Dogs = Democrats / Cats = Republicans

[HEyHEY]

Dogs are loyal noble loving animals that will do anything for their owners. They care about people, rescue babies. All that. Dogs represent the greater good.

Cat's however couldn't care less about their owners, are only loving because they want something, aren't loyal and have EATEN owners bodies when said owner dies. Cats are in it purily for themselves.

Cats are repukes.

Dogs are dems

[devilgrrl]

1. Cats & Dogs = Quality products for people with taste...

Cat Haters = Trashy schlock for the simple minded

[Caution]

2. Spoken like someone who has never had a cat

[HEyHEY]

4. I have had a cat - that's why I hate them.

[Az]

19. Had several cats

Still like cats. But face facts. Cats set the relationships in their terms.

Dog point of view: My human feeds me, takes care of me, and loves me. They must be a god.

Cat point of view: My human feeds me, takes care of me, and loves me. I must be a god.

Face it. Cats are not social creatures. They are solitary hunters that have been partially domesticated. Dogs are pack animals that have fully embraced humans as their pack. In fact there are some theories suggesting that dogs and humans helped each other along the evolutionary tree.

Cats can be friends, but dogs are best friends.

[ixion]

3. hey, don't insult cats

they are far better creatures overall than repugs.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

46. they are far better creatures overall than repugs.

and human being in general...

[devilgrrl]

5. Cat haters are Leafs fans!!!!

Just kidding! :crazy:

[HEyHEY]

10. Hey, don't cross the line!

:-)

[aquart]

6. Spoken like someone who doesn't know how Scully got her dog.

After it ate the innards of its dead owner.

[AlienGirl]

7. Dogs don't care who their owners are...

Blondi loved Adolf and was fiercely loyal to him, after all.

To win a cat's love, you must respect the cat. To win a dog's love, you must give him food.

I don't dislike dogs, but cats are better judges of character. And I have now killed this thread by Godwinizing it! :P

Tucker

[HEyHEY]

12. BEcause dogs are full of love

Cats don't love anything. And dogs do care who their owners are. They become quite sad when you go away.

[Az]

23. There are not stories

of cats dying soon after their human dies. Or cats not moving from the site their human died at. Dogs are incredibly loyal.

[Taeger]

52. Not really

You can feed a wild dog, and he will NEVER love you.

Also, a owner who DOES NOT take authority with their dog WILL NOT be so loved. The dog will think HE is the leader. There cannot be TWO leaders in dog society.

Owners who BEAT their dogs will NOT be loved. They are still a food source, but the dog won't express true affection. They will only display submissive behaviors that the owner "perceives" as love (since thats what a dog beater wants from EVERYONE, submission).

I do think some cats are capable of real affection. But I see most of their behaviors like rubbing as an act of possession. You are a resource. They lay claim to you by rubbing and purring.

Cats don't seem to have deep attachments to the PERSON. If you walk down your block, will your cat follow you??? Rather, they seem attached to their territory (including hunting grounds).

A dog that REALLY loves you will follow you ANYWHERE. Indeed, there are cases of lost dogs trekking THOUSANDS of miles to find there way back home. I've never heard of a cat doing that. They would simply find a nice place to hunt or a new owner.

[AlienGirl]

66. There are lots of cases of lost cats going home...

Also, purring is the way mama cats soothe their kittens; it is definitely an expression of affection rather than ownership.

Tucker

[Mikimouse]

8. You are SO in trouble...

When I told the cats about your post, they immediately got on the web and made reservations for three (they have an expedia.com account). They will arrive in your neck of the woods sometime later this evening. They want to have a friendly chat with you about Redoglicans and DemoCATS.

[everythingsxen]

9. Screw you!

I am a cat. Well at least thats what they tell me! I like cats, cats like me.

Dogs are, typically, vicious and utterly hate me. I have met some nice dogs, but honestly most of them are evil. And smelly. :P

[HEyHEY]

14. Smelly...Cat shit that's smelly

[Taeger]

26. I've noticed ...

I've noticed that cats leave A LOT more aroma problems than a dog. Once you house train a dog, they won't mark indoors.

