Slate magazine attacks Bushs service dog, Sully.

[JohnR]

The author is likely a radical feminist.

She probably has cats, or at least did until she joined PETA.

Since joining PETA she probably has middle-age BETAmales as pets in conversion therapy (not making this @#*&$ up ; ) ).

She erroneously believes that Cat Humans > Dog Humans. This is clearly false.

Unless, all the above is wrong, and the Article was Penned by a CAT

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Unless, all the above is wrong, and the Article was Penned by a CAT

That's the most benign possible explanation, by far!

The Trump-inspired, liberal descent into the abyss of madness, continues...

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by JohnR

The author is likely a radical feminist.

She probably has cats, or at least did until she joined PETA.

Since joining PETA she probably has middle-age BETAmales as pets in conversion therapy (not making this @#*&$ up ; ) ).

She erroneously believes that Cat Humans > Dog Humans. This is clearly false.

Unless, all the above is wrong, and the Article was Penned by a CAT

How else are they going to keep Canine Privilege in check?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

How else are they going to keep Canine Privilege in check?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I didn’t read the article but I’m sure they were just trying to generate Clickbait hits by writing something that would infuriate a lot of people
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Nebe

I didn’t read the article but I’m sure they were just trying to generate Clickbait hits by writing something that would infuriate a lot of people
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

There's nothing particularly infuriating in the piece, but the theme about people needing to project their own emotional needs onto animals is pretty observant if a bit cold.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

There's nothing particularly infuriating in the piece, but the theme about people needing to project their own emotional needs onto animals is pretty observant if a bit cold.

She called it 'demented' to be moved by the sight of the dog in front of the casket. The word she used, was demented.

The title, also says explicitly, that it's 'wasteful' to spend emotional energy, feeling good about this Sully.

Naturally none of this is insulting to you. The entrance to liberalworld, requires one to leave their soul and conscience at the door.

Not ong ago, before the national Democratic party lost its mind, Donna Brazile was fired by Michael Dukakis for promoting the fake story that HW Bush had a mistress. In today's democratic party, she is rewarded for that kind of thing, with the office of chair, and vice-chair, of the DNC.

Hooray!

Anyone with a soul was moved by the photo of the dog laying by the casket. Only a completely broken person without a soul, would be offended by people rallying around something so pure, so innocent, and so touching.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

She called it 'demented' to be moved by the sight of the dog in front of the casket. The word she used, was demented.

The title, also says explicitly, that it's 'wasteful' to spend emotional energy, feeling good about this Sully.

Naturally none of this is insulting to you. The entrance to liberalworld, requires one to leave their soul and conscience at the door.

Not ong ago, before the national Democratic party lost its mind, Donna Brazile was fired by Michael Dukakis for promoting the fake story that HW Bush had a mistress. In today's democratic party, she is rewarded for that kind of thing, with the office of chair, and vice-chair, of the DNC.

Hooray!

Anyone with a soul was moved by the photo of the dog laying by the casket. Only a completely broken person without a soul, would be offended by people rallying around something so pure, so innocent, and so touching.

I think you just made her case. It’s a picture of a dog by a casket. You have no clue what the dog is thinking. It’s your projection. Nice job Jim.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I think you just made her case. It’s a picture of a dog by a casket. You have no clue what the dog is thinking. It’s your projection. Nice job Jim.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I don't know what the dog is thinking. I never said I did.

Here's what separates me from you, so pay attention.

It's comforting to me, to hope that the dog is thinking something about th person he was charged with serving, at that moment. It's not something I can prove, it's not tangible, but it's hopeful and uplifting to consider the possibility.

You just see a dog who felt like taking a load off.

I like what it triggers in me. I feel sorry for what it doesn't trigger in you.

Same thing that happens to each of us when we look at an ultrasound of an unborn baby. I see a miracle. You see nothing worth wasting emotional energy over, which was the title of that Slate hit piece.

Devoid of soul. Horrifying.

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by Nebe

I didn’t read the article but I’m sure they were just trying to generate Clickbait hits by writing something that would infuriate a lot of people
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And by that I mean troll the masses.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by Nebe

I didn’t read the article but I’m sure they were just trying to generate Clickbait hits by writing something that would infuriate a lot of people
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Ohhh, absolutely true. Total clickbait. Breitbart meet Slate, Slate, Breitbart

Originally Posted by spence

There's nothing particularly infuriating in the piece, but the theme about people needing to project their own emotional needs onto animals is pretty observant if a bit cold.

Not entirely true, the author exhibits needs that might be allayed with a good dog, though that might not be good for the dog.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Ohhh, absolutely true. Total clickbait. Breitbart meet Slate, Slate, Breitbart



Not entirely true, the author exhibits needs that might be allayed with a good dog, though that might not be good for the dog.

Would be good for Cujo.