

-- Edited by catahoula on Thursday 30th of June 2011 04:38:50 PM

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

Hehehe.
Win.

Except the doggie is a pit bull. BE AFRAID! You might just get LICKED to death.

ETA: No worries, I'll never take over the world. No real interest in being a politician. But considering I've decided to go into some kind of health law, I might end up going the way of politics by default. If I could, I'd just be a bioethics philosopher for the rest of my life, but I doubt that's going to pay the bills :(.

-- Edited by romanigypsyeyes on Wednesday 29th of June 2011 06:13:09 PM

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

Must watch Romani, carefully. With that kind of wily sense, she could take over the world.

busdriver11 · Guru

You're right, that's a double whammy. Completely unfair, but a smart woman uses her feminine wiles and her dog to get the advantage. Tricky.

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

True. It was pulling out all the stops with romani's use of personal picture. ;)

Razorsharp · Guru

romanigypsyeyes cheated. She used a picture of a cutie pie girl AND a dog. How can anyone argue with her?

busdriver11 · Guru

Okay, I feel better then. At least I know he's no Leftie Commie pinko....but he could be hiding his knee jerk liberalness underneath that intelligent face.

Cartera · Guru

I'm sure the earnest little face - or a version thereof - will reappear.

busdriver11 · Guru

Oh that's good, really perfect! But it just makes me laugh instead of pissing me off, and I miss that earnest little dog face.

Cartera · Guru

I wear that one on my other sleeve.

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

What? You couldn't get the Knee Jerk Liberal badge? ;)

Cartera · Guru

Busdriver - does this help?

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

Maybe everyone needs a more vicious avatar. The puppies do take the fight out of us, don't they?

busdriver11 · Guru

Well, it is a nice change to see some good old fashioned fighting here. The tone on this forum has been way too civilized (thanks alot, landshark!) and it does make it more interesting. Now if I can just find somebody to fight with too. It's awfully hard when I see your pictures and particularly difficult when I see those dogs.

Especially Cartera's. If this was the old politics forum, I'd be jumping all over some of her comments, but that dog just does me in every time.

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

I spend a lot of time on the FA forum for some reason. They often start off with parents making 200k+ per year whining (which, yes, it's usually whining rather than asking for legitimate advice) about how they can't send their kids to top private schools while those from "lazy" parents (ie those of us from working class families who make 40k or less a year) get to send their kids to school for "free". It tends to go into taxation and cost of living from there, which is often deemed political and locked. It's a pattern.

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

Wow, romani. Haven't seen any recent Fin Aid threads that have turned political, but I simply don't spend that much time in those threads, anymore.

I have seen undocumented students financial aid threads turn fiercely political in the past.

Those that run CC don't want POLITICAL anything. It's their game and their rules.

Of course, just reading a thread at CC about AP scores that made some reference to a troll and rape. I didn't read far enough in to even know what reference point rape could have in an AP thread. Nothing surprises me anymore. Didn't report it. Just got annoyed and shut down the computer.

-- Edited by SamuraiLandshark on Tuesday 28th of June 2011 08:05:26 PM

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

Actually, I've seen FA threads disappear that were starting to get political. More often they're locked, but I've seen one or two disappear nonetheless. It's quite irritating because they are issues that make or break whether or not a lot of students can even GO to certain colleges. But it's damn near impossible to talk about FA without it being political.

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

CC has changed it's rules. There is no political discussion, whether it is civil or uncivil. Makes not a whit of difference.

Get used to it.

If it smells political or might be controversial and unrelated to college admissions, financial aid or standardized testing, it probably doesn't fit in with the new agenda at CC.

Just because a thread wasn't deleted immediately isn't because it was following the rules. I mean no disrespect - it's just that the folks running CC now don't want anything controversial unless it's about college, plain and simple.

If it's in the cafe or forum and about Project Runway, it's probably okay.

If it's about what stores have the best drop service for linens, it's probably okay.

If's it about what cell phone carrier works best at Columbia, it's probably okay.

It's it about LGBT issues or religion or economics, probably not okay, unless it has to do with what school has the best theology or economics program, or what school best supports those students who are LBGT.

I have been irritated with stuff over the years at CC. We all have. Things are different now. But seriously, folks - it's over for politics there. Give it a rest. Let it go. Move on.

Have the conversations here and stop worrying about it. You have an open forum. Invite more folks if you like them and they want to talk politics or current issues of the day that might veer into dangerous or controversial territory.