But cats around OTHER cats are notorious for trashing carpets and furniture. And yeah, those litter boxes are positively putrid.

When dogs get whet, they do smell. It's a solution excreted from their skin that conditions their coat. The smell is THE SAME as that of a perm. Sorry, it's the SAME smell.

[everythingsxen]

27. Cat poo does indeed stink to high heaven...

But they at least know to go in the litter box...

And cats themselves aren't stinky. Unlike dogs. Which are stinky. Stinky stinky stinky. :P :P :P

[Taeger]

56. Dogs spend more time

Dogs tend to spend more time outdoors. They tend to get into things. If the owner doesn't bathe them regularly, they will smell.

If YOU don't bathe regularly, you will smell.

[Taeger]

20. My dog ..

My dog doesn't hate cats. He kinda looks at them like toys. They are fun for chasing.

The kitties don't like that game. They run and hide. That only makes my puppy MORE eager to play.

[Taeger]

11. I'm a dog person

But I think the cat people will take exception.

I do kinda agree though. There are social cats, but they are exceptional. Dogs are looking to fit into pack. They are VERY social by nature.

In this respect, I don't think the analogy really fits. Republicans aren't really solitary. They ARE in it for themselves, but they form hierarchies of things to SERVE THEM.

They aren't true leaders. Leaders serve the group. They sacrifice their own needs for those of their followers. A dictator forms a group and makes it SERVE THEM.

[pmbryant]

13. I could make the exact reverse argument

Aren't dogs the one that are ultra-conscious of social hierarchy and completely deferent to the "leader".

That sounds more like Republican behavior to me!

:-)

--Peter

[HEyHEY]

16. Yes but they serve the good!

Cats merely exploit it!

[Taeger]

35. The ALPHA

The alpha is responsible for the well being of the pack. He is the lead hunter and the provider.

He will try to put down ANYONE who challenges him. But afterward, they all make up.

The Omega, who is seen as the whipping boy of the pack is actually guarded VERY protectively. The hierarchy of a dog pack is like that of a master and student. One is responsible for the other.

Finally, an Alpha that DOES NOT provide will be put down by the pack itself.

[pmbryant]

50. That sounds more like wolves than dogs

They may be related, but they aren't quite the same.

I have both a dog and several cats, so I think they are all great. :-)

--Peter

[Taeger]

60. Same species

Dogs, Wolves, Coyotes and Dingos are the SAME species.

Dogs have simply had a LOT of dominance bred out of them. You couldn't keep a wolf as a house pet. He would NOT accept your dominance.

One great thing about dogs is that they show the GREAT versatility in DNA. They are bred into so many different shapes and sizes, it's really quite amazing that they are ALL the same species.

There is a canine genome project ongoing. I expect they will learn A LOT about how different traits are expresses by studying the VASTLY different atrributes of different dog breeds.

[pmbryant]

65. They can interbreed, but they aren't viewed as the same species

Found this reference: http://www.press.jhu.edu/books/walkers_mammals_of_the_world/carnivora/carnivora.canidae.canis.html

CARNIVORA; CANIDAE; Genus CANIS
Linnaeus, 1758


Dogs, Wolves, Coyotes, and Jackals
There are eight species ... :

C. simensis (Simien jackal), mountains of central Ethiopia;
C. adustus (side-striped jackal), open country from Senegal to Somalia, and south to northern Namibia and eastern South Africa;
C. mesomelas (black-backed jackal), open country from Sudan to South Africa;
C. aureus (golden jackal), Balkan Peninsula to Thailand and Sri Lanka, Morocco to Egypt and northern Tanzania;
C. latrans (coyote), Alaska to Nova Scotia and Panama;
C. rufus (red wolf), central Texas to southern Pennsylvania and Florida;
C. lupus (gray wolf), Eurasia except tropical forests of southeastern corner, Egypt and Libya, Alaska, Canada, Greenland, conterminous United States except southeastern quarter and most of California, highlands of Mexico;
C. familiaris (domestic dog), worldwide in association with people, extensive feral populations in Australia and New Guinea.

