Wednesday, April 15, 2015

It gets betterer and betterer

Check it out... the Mickey Admins are falling asleep on the job!

(check out the last 2 messages at the bottom!)

Don't bother going to the "Watch Mickey Beat Cancer" page, they will surely have purged all anti-DOGma by then!

Pursuant to an ongoing theme on this blog - censorship is SUCH a monumental task, isn't it?  Think of those "poor" MICKEY admins that have to toil DAY AND NIGHT to delete ALL of those hateful anti-mickey messages! 

I've been trying to work up an essay on this massive struggle, but can't quite get my head around it.  What I'll say for now is this:

OUR side has no funding, no organization, and no leadership.  THEY have multimillionaires, major celebrities, and the President himself on their side.  And, you know what?   We manage to hold them off (much of the time).   THEY spend a ridiculous amount of time and effort to hold off a bunch of US unwashed rabble! 


As always:


  1. Yep.... less than a half hour later.... the offending messages are gone.

    However, they live on HERE in perpetuity.


  2. Those who know better, those who learned the hard way, those who just plain learned over time. To speak puts these people at risk of erasure and personal attack. We are all just beside ourselves, as we continue to be censored, intimidated, and slapped with libel. But the show must go on, and we are silenced so the Pit Ring Circus can continue under the watchful eye of its pet industry sponsor. The bizarre jokes we make with The System (and perhaps sleep deprivation) working against us.

    1. Thanks for citing the source of the problem, Cardinal. It's the pet industry, all right. Gotta sell that pit bull chow!

    2. That's been the problem this entire time. We're all in this together, do not forget this. This has been cited many many times already. Why hasn't anything been done yet?

  3. The personal attack route is the only defense the pitwits have. The made up history of their portable meat grinder had been proven false 1000 times over.
    Once they start calling me names I've won. If the only response is you're ignorant, a hater, racist I've won.
    A follow up picture of their pit with a baby = double points. triple if the dog is wearing a hat , scarf or has a flower on its head. If you have to threaten or shower your opponent with personal attacks in an actual debate you have no cause.
    Blogs and posters of like minds are allowed to express their disdain and opinion right down giving a BBQ PIT a new meaning That is free expression. free speech. And the right to an opinion.
    None of those above change facts that are either true or false. The use of half truths like all dogs bite is another diversion. Cherry picking photos of Victorian children with pit type dogs while a more general search shows just as many with floppy eared spaniels and cats.
    They're winning by lying at the top of their lungs. I just keep making my case and pissing them off. Don't get me wrong. They are winning. You can expect either a blood splattered classroom with one too many service pits or a few PTSD pits on a plane going off along with the continued body count that grows each year with the pit population.

    1. I hope the people I know and love won't be attacked by dogs. I love kids a billion times more than any dog, even perfect dogs. The whole utter insanity of it all makes me so sad sometimes for those children I don't even know.

      I was talking with a friend today, and we were brainstorming other reasons that pit bulls might be worthy of such slave-like devotion, excepting their high propensity for severe violence. That seems to induce a cult like following all by itself.

      My friend came up with the idea that perhaps pit bulls are easier for people to project themselves upon. They look a bit human...bald (they look bald to me) and with tiny eyes relative to most other mammals. One child I know that has been attacked tells me they look like something an evil orc would ride into battle with, but that is a bit off topic...

      They have low affect. No emotions. Nothing seems to bother them. They seem to me to be...not the most blessed (or cursed) with the smarts of many other dog breeds. Pit bulls remind me of the character of 'Chance' in this movie/book:

      Except of course, that they kill people. But even when they are covered in the blood of children they never look guilty, so how can we blame them?

    2. I think that it's a combo of how sweet they can seem. My ex's pits were very cuddly and affectionate. When a neighbor's pit killed my cat, Tommy laid at my feet and would stand to put his head in my lap that next day. Of all the pits in the world, I hope he and his mother stay cold. Their owner is an ass, but they are good dogs, and I hope they always stay that way. Add how unfazed they seem by different things. The Vicktory dogs are a great example. Despite their past, the ones in the public eye are just dogs. Some might have been bait dogs, and some were fought, no doubt all were abused, but they seem to have overcome it and live like normal dogs. I think it's easy for people to identify with that, because we all deal with so many different things and most of us keep going. We can look at abused pit bulls and see where they are and almost project heroism on them. Then when a Mickey happens people see it as the victims fault. Poor Mickey, he was chained up, his owner's girlfriend was scared of him, and Kevin dared to try and take his bone away. Therefore, it's Kevin's fault for provoking a poor misunderstood and mistreated dog. That's my take on the way some people see it.