DonnaL · Senior Member

It's not the disagreement I object to. Lots of people disagree with me. It's the personal insults. If someone speaks to me that way, I'll respond in kind. If people are polite, I try to be polite. So please don't be all fake-innocent. An entire post filled with insulting comments is somehow better than what I said? By the way, after reading some of your prior posts here, I think you really are MOWC. In which case, this is now the second time you've jumped into a thread -- once on CC, and once here -- for the sole purpose of attacking me personally.

-- Edited by DonnaL on Tuesday 28th of June 2011 01:28:12 PM

highoverhead · Veteran Member

I believe when this forum started it was made clear that posters did not need to keep CC names or reveal their identities. I guess you don't get to set the rules, Donna!

When people disagree with you, this has been your approach. Name calling. I'm calling it like I see it and if that makes me a nasty human being, so be it. Coward? Hardly.

I am absolutely not homophobic, but I AM "everything I think and say has to be viewed through the lens of my agenda"phobic.

DonnaL · Senior Member

Either you're Mom of Wild Child or her doppelganger, because this post is almost word for word what she said to me in a CC post a couple of weeks ago!

Whoever you are, you're a pathetic coward and a nasty human being. You don't even have the courage to use your regular screen name??

PS: I don't necessarily believe that every single person who opposes same-sex marriage (there's really no such thing as a "gay marriage"!) is homophobic -- although the more that laws like those of New York provide religious exemptions, the less excuse that people have for their opposition. I really don't know what President Obama is, except that he's definitely not the "fierce advocate" for LGBT issues that he once claimed to be! Those issues are very obviously not a priority for him.

Celtic Clan, on the other hand, leaves no doubt.

-- Edited by DonnaL on Tuesday 28th of June 2011 09:12:55 AM

-- Edited by DonnaL on Tuesday 28th of June 2011 09:17:17 AM

-- Edited by DonnaL on Tuesday 28th of June 2011 09:19:59 AM

highoverhead · Veteran Member

Donna- your whole purpose seems to be a "crusade". I can understand why the thread got deleted, because you would, inevitably, spin it to foster your own agenda, as you have done so many times.

I get that you are in a "special" situation, but it does lead to debate and that debate leads to political comments. I guess they cut it off before it got started.

Everything you post is written through the lens of your own agenda, and you seem to have trouble understanding that others might not be as gung-ho over that agenda, or even give a ****! It's tiresome.

To say that threads about someone's child marrying an opposite sex partner should be viewed as "political" might be a new low for you. Congratulations. You would be more than welcome to start a thread about your son marrying a dude. Wonderful! But I'm sure you would interject all your political views and spin right into it. And then whine when it got deleted.

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

The issue with same sex marriage is a complicated one. I am generally in favor of people getting married, as long as they are of age and to only one partner. I am not a fan of polygamy, which is a bias that I cannot readily get over.

I don't think it is difficult to understand why CC closed the thread before it got going. Regardless of what was said, it was going to head down the road that it did here, in just record time. The mods are simply being heavy handed, which is getting worse and worse each week at CC. I hardly even post there, anymore.

Without even trying, accusations and insults got thrown in just a handful of posts, which aren't suprising. It's an emotional issue for those involved and sometimes for those that are passionately interested in the cause.

I am always amazed how it doesn't take long for the term "homophobia" to get leveled when a person doesn't believe that same sex partners should have the ability to marry. Does President Barack Obama suffer from homophobia? I don't think so. He has done much to support the cause of LBGT issues, but has also has has stopped short of supporting gay marriage.

CelticClan07 · Senior Member

Um, no, not afraid of any homosexuals whatsoever, but you're free to hold your own misguided opinion. Last word..............have a great day!

DonnaL · Senior Member

Not spin, just stating the self-evident. What I said originally made very clear that I was talking about ME. If you really think that makes me "dishonest" because I applied what I see as a negative term to someone else whom I was criticizing at the time, you're just making clear that you're either being disingenuous yourself, or that you're incapable of understanding something that really isn't that complicated. Take your pick, and keep it up if you like, but I'm done with this ridiculous conversation. Which, of course, has absolutely nothing to do with either the thread on CC, or same-sex marriage itself, or your own very obvious homophobia.

-- Edited by DonnaL on Monday 27th of June 2011 09:15:45 PM

CelticClan07 · Senior Member

I meant, rather obviously, that I don't apply that word to something I'm doing myself. Why wouldn't I apply it to the actions of someone I'm criticizing? You're not making any sense at all.

Nice try spinning! I'm calling you out as being dishonest. Makes perfect sense, sorry if that hurts, but it's the truth. You wrote you would never use the word crusades, you did, I did and I did indeed mean it in its context. So what, move on.

That's a lot of work you put into such a peculiar attempt to discredit me.

