I suppose it shouldn’t be surprising that San Francisco would decide that it can tell McDonald’s they are no longer allowed to sell a safe, legal product. If you have not heard about this, San Francisco, a city dominated by very vocal and powerful homosexuals, has passed a law that says McDonald’s can no longer put toys in Happy Meals unless the meals meet certain guidelines, mainly being under a certain amount of calories. Trying to keep little kids from becoming fat is a good thing, but I don’t see how Happy Meals are the main cause of obesity as opposed to lack of exercise and parents who let kids go overboard. I ate plenty of Happy Meals, I still like them sometimes, and I have never been overweight. Millions of other people are the same. But San Francisco’s “progressive” idea that they (homosexuals) know what is best for everyone and their hatred for big companies makes this type of insanely ridiculous law OK by them. Of course McDonald’s should do the right thing and ignore the law and sue all the way to the Supreme Court when it is enforced, but the fear of bad public relations will stop that.
Let’s not forget that San Francisco is the same place that has, as an official act of the city, condemned the Catholic Church in clear violation of the First Amendment and they have been upheld by a federal court in doing so. When I am asked the same question, over and over, by so-called “gay marriage” advocates why I oppose redefining marriage, I say again and again that I don’t trust homosexual activists to not attempt to force the Church to marry gay people (they already have talked openly of doing so and groups like “rainbow sash” have proven that homosexual rights advocates are openly hateful of the Church and want to see it brought down). I also don’t trust our courts or legislatures to protect the Church. Given the homosexual proclivity to use the power of the state to enforce their own brand of “morality” on everyone else, does it seem unreasonable for me to be concerned? You not being concerned is unreasonable.
Posted in Faith, Health, News, Society
Tagged apples, court, fries, gay, hamburger, Happy Meal, homosexual, law, liberals, marriage, McDonald's, mcnuggets, progressive, San Francisco, tolerance
First off, I consider myself to be a very strong proponent of the environment; the threat of global warming is real and the claims are backed up by legitimate science regardless of what the “deniers” try to say. That is a huge reason why this type of advertising campaign bothers me, among many other reasons. When the pro-environmental message is mixed in with this kind of stupidity, it makes the message easier to mock and dismiss. So this is a video from the British part of the group 10:10 Global, which is a group that advocates cutting carbon emissions by 10% per year starting this year (10%, 2010 = 10:10); a good intention despite the fact that the entire thing was clearly made up in meeting rooms by marketing experts. The video is, and let’s see if I can exhaust my adjectives here: gross, inappropriate, juvenile, tasteless, unfunny…you get the point.
The group took the video down and put up a half-hearted, rather condescending apology. But beyond the disgusting video content and the amazingly poor judgment needed to depict kids in this way, the video poses a serious question about the beliefs of many of those who are advancing the pro-environment cause. This goes hand in hand with the overpopulation hysterics of those who think all procreation should have ended the second after they were born. The correct message that we should embrace when talking about global warming is that this is an issue about saving lives; it is in some ways the ultimate “pro-life” movement. What possible place does exploding people who don’t step in line with the message have? And what about the lies told to the unfortunate exploding people? It’s ok if you disagree, you are free to do so. It reminds me so much of so many so-called “open-minded” people online; they are all about freedom of speech and tolerance right up until the point that you don’t agree with them.
“I don’t agree with what he says, but I will fight to the death for his right to say it.”
Really? Because I don’t think you will fight to a paper cut much less to the death. When we get beyond the cliches and platitudes, how many of us are paying lip service to “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech” while what we really desire is freedom of speech for those who agree with us and for the rest to just shut the f**k up be it through executive fiat or coming down with a severe case of tongue rot? We’re lazy about the rights we actually do have and we get most excited over the rights we only think we should have. At this moment, writing about the subject, I am truly happier that I have a fresh banana for my oatmeal than freedom of speech.
How often do we use it, this right to free speech? Here on WordPress? I spend most of my days in my parents’ house (not a lot of free speech for me there), at my job (nope), at school (a touch of free speech mixed with a touch of “Do you enjoy being a student here?”) and asleep (it is in my dreams that I break the bonds of servitude). If anyone died for our right to free speech, I hope a sign in front a bar in Georgia was not the last mental image of what they were dying for. Considering that the only war fought to defend our Constitution was the one fought 11 years before the Constitution existed, I am not so sure the concept of the proud warrior defending the Bill of Rights applies so much as the concept of the scared guy trying to kill the guy who is trying to kill him.
So if you want to be a racist, draw someone’s deity, wear tea bags on your hat, or just be a garden-variety a**hole, go right ahead but leave the First Amendment out of it. No one died so you could post a picture of a woman having sex with a horse on the Internet and draw chalk outlines of Muhammad on the sidewalk. When you actually have a reason to speak out against state tyranny, the First Amendment will be right there beside you as will the spirits of Adams, Madison and Jefferson. Until then, you’re just a self-entitled blowhard who doesn’t know how good his life really is because a government sniper isn’t going to shoot him in the head while he is giving an interview anytime soon.