You are right that the variety of dogs is an amazing fact of nature. I just read a great book about this called "The Truth About Dogs".

:thumbsup:

--Peter

[Taeger]

71. Splitting hairs

One could get into a long argument about whether they are the same species or "sub-species".

The fact is that you can interbreed ALL of them. The result will be fertile offspring. That is the most basic definition of a species.

You can breed a Tiger and a Lion together, but the offspring are infertile.

[pmbryant]

76. Not really

I suspect biologists have a good reason for putting them in different species. Presumably this has to do with their behavior, which is very different, which was my original point. :-)

--Peter

[AlienGirl]

79. Dogs were recently reclassified as wolves

Dogs were recently* reclassified as Canis lupus, the same species as wolves.

Species classifications are based mostly on DNA difference and hybridization ability. The behavioral differences don't factor into taxonomy that much.

Incidentally, most of the behavioral differences between dogs and wolves are learned, not innate.

Tucker

*1993

[pmbryant]

80. Hi Tucker! You got a link for that? ;-)

Cause what you just said goes against much of what I read in that book I mentioned above, which is a rather recent book, and appears rather well-grounded in the science of dogs. (That's what it's all about, actually.)

And the online reference I found also made no reference to any recent re-classification.

:shrug:

--Peter

[AlienGirl]

81. I sure do!

http://4thmoon.com/critters/wolf/wolfdog.htm

Tucker

[pmbryant]

88. Well, that is puzzling.

This switch happened in 1993, according to that link, which was not so recent. Yet the 1997 online source I found ("Walker's Mammals of the World, published by Johns Hopkins press) uses the "Canis familiaris" term for dogs, not "Canis lupus familiaris". And the "Truth About Dogs" book I read, a popular account of the science of dogs written in the last couple years, also uses the term "Canis familiaris". So did they switch back?

:shrug:

Well, whatever the official category of dogs, I must question your proposal that most of the difference in wolf and dog behavior is learned and not innate. If so, this would imply that humans could adopt a wolf pup as a pet and raise it to be much like a dog. Everything I've read indicates that this would be extremely unwise to say that least. ;-)

It also implies that wolves could adopt a dog puppy and raise it to be a functioning member of the wolf pack. I've not heard of this experiment being attempted, but I find it implausible without seeing further evidence. Dogs are just too goofy! Wolves are very serious. They have to work for a living after all. :-)

--Peter

EDIT: grammar!

[Taeger]

96. Legitamite debate

I think there is a legitamite debate over what a species classification should be. It's up to people more learned than I to duke it out.

But I'm sticking by the old axiom of genetic compatibility. If they can mate and produce fertile offspring, they're the same species. Variances within that species (dogs, dingos) are sub-species.

[glarius]

15. Cats are too smart to allow themselves to be slaves to their owner.....

Cat's keep themselves clean....Dogs don't know how....

[HEyHEY]

18. Dogs bath themselves

They just don't have the ability t stretch. :-)

[glarius]

24. All 3 of my cats are hissing at you!

:)

[Taeger]

74. Dogs are more into

All dogs will groom "certain parts" of themselves quite fastidiously. Other dogs will indeed self groom (mine does).

Almost ALL dogs will do mutual grooming. These reinforces the pack bonds.

[elfwitch]

17. How Dare You!!

You insult the nature of the mighty feline?
You should be drawn and quartered for such a remark.
Cats are wonderful.
Cats require advanced pet ownership skills.
Fie on you!
:grr:

[HEyHEY]

21. Advanced ownership skills?

Put food in bowl. Let cat out for a piss.


DOgs must be trained.

[elfwitch]

40. yes, Advanced...

Any fool can own a dog. Dogs are stupid and easily led. They will take up with any person that adopts them.

Cats, on the other hand, will not. You have to be a strong person to own a cat. If you are looking to have a pet so you can have some fur person fawn all over you to make you feel superior, then cats are not for you.