Nope actually it was very easy, simply read through a thread that was linked to the topic. Just exposing the truth.

Whatever, have a nice day......................

Hit submit before I read this interseting piece from Huufpo. Actually shocked to read this from Sam. Thought he only hated big oil money.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/27/money-gay-marriage-bill-new-york_n_885546.html

-- Edited by CelticClan07 on Monday 27th of June 2011 08:46:04 PM

DonnaL · Senior Member

I meant, rather obviously, that I don't apply that word to something I'm doing myself. Why wouldn't I apply it to the actions of someone I'm criticizing? You're not making any sense at all.

That's a lot of work you put into such a peculiar attempt to discredit me.

And unfortunately for people with views like yours, New York actually believes that legislation is supposed to be done by legislatures, and that civil rights are not something that's appropriate to put up to a popular vote in a referendum, unless the legislature twice approves it.

As for the reason they deleted the "thank you, New York" thread, unless there were posts I didn't see, nobody posted anything even vaguely contentious or argumentative. So I still don't understand why they waited as long as they did, until there were as many posts as there were, instead of shutting the thread down right away if they had a problem with it.

As for BigG's question, I have no idea, really, what impact this will have elsewhere. The situation is different in every state. One would think a place like New Jersey (which already has civil unions) would be a likely candidate, but Gov. Christie has already said that he would veto any similar law. Perhaps Maryland and Maine will try again.

-- Edited by DonnaL on Monday 27th of June 2011 06:39:35 PM

-- Edited by DonnaL on Monday 27th of June 2011 06:43:34 PM

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

On second thought... I know better than to get involved in arguments like this.

-- Edited by romanigypsyeyes on Monday 27th of June 2011 05:57:41 PM

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

I went back and perused a couple of the posts. Some of them fairly ugly.

I did wonder how dallice became not only a Senior Member but also ended up with 2 billion posts like mine. Her post count was pretty small back in the day. Strange, huh?

dallice

Senior Member

Join Date: Sep 2008

Posts: 4,294,967,295

CelticClan07 · Senior Member

Given the example SLS provided, would that explain the rapid demise of the NY thread? I believe so. It's amazing to me that when the vote to allow gay-marriage is put in the hands of the voters, 31/31 it was soundly defeated. That number speaks volumes. Imagine the nefarious backroom politics surrounding gay-marriage votes in the halls of the few state capitols that have passed it.

"Crusade" is a word I would never use, by the way, considering my opinion of the original Crusades and most of the crusaders -- murderers that they were, long before they ever got to the Holy Land. Speaking of religious excuses for awful things.

Ok, so do you prefer personal agenda instead of personal crusade? You didn't mind using crusade in a similar thread previously.

11-03-2008, 03:28 PM #115 DonnaL Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: New York City Posts: 548 Razorsharp, maybe I didn't "properly apply" the rational basis test. As I said, I'm no Constitutional lawyer. But at least I mentioned it. You said nothing about it (apparently pretending, for whatever reason, that it didn't even exist) until I brought it up. Of course, all of this is irrelevant if Proposition 8 loses. The majority will have spoken, and you can be happy. Then you can embark on your own crusade to legalize polygamy.

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

The Prop 8 thread at CC was political. It was not neutral and shifted into political territory pretty quickly.

http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parent-cafe-election-politics/591175-no-prop-8-a.html?highlight=no+on+prop+8

BigG · Guru

Still not seeing a thank-you New York thread here.

Just a bitch about CC thread....

We don't like to admit it, but New York is an important and influential state. This legislation gives "political cover" to other states following suit.

DonnaL · Senior Member

In the thread in the Cafe about favorite tearjerker movies, someone just mentioned Brokeback Mountain, and started the post by saying "I hope this isn't too gay-friendly for CC"!

Gee, I wonder what made them say that?

Poetsheart · Senior Member

I suspect the deletion of the thread was meant to send a unambiguous message to Donna herself. There have been plenty of threads that have been allowed to stand that have more than skirted politics.

BigG · Guru

And why delete the thread entirely, rather than simply close it

Good point.

-- Edited by BigG on Sunday 26th of June 2011 05:29:56 PM

-- Edited by BigG on Sunday 26th of June 2011 05:30:19 PM

DonnaL · Senior Member

That's what I would have said if I had wanted to be political!

It happens to be true of many people who oppose same-sex marriage, and I used the term because I was extremely angry when I posted about CC's decision. I know people hate being called bigots, and make all sorts of excuses (including religion, which has been used as an excuse for many horrible things), but if the shoe fits, etc. I can say that here, because this is not a place where I would waste my time trying to win anyone over to my position who isn't already there. And I wasn't doing that on CC, either. All I did was say "thank you" to New York, without even saying what I was being thankful for. Except that I added, without elaboration, that I look forward to the day -- however far in the future -- when I'm able to dance at my son's wedding!

