Watch this one get deleted...

[Johnny Stew]

Originally Posted by GypsySorcerer

I would just like to know why the sudden interest in the FAQ and guidelines. We were reminded to tone down sexual language via a sticky; yet we had several "perv" threads throughout the winter and spring. (To which I had no objections and participated in.) But out of nowhere, we get are requested to tone down the sex talk. Also, seemingly without warning, we were asked to avoid the "foulest" of language. Again, why now?

Since we now have a new crop of moderators, we're taking the opportunity to remind Ledgies of the rules that have always been in place, but that we had perhaps gotten a little too lax on enforcing in recent times.

[GateandGarden]

Originally Posted by Sugar

Wow. I'm really surprised, Hillary.

There were some people who had expressed feeling uncomfortable by some of the excessively explicit talk on the board. We decided that toning it down a bit wasn't too much to ask for the sake of making this board a welcome place for all Fleetwood Mac fans.

I took quite a bit of care trying to word my post in such a way as to not sound preachy or judgemental...even friendly.

Is toning down the sexual content so troubling to you?

I don't think you are preachy or judgemental at all. Far from it. Like I just said to Brian, I don't have an issue with you, never have. You have always been friendly.

I just don't like being limited. I guess I'm surprised myself because I thought people would be expecting identical or similar protests.

I'm all for someone's right to complain about sexual content as I'm for their right to complain about anything but I don't agree with prohibiting it on the board. I think the board should be for all FM fans and I think that if certain fans have a problem with two gay guys or a guy and chick flirting with each other incessantly and getting raunchy and such, then they don't have to read those threads. They can put particular posters on ignore. They can skip over certain posts in threads. I skip over a lot of things that I don't like rather than requesting that they be removed completely.

[KarmaContestant]

Originally Posted by Brwn_eyes0511

To say that Hurricane Katrina was Bush's fault, to me, is just as insane as saying that it was the fault of the "sinners" down there in the gulf!

First off - Sorry to everyone, as I am being quite voyeuristic in my reading of this thread when I really don't care about the subject matter. I am being entertained. I admit it. I would like to add my perspective to the above comment in quotes, however, by saying that while, yes, it is 'insane' to blame Katrina on Dubya, there is a deeper meaning to this.... Two words. Kyoto Accord. Our country could do our part to cut back on global warming by complying with the Kyoto Accord - but the current administration feels it (the Accord) is biased in favor of developing industrial nations. Still - two wrongs don't make a right.

Just my 4 cents.

*on edit, I did not actually hear anything that Cindy said with my own ears - only the hearsay repeated in this thread.

[Dreammms]

Originally Posted by dissention

Stop repeating the right wing talking point that she blamed the hurricane on Bush. She did not. She blamed his policies that cut New Orleans funding that would have helped them to brace for such a disaster. There is a difference if you take the time to read what she wrote.

See this is the debate that was going on before. What is the harm in it?

[sodascouts]

Originally Posted by Dreammms

See this is the debate that was going on before. What is the harm in it?

EXACTLY.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Originally Posted by dissention

Stop repeating the right wing talking point that she blamed the hurricane on Bush. She did not. She blamed his policies that cut New Orleans funding that would have helped them to brace for such a disaster. There is a difference if you take the time to read what she wrote.

I actually did read what she wrote...

and perhaps I should bring that up as well. Because Cindy said...

"Well, George and I are leaving Crawford today. George is finished playing golf and telling his fables in San Diego , so he will be heading to Louisiana to see the devastation that his environmental policies and his killing policies have caused."

OK, I don't understand how this woman, who last time I checked was not an environmental specialist, can make such an off the wall statement...and while not only blaming his "environmental policies" she also blames his "killing plicies", so I'm guessing she means the War when she says this! The woman is somehow thinking the war has something to do with the hurricane too?

SOOOO...essentially I do see it as her basically blaming Bush for the hurricane.

*NEWS FLASH* ----- SH*T HAPPENS ----- IT'S NOBODY'S FAULT -----

we now return to our regularly scheduled program already in progress...GENERAL HOSPITAL!!! OH YEA BABY!