Owning a cat is like having an equal. They love you if they love you and they don't if they don't. You cannot make a cat love you. A cat is no subordinate. You earn their friendship and trust.

An awful lot of people cannot handle cats because they have pets to boost their ego. The biggest ego booster of all is if a cat, who normally doesn't need anyone, decides that you are their person. I am my cat's and my cat is mine.

[HEyHEY]

53. How do you know?

Cats have no emotion.


Dogs however fit your analogy better. Dogs will enter into a brotherhood with a good owner.

[elfwitch]

58. yes but...

Any dog will bond with any person. If you pick up a stray dog, it will eventually be loyal to you. The will love anyone who feeds them and talks to them.

Cats will not. Cats pick the person they want. You can feed a cat and give it a place to live and you still may not be that cat's person.

If you can't live with the fact that you may give the animal love and shelter and it still may not bond with you, then you cannot have a cat.

Cats are like people. Everybody has had an experience with another person where you love them and spend time with them and they still don't love you back. It's called a crush.

Cats love the person they are supposed to love. Dogs are sluts that will love anyone with a warm bed and some tasty morsels.

[Taeger]

62. not really

No. Dogs have advanced behaviors and will not respond to "just anyone". The vast amounts of dogs in shelters are testaments to this. In most cases, there was nothing inherently wrong with the dog. The owner was simply unprepared for the challenge.

My dog was neglected and knew SHIT when I got him. He was difficult, stubborn and erratic. I honestly questioned whether I would have to take him back. He is now the Apple of EVERYONE's eye who meets him. I had to do a LOT of training and a lot of bonding time with him.

A cat will do well in any house with a food dish and a litter box. They may not feel like they have a "special bond" with their caretaker, but they will do fine nonetheless. Like you said, they don't need you (beyond the kitty chow).

Dogs have a real sincere need for a pack. An dog isolated from a pack is not a healthy animal. That's what is so great about having a dog. You need each other.

[elfwitch]

64. Dog = Groupthink

They are looking for a leader. They are not their own fur people. Buncha sheep really.

I have had many dogs. I have had many cats. The older I get, the more I prefer the company of cats. I have no patience for an animal that acts like I've been gone 50 years, when I've only stepped out to check the mail. Dogs are too needy. They are co-dependent.

Cats are clean and quiet. Nobody has ever complained that your indoor cat was making too much noise. Cats rule and dogs drool.

[Taeger]

85. Sheep and leadership

Actually, sheep don't have leaders. They are a chaotic society. Sheep follow EACH OTHER.

There are often animals that are a little more brave than the other (bellweathers) and they will "nudge" the group in one direction or the other. But they aren't leaders.

[elfwitch]

86. fine but...

Dogs are still a bunch of co-dependent followers.

If you were in a relationship would you rather have someone who is independent and self sufficient or someone who is co-dependent and needy?

[Spider Jerusalem]

22. I fucking loathe dogs.

And humans who act like them. The pack mentality. The utter lack of independence. The need to conform. The slavish and unreasoned devotion. All of it. Dog-like traits are neither admirable nor to be emulated, unless you happen to think a conformist society based on a rigid pack-dominance heirarchy is a GOOD thing.

[HEyHEY]

25. No trait to be admired?

When was the last time a cat pulled someone out of an avalnche? Dogs don't conform...they work together.

[arcane1]

28. funny, a dog mauled a woman to death here recently

:shrug:

[HEyHEY]

30. And a Cat smothered a baby recently too.

It happens..they are both still animals.

[arcane1]

41. exactly

why hate either?

[Bertha Venation]

29. You've said ugly things about THIS cat.... he's comin' after you!

[HEyHEY]

32. Ack!

[Bertha Venation]

33. And when he's done with you , god help you, HEyHEY! Heeere's Wenchzilla!

Thanks to GregW for the Photoshoppage

[HEyHEY]

38. That's too funny

[flamingyouth]

73. LOL - I love it! Good work n/t

[demnan]

49. That's a nice looking Siamese baby

you have there.

