General Discussion

MineralMan

(146,254 posts)

7. K&R. I have nothing to add to your excellent OP.

Reply to McCamy Taylor (Original post)

Thu Feb 26, 2015, 03:00 PM

Feb 2015

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

45 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

A Few Modest Suggestions for Making DU's Presidential OPs More Friendly to Women [View all] McCamy Taylor Feb 2015 OP

Um, #2 = Hillary Clinton. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Feb 2015 #1

I think it's the "...but..." that's a problem. And I agree. PeaceNikki Feb 2015 #2

What's the problem with 'but'? Erich Bloodaxe BSN Feb 2015 #6

All of this! hifiguy Feb 2015 #8

See the forest as well as the trees---it makes finding solutions a lot easier. McCamy Taylor Feb 2015 #12

I agree - TBF Feb 2015 #30

It minimizes everything before it. PeaceNikki Feb 2015 #10

No, I don't. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Feb 2015 #14

mmm hmm. you disagree. noted. PeaceNikki Feb 2015 #15

I kind of agree with you, but when used on "women's issues" for a female candidate it does cui bono Feb 2015 #17

+1 nt F4lconF16 Feb 2015 #29

It isn't just Clinton. Sen. Nelson in Texas Senate (GOP) is very interested in "women's issues" McCamy Taylor Feb 2015 #4

DU Rec. Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2015 #3

A few things: vi5 Feb 2015 #5

IMHO every mention of Christie's weight deserves censure. It is a mean, rude attack. McCamy Taylor Feb 2015 #9

Disagree strongly. Obesity is well-documented as correlating with very high mortality. closeupready Feb 2015 #13

Evidently women need EXTRA protection Major Nikon Mar 2015 #43

K&R. I have nothing to add to your excellent OP. MineralMan Feb 2015 #7

Yes, exactly what you said. kiva Feb 2015 #11

#2 doesn't compute. progressoid Feb 2015 #16

"John Kerry has his wife's money" Really? nichomachus Feb 2015 #18

Well that's really nitpicking. Just substitute another example that works for you then. cui bono Feb 2015 #25

I think everyone should just express themselves freely, and not worry about dissentient Feb 2015 #19

Um.... no. cui bono Feb 2015 #22

Yes, then they can be banned if they say racist stuff. Better that, then they try and be sneaky dissentient Feb 2015 #23

But there are many people who aren't really racist or sexist but say things that are offensive cui bono Feb 2015 #24

Yes, I agree that free and open communication is best dissentient Feb 2015 #26

The N word is a good example of how that works. zeemike Feb 2015 #33

Agree. I don't need anyone making rules for me on this site except Skinner. HERVEPA Feb 2015 #27

I agree, good point! I think the ones in charge should declare it when they want new rules for the dissentient Feb 2015 #28

So I can post "cracker redneck troll" without any fear? McCamy Taylor Feb 2015 #37

Rec. Also just wanted to point out a typo in case you want to fix it... cui bono Feb 2015 #20

Who's doing that? Iggo Feb 2015 #21

No one, that I've seen Oilwellian Feb 2015 #31

I personally saw a variation of #3 on DU herding cats Feb 2015 #34

Check one of my OP's and scroll down. Unless the writer deleted it. "Good on women and children McCamy Taylor Feb 2015 #38

Honestly, in a duscussion of a candidate I don't think the "but" negates what was said before. cui bono Feb 2015 #39

Funny, the same argument could be made about mental illness and how stigma of it is promoted HereSince1628 Feb 2015 #32

do you mean more friendly to Hillary? because I have not seen any of these on du Doctor_J Feb 2015 #35

Where were you during the 2008 primaries? Jamastiene Mar 2015 #42

I've been here since 2001 and your statement is ridiculous Doctor_J Mar 2015 #44

Congratulation, you just trashed an ally. BeanMusical Mar 2015 #45

Modest suggestions? winter is coming Feb 2015 #36

You just keep plugging away, McCamy. KnR Hekate Mar 2015 #40

What gets me is that some of the same people who did things like post Jamastiene Mar 2015 #41