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Originally Posted by KarmaContestant

First off - Sorry to everyone, as I am being quite voyeuristic in my reading of this thread when I really don't care about the subject matter. I am being entertained. I admit it. I would like to add my perspective to the above comment in quotes, however, by saying that while, yes, it is 'insane' to blame Katrina on Dubya, there is a deeper meaning to this.... Two words. Kyoto Accord. Our country could do our part to cut back on global warming by complying with the Kyoto Accord - but the current administration feels it (the Accord) is biased in favor of developing industrial nations. Still - two wrongs don't make a right.

Just my 4 cents.

*on edit, I did not actually hear anything that Cindy said with my own ears - only the hearsay repeated in this thread.

And your point is very well taken...and perhaps there is more this administration could do to help with the environment...that said...

How, in the name of all that is good, could ANYONE have known that there was going to be a devistating hurricane to hit the gulf in August of 2005?

I guess my main problem with her statement was that she is taking every chance she can now to attack the president and even goes as far as to blame a natural disaster on him.

[Sugar]

Originally Posted by GateandGarden

I'm all for someone's right to complain about sexual content as I'm for their right to complain about anything but I don't agree with prohibiting it on the board. I think the board should be for all FM fans and I think that if certain fans have a problem with two gay guys or a guy and chick flirting with each other incessantly and getting raunchy and such, then they don't have to read those threads. They can put particular posters on ignore. They can skip over certain posts in threads. I skip over a lot of things that I don't like rather than requesting that they be removed completely.

The problem is that it seemed to be spilling into a lot of threads; not just ones that were evident by the thread name and not just on the Chit chat forum. It wasn't as easy as just "avoiding the offending threads."

And we're not talking about flirting, we're talking about graphic, excessive content. Johnny Stew or Marty can correct me if I'm wrong, but I like to think of this as an "R" rated board.

If your mother asked you to watch your language because she didn't want your 13 year old cousin who was in the next room to hear it, would you be this outraged?

[dissention]

Originally Posted by Brwn_eyes0511

OK, I don't understand how this woman, who last time I checked was not an environmental specialist, can make such an off the wall statement...and while not only blaming his "environmental policies" she also blames his "killing plicies", so I'm guessing she means the War when she says this! The woman is somehow thinking the war has something to do with the hurricane too?

Since when do you have to be an "environmental specialist" to realize that his environmental policies regarding what FEMA called one of the "three most likely US disasters" did a lot of damage when that disaster finally hit? Have you bothered to look up all the funding he refused to give New Orleans that they asked for in order to prepare for such a disaster? If you can tell me those policies didn't add to the devastation, I'd like to trash your crackpipe because you've been tooting it way too much.

As for her references to the war, how can you refute that? Our military is stretched so incredibly thin that the rescues down South can be called sloppy at best and utterly incompetent at worst. And that's being kind.

Originally Posted by Brwn_eyes0511

SOOOO...essentially I do see it as her basically blaming Bush for the hurricane.

And that's absurd.

Originally Posted by Brwn_eyes0511

*NEWS FLASH* ----- SH*T HAPPENS ----- IT'S NOBODY'S FAULT -----

we now return to our regularly scheduled program already in progress...GENERAL HOSPITAL!!! OH YEA BABY!

My mood would be just as foul as yours if I had to put up with that Sonny and Carly bull**** for an hour.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by Brwn_eyes0511

How, in the name of all that is good, could ANYONE have known that there was going to be a devistating hurricane to hit the gulf in August of 2005?

No one knew when it was going to hit, it's ludicrous to even ask such a rhetorical question. The problem is that we knew it was going to hit eventually, and that it would level New Orleans, yet the proper funding to help prepare for it was vetoed.

[Johnny Stew]

Originally Posted by Brwn_eyes0511

How, in the name of all that is good, could ANYONE have known that there was going to be a devistating hurricane to hit the gulf in August of 2005?