[Bertha Venation]

55. Thank you! We adore him.

Petey's his name, and his daddy is a tuxedo cat and his momma was a tortoiseshell. :shrug:

[redqueen]

63. Someone doesn't like his picture taken!

Great pic! :D

[flamingyouth]

75. Great photo!!

I can't tell if he looks like he's going to kill us or dance with us. :shrug:

[Bertha Venation]

77. Petey's a lover. Not a killer.

He's just trying to get the "bird" -- the feather toy.

He is the gentlest soul ever to pad on four feet.

[flamingyouth]

84. I figured so

It's partly the glowing eyes - it's otherworldly! My blue-eyed cats get that cast in photos too.

He is really a sweet-looking boy!

[La Lioness Priyanka]

31. thats utter crap and bullshit

cats purr cos they are happy...most cat eating dead humans is misreported because of media prejudice...the most recent one where the only woman was supposedly knawed on by her cats, said cats were found in a starvd condition...i think they were trying to get her to wake up...if not they would not be starved with atleast 100lbs of meat in front of them

[HEyHEY]

34. Are you suggesting a media conspiracy against cats?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

44. no i am suggesting a existing social prejudice

just cos its a political non issue does not mean it does not exist...most people think of cats as aloof and independent and manipulative...reporters are people too...and i think that this is reflected in their writing and "seeing" of an incident

[HEyHEY]

48. Well that's for a good reason - Cats suck!

(Runs off laughing like daffy duck)

[La Lioness Priyanka]

57. so do polar bear

vicious animals like us,...hunt for sport too...the rat bastards!!!:P

[devilgrrl]

36. Fine... Then people who hates cats are Habs fans.

F*** the Habs!!!! :silly:

[HEyHEY]

43. Habs rule cats drool!

[Bertha Venation]

59. What are Habs? eom

[devilgrrl]

68. Habs is short for Le Habitants...

French for inhabitants aka Canadiens.

The Montreal Canadiens -The friggin' Habs! :puke:

:silly:

[Bertha Venation]

78. Thank you.

I'm a Ducks' fan, m'self....

[glarius]

37. When did you last hear of a cat turning on it's owner and attacking

even killing him (her)...We hear a lot of that with respect to dogs..."Oh I can't understand why fido attacked little Jimmy...He's always so friendly!".....I guess you know you've really upset us cat lovers eh?.....:D

[HEyHEY]

42. Hey plenty of cats scratch their owners

If they were bigger there'd be a lot of cat related death.

I will admit I was expecting more backup from dog people.

[CrownPrinceBandar]

89. If they (cats) were bigger...

they may pull people out of avalanches as well.

[HEyHEY]

90. Yeah just to eat them!

;-)

[PragMantisT]

39. And We The People

are the mice

apologies to Art Spiegelman

[anti-NAFTA]

45. It's actually the opposite.

Dogs are idiots who believe anything their master tells them while cats have brains and like what benefits them. Sure, there are some repukes that vote for their pockets (e.g. capitalists), but most of them are fundie scum.

And how can you call Repukes cats when Bill Frist used to torture the poor animals?

[HEyHEY]

51. No t's right

Dogs obey because they love their masters..not cause they're dumb. Dogs are all about friendship

[Az]

54. Dogs=Social Cats=Solitary

Comes down to nature. Dogs are far closer to humans socially. They have been with us since long before recorded history. Cats only recently were partially domesticated and are not social creatures. They abide humans and may show affection to a few but they would never be part of a team or group trying to do something productive for the whole.

[Taeger]

67. Well no

Dogs don't really believe anything. Animals don't have the same higher reasoning skills as you or I do.

They can be conditioned on way or another. It's a more primitive response. The kind that YOU can't explain like phobias.

Dogs are more easily trained because they desire to be part of a pack. You can condition them with acceptance and approval. Food works well too. That's another form of acceptance and social bonding.