    3. I think there are a few psychological phenomenon involved in pit worship, first hybristophilia, bad boy syndrome (woman and girls having finally got the message that druggies, abusers and control freaks don't make good partners have changed tactics and now seek to 'save' canine miscreants instead), victim identification syndrome (oh poor pitties are misunderstood and put down like I was) and the savior complex.

    4. Michael Vick's dogs didn't go on to live normal lives like the media led people to believe. In a study 96% of pit bull will at least attempt to attack someone or something by age six.

    5. Thank you Ka D. To anyone who has ever had to walk by a dog on a lead or behind a fence where the obvious intention of the dog is to attack simply because you have in it's mind invaded it's space.

    6. KaD, I was just using them as an example of what's perceived. As for my ex's pits at ten and eight they're still cold. They were always sweet enough and chill enough to wish them happy normal lives. They never hurt his rats or his lizard either. If all pits that got into the pet population were like them, attacks wouldn't exist.
      I walk everywhere. It's what you do when you don't have a car. I can't count the number of allies I avoid and areas of side streets because of the snarling dogs I hear or see. I ignore the little yappers , if they got out a swift kick would be enough. It's the big ones that I stay away from.

    7. I think that sounds about right Trisha for some people. People read things in newspapers, they might happen onto a page like this. They think we're all crazy. Their dog has never done anything, their dog is wonderful. cheers them up, can seem to read their mind sometimes. That pit bull that tore apart that person, he was trained wrong, his owner must have been abusive.

      That dog is nothing like my dog:

      That article makes me shudder. I'm glad dogs are not more intelligent, or it all might be much worse.

    8. This is "no true scotsman" fallacy, with elements of weak induction, writ large. They think that since their [pet of choice] never [indicate bad behavior] that must mean that no [pet of choice] would ever [indicate bad behavior]. In other words, since their pit bull never attacked anybody, that must mean that NO pit bull would ever attack anybody (without good reason at least).

      This attitude is bolstered by the underlying cultural narrative indicating that dogs and dog owners are always the agents of good.

    9. Agreed. Dogs hijacking our oxytocin receptors for food and a safe place to raise their pups makes me think of wasps mating with orchids or cowbirds having wrens raise their huge babies. Yuk. Its creepy even if a successful evolutionary pathway for a species to take.

      Its interesting to look at human/dog symbiosis, (or parasitism) and see the specifics of what goes on. Humans abuse dogs, dogs maul humans. Humans kill dogs and dogs kill us. And we all live in an enforced happy dysfunction about it, because most of the time we are pleased with the relationship. But these moments of dogs killing and mauling people should remind us that these aren't furry humans. They are another species and we cannot have human relationships with them.

      Pit bulls will be next:

      In a sense they already are, with the shelter numbers being what they are. Dogs as commodities..That is a relationship we tend to have with non-humans, distasteful as it may be.

  4. I usually use statistics and logic to make my point, but I really liked the 'dog hominem' today. Thanks.

    1. You can only get so far with statistics and logic *alone*. Its generally understood in debate circles that you cannot prove a point solely with statistics: While important, statistics can only be used to prove a larger point. For example, the weekly death-by-dog and the "daily dismemberment" by themselves don't mean anything - you have to put them in a larger context to indicate a problem. What is interesting is WHY it happened, what are the underlying causes, what was the fallout, etc....

      So, to pursue the allegory above, the death-by-dog statistics by themselves are not that interesting. People die all the time, so who cares? What IS interesting is the fact that most of those deaths involve game-bred fight dogs, brought into our communities, that are completely out of control of the owner and authorities. THAT is interesting. THAT is what makes people care. You have now identified a potential problem. And, when you have identified the problem you can work on a solution.

      Everything I say has a basis in first principles (values). Facts, logic and reason are used to bolster those. Using emotional appeals and snark/humor is an excellent way to get the point across as long as you stick to your basic values.

      The primary value indicated in the "essay" above (not really much of an article) is TRUTH. Truth and Honesty are basic values. Dog fanatics frequently lie and bully others into silence to advance their agendas. Ergo, dog fanatics are (or at least may be) a threat to my basic values. So,whether the "Mickey" admins censored 50 or 100 people yesterday is not really all that important.

    2. I find it easy to see larger patterns in statistics, and incredibly interesting. Its my nature and my training. I'm always looking for the larger context. I'm sure its not a strength of some people, people are different. I'm not crude though. I don't do that. I don't attack individuals. But I do try to bring the statistics to a place where they matter, which for me is always the potential of a good data set.