99% of the responses -- and there were almost 50 of them the last time I checked the thread -- were very simple, and simply said that people were happy. A couple of people asked about tax consequences. Churchmusicmom said that she was pleased at the religous exemptions, and that it was a good compromise.

If they were going to close the thread, why not do it right away rather than wait a day or more and allow people to post that many comments -- none of which were "political" in the sense of trying to justify their opinions, or discussing strategies for the future. And why delete the thread entirely, rather than simply close it, as they often do for threads they deem inappropriate in some way?

That's what I find really offensive.

I should also point out that same-sex marriage is hardly a personal "crusade" for me. I'm very pleased, but it isn't as if same-sex marriage is something that I would take advantage of myself, and it's never been a major priority for me in terms of what I think would benefit LGBT people in general, or what I spent time advocating during my three years on the LGBT Rights Committee of the Bar Association of the City of New York.

"Crusade" is a word I would never use, by the way, considering my opinion of the original Crusades and most of the crusaders -- murderers that they were, long before they ever got to the Holy Land. Speaking of religious excuses for awful things.

PS: New York did already recognize same-sex marriages from other states, even before this.

-- Edited by DonnaL on Sunday 26th of June 2011 05:05:11 PM

-- Edited by DonnaL on Sunday 26th of June 2011 05:11:02 PM

-- Edited by DonnaL on Sunday 26th of June 2011 05:18:59 PM

-- Edited by DonnaL on Sunday 26th of June 2011 05:20:06 PM

CelticClan07 · Senior Member

Razorsharp wrote:
They deleted it because it was clearly political. How do I know this? When someone specifically says this thread is not political you can bet it is political.

Let's do some analysis. A political vote was had on a political issue and DonnaL created a thread to thank those who supported her political view. If it walks like a political duck, quacks like a political duck, then maybe it is a political duck (or maybe a happily married gay duck).

I concur 100%. Completely political, celebrating a political vote, signed into law. Um, yeah, just sayin'.

just because it might offend some knuckle-dragging jackass?

And who would that be? Talk about divisive, geesh. Anyone who doesn't agree with YOUR personal crusade, is as you stated above? GREAT! Excellent way to win people over and promote a civil conversation.

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

is now considered married by the state of New York....or if they have to get remarried by the state

For some reason, I thought gay marriages were already recognized by New York if they were performed elsewhere.

busdriver11 · Guru

"Does CC's position mean that if anyone has a gay kid who plans to get married in a state that's legal, and posts that they're happy about it, that thread is going to be deleted too"

That will be interesting to see what they do about a thread like that, it doesn't seem that it would be legitimate, unless it turns political. Perhaps they deleted the thread purely because they saw the potential for it to get overly political. I never saw it at all.

So I wonder if my sister in law, who got married last year in Connecticut, but lives in New York, is now considered married by the state of New York....or if they have to get remarried by the state (and of course, pay the requisite fee). Seeing as there still is the marriage penalty and they both work, it could be a costly proposition for them.

Razorsharp · Guru

So if someone started a thread on CC thanking California for passing Proposition 8 to eliminate same sex marriage and declared that it was not a political thread just a thank you thread, then it would not be political?

It seems to me it would be political and kind of obvious at that.

DonnaL · Senior Member

It was a non-political thread about a political topic. Which other people have done without getting the thread deleted. In any event, same-sex marriage in New York is legal now. Just like opposite-sex marriage. So please explain to me how any thread about marriage isn't also political if this one was? "Straight" marriage at a time when gay people can't marry everywhere is a controversial issue in and of itself. Every "straight" marriage that takes place is, in that sense, a political act, intentionally or otherwise.

As I said, I plan to report as inappropriately political the very next thread of any kind relating to weddings or marriages of any kind.

Does CC's position mean that if anyone has a gay kid who plans to get married in a state that's legal, and posts that they're happy about it, that thread is going to be deleted too, just because it might offend some knuckle-dragging jackass?

Finally, what happens if and when I'm still on CC when my son decides to get married, and I need advice on where to buy that all-important "father of the groom" dress? Will I be prohibited from doing so?

longprime · Guru

My farewell thread was deleted and it didn't have a speck of Politics.

I made a private message to a mod and called a thread political. Got a demerit.

Call Atkins [Atkins diet a bitch] got demerit. then questioned the demerit and got timeout.

I'm a bad boy. evileye