I always tell people that FOOD is the foundation for any good relationship. It holds for people as well as animals. Think of ANY social ritual you engage in. EVERY ONE involves the sharing of food.

My perspective is that cats are simply less social in nature. They are also less fun depending on how outdoorsy or sporty you are. You can't really teach them to do a task or chore. They don't bark at intruders. They don't alert you when someone is coming.

Cat behavior is a LOT less cooperative. It's no wonder since introducing a cat into anothers territory is the equivalent of starting a war. Dogs will accept each other readily once dominance is established (if two dogs are EQUALLY matched, you may have problems).


I don't think you could assign a cat vs dog association to Democrats OR Republicans. Dogs having pecking orders, they don't have hierarchies. Cats tend to just plain hate each other.

Ultimately, if you desire being ignored and rejected instead of loved, a cat is probably the right animal for you ;-) Cats aren't social, they're co-dependent ;-)

[EstimatedProphet]

47. Wrong analogy

Dogs and cats=Democrats
Tapeworms and maggots=Republicans

[redqueen]

61. Dog person here

You're exactly right!

Those damn cats were gods back in the day and they still want to take over and rule us! Watch them closely! ;)

Seriously, though, when they rub the side of their face against you, that is in fact marking you as their property / territory. They have scent glands along their whiskers.

BUT, if they bump you with the top of their head, THAT'S love! :D

[Taeger]

82. Rubbing

RedQueen, you're always my ally ;-)

Yep, the rubbing behavior is a gentle form of marking. Dogs do this too.

In fact, A LOT of animals will rub objects. It's ALL a form of marking territory or possesion.

[DinahMoeHum]

69. WTF ??? Not "Re-Pug-Licans" and "Demo-Cats" ??

Remember the "Capitol Critters" cartoon show ??


:kick:

[kodi]

70. dogs and democrats both are recognized for their trait of empathy

do you know what a compassionate conservative is called?

a democrat.

[flamingyouth]

72. I think my cats are more Libertarian than Republican

They've certainly got the "live free" part down pat!

[DS1]

83. Dogs are the republicans

They eat shit and like it.

[tom_paine]

87. I always thought of dogs as Busheviks due to their slavish nature

You leave the house for 5 minutes, and who behaves as if you were leaving forever and you surprised the shit out of them by returning?

Freepers...errrr...dogs.

Who goes nuts when denied the soothing sounds of His Master's Voice and will do WHATEVER Master says in order to get that pat on the head or Scoobie snack?

Freepers...errrr...dogs.

See, you can spin this any way. Let's leave the animals out of this, eh?

[Lorien]

91. What a vile thread

thank goodness for the "ignore" feature!

[HEyHEY]

92. If you think a light hearted thread about cats is vile I question

Your ability to cope with daily situations.

[Deja Q]

93. Other way around, dude!

Dogs = mindlessly obedient, all dance and work to the same mindless tune. Dog are also TRAINED to rescue babies, walk the blind, drink the booze barreled around their neck, rip people to shreds, and everything else they do. Naturally, left to their own devices, they just sit there in a stupor.

Cats = the epitome of individuality. Surely the mark of the liberal, individuality? Cats also like to play, not work. Working is for losers.

Also, put a gaggle of cats and a gaggle of dogs into a ship. Blow a hole in the side of the ship. As the ship sinks, watch who tries to help who. Neither helps out anybody but themselves. The comparing-animal-to-human approach doesn't quite work either way.

Not that your take is wrong though, I am compelled to agree...

[HEyHEY]

94. hey come on untrained bowsers have resuced folks

:-)

[ikojo]

95. If animals could use a computer

Dogs would use Windows

CATS would use a MACINTOSH


Cats are simply a far more intelligent and choosey species of animal.

I am honored to be in the company of a fine calico feline.

[Taeger]

97. Intelligence denotes ..

Intelligence denotes the ability to learn. Judging from the number of tasks and situations a dog can be taught, I would say that dogs are the more intelligent species.

Perhaps cats are simply uncooperative. However, there is a fuzzy line between stupid and lazy ;-)