When Dr. Dark and Blackout Boy threatened to wreak havoc across the metropolis of Seattle, there was only one hero who could save the day. The Mayor and Police Chief were helpless. Dr. Dark and Blackout boy had taken the city’s beloved soccer team for ransom, trapped a Puget Sound Energy worker on a deadly light post, and were holding dozens of people on top of the Space Needle, threatening doom. Only Electron Boy could help. And help, he did. He freed the Sounders. He rescued the trapped electrical worker. And he saved the Space Needle and all those inside. Perhaps Seattle has not heard the last of the evil Dr. Dark and Blackout Boy, but we have also not seen the last of Electron Boy.
If you want to read the entire story behind Electron Boy, see it here and here. Reading about this is one of the best things you can do for yourself today. Even more, you can give to the Make-A-Wish Foundation to help ensure that we never run out of heros.
When tea party members–predominantly old and virtually all white–gather, it is called a “peaceful protest”. The fact that they are implicitly threatening violence doesn’t matter.
When opponents of the Arizona immigration law–many young, many Hispanic–gather, it is called “rioting”.
The thing with being a bigot is that you probably don’t know that you’re one.
I wonder if any of the families or friends of the 11 people killed by the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico were chanting “Drill, Baby, Drill” along with the others at the Republican National Convention in 2008? I wonder if those whose jobs depend upon the Gulf Coast fish and shrimp were chanting along with Sarah Palin?
Perhaps it was only the profit motive that led BP to oppose stricter regulations on offshore oil drilling and Massey Energy to ignore safety rules on, literally, thousands of occasions over the last decade. Safety is expensive and inconvenient. BP knows that. Massey Energy knows that. Tesoro knows that. The 300,000,000 plus Americans who don’t know anyone who died recently on the Deepwater Horizon, in the Upper Big Branch mine, or in Anacortes, Washington (47 men and women in all) mostly only care about cheap gas and electricity. If it means less to spend on the new TV or “McMansion”, the body count be damned. And if human lives don’t matter, you can be sure that animals and those who have not been born matter even less. I am sure many Americans shook their heads and said “That’s a shame” every time they watched the news over the last few weeks, then went out and filled up the Range Rover while leaving the thermostat set at a comfortable 72 degrees.
We have the cheapest energy in the industrial world, but you would never know it by asking. Americans, possessing the grandest sense of entitlement in history, feel they pay far too much. So bring on more men and women to the slaughter. We don’t have to see their children cry.
Drill, Baby, Drill.
Do you care how many people die so you can have cheap energy and gas?
Posted in News
Tagged energy, gas, greed, oil
Apparently a county teacher’s union in New Jersey sent out an “internal memo” which included the following paragraph:
“Dear Lord, this year you have taken away my favorite actor, Patrick Swayze, my favorite actress, Farrah Fawcett, my favorite singer, Michael Jackson, and my favorite salesman, Billy Mays. I just wanted to let you know that Chris Christie is my favorite governor.”
Chris Christie is the Governor of New Jersey and the teacher’s union is currently in a contract negotiation with the state and strongly opposes Governor Christie’s proposed budget cuts to education (see the story on CNN). In response, the leader of the union stated that the memo was a joke, but then conceded that it was “in bad taste.” Years ago, Anne Coulter made a public statement about poisoning Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens (see the story on Fox News). Coulter told an audience that “We need somebody to put rat poisoning in Justice Stevens’ creme brulee. That’s just a joke, for you in the media.” More recently, Sarah Palin sent out a tweet telling followers “Don’t retreat, instead RELOAD!” This followed a Facebook posting where a graphic showed a shooting target over the names of members of Congress that she believes should be defeated in the November election (see a story on CBS). John McCain dismissed criticism of complaint’s about Palin’s language and many defenders have claimed the statements were jokes and harmless.
When did it become OK to joke about killing people? And when did it become OK to make extreme, and offensive statements and defend them with claims that you were only joking? I remember threatening once to kick my cousin. When my mom punished me, I told her I was only being funny, I didn’t mean anything. She responded that some things like violence, or pretty much anything else listed in the Ten Commandments–the Commandments being subject to additions by her, without notice–were not things to be joked about. I was always confused as to why some cartoons could joke about so much violence (when I could sneak a look at them; my mom’s control of my TV viewing habits is a whole other post) but my mom confirmed that if the cartoon writers were present she would spank them too.
I don’t think I am saying anything new on the nature of public discourse. We are a nation that becomes less and less civil by the day and I have been guilty of contributing. I hate it and I hate the fact that I have contributed to it all in the past and still fall into trap. Is there a line where a joke stops becoming a joke? How much weight should we give to words versus actions?