I guess my main problem with her statement was that she is taking every chance she can now to attack the president and even goes as far as to blame a natural disaster on him.

I don't believe Cindy was blaming President Bush for the hurricane, which I realize is how you interpreted her comments.
The way I interpreted them, was that Cindy was expressing the opinion that the devastation of several thousand lost lives (due to an ineffective evacuation system), and of hundreds of thousands of people living in horrific conditions with no food, water, etc., was due to the fact that our national budget is being directed towards this war, when funding should be directed towards avenues that would help protect our citizens from the aftermath of natural disasters, terrorism, and so forth.

Our president isn't tending to his own garden, as the saying goes.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Originally Posted by dissention

Since when do you have to be an "environmental specialist" to realize that his environmental policies regarding what FEMA called one of the "three most likely US disasters" did a lot of damage when that disaster finally hit? Have you bothered to look up all the funding he refused to give New Orleans that they asked for in order to prepare for such a disaster? If you can tell me those policies didn't add to the devastation, I'd like to trash your crackpipe because you've been tooting it way too much.

As for her references to the war, how can you refute that? Our military is stretched so incredibly thin that the rescues down South can be called sloppy at best and utterly incompetent at worst. And that's being kind.

Ok I can understand what you are saying abou the funds being refused to New Orleans...and as we see now that was a mistake. But my point is how could he have KNOWN what was to happen!?! So to lay the blame on Bush is unfair...but it is her opinion.

My major point is that Cindy has turned into a lying, media whore who will now make any rediculous statement against the president to gain her some attention...is it even about her son anymore?

My mood would be just as foul as yours if I had to put up with that Sonny and Carly bull**** for an hour.

I'm hoping Guza and Pratt are fired soon as head writers of GH! I mean don't get me wrong Carly used to be my fav. character, and I suppose she still is...but now all of her world is wrapped up in SONNY SONNY SONNY!

ABC DAYTIME GET WITH IT!

[sodascouts]

Originally Posted by dissention

Since when do you have to be an "environmental specialist" to realize that his environmental policies regarding what FEMA called one of the "three most likely US disasters" did a lot of damage when that disaster finally hit? Have you bothered to look up all the funding he refused to give New Orleans that they asked for in order to prepare for such a disaster? If you can tell me those policies didn't add to the devastation, I'd like to trash your crackpipe because you've been tooting it way too much.

It's easy to say "he should've given more money" - but sadly the government's pockets aren't bottomless. And frankly it's doubtful that any amount of money could have made New Orleans come out of this OK.

As for her references to the war, how can you refute that? Our military is stretched so incredibly thin that the rescues down South can be called sloppy at best and utterly incompetent at worst. And that's being kind.

Yes, there would be more national guardsmen don't there if it weren't for the war. However, the lack of then did not "cause" devastation. Katrina did. And there's no getting around that, no matter how hard some try to turn this into a partisan talking point.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

I don't believe Cindy was blaming President Bush for the hurricane, which I realize is how you interpreted her comments.
The way I interpreted them, was that Cindy was expressing the opinion that the devastation of several thousand lost lives (due to an ineffective evacuation system), and of hundreds of thousands of people living in horrific conditions with no food, water, etc., was due to the fact that our national budget is being directed towards this war, when funding should be directed towards avenues that would help protect our citizens from the aftermath of natural disasters, terrorism, and so forth.

Our president isn't tending to his own garden, as the saying goes.

And I totally see your point.

Guess we can always use those millions the celebs have given...oh wait...they haven't...hmmm

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

I don't believe Cindy was blaming President Bush for the hurricane, which I realize is how you interpreted her comments.
The way I interpreted them, was that Cindy was expressing the opinion that the devastation of several thousand lost lives (due to an ineffective evacuation system), and of hundreds of thousands of people living in horrific conditions with no food, water, etc., was due to the fact that our national budget is being directed towards this war, when funding should be directed towards avenues that would help protect our citizens from the aftermath of natural disasters, terrorism, and so forth.

Our president isn't tending to his own garden, as the saying goes.

double post...sorry