Comments of winocas (17)

Comment on post Seriously, Texas?:
2009-04-24T12:16:32+00:00
All I can do is remind you that these are the same people who voted for W. not only once, but twice.

Fool me once, shame on me; fool me twice, I'm a Republican...

Comment on post Time Warner shelving bandwidth caps!:
2009-04-16T22:05:21+00:00
Is there something about bandwidth limiting I'm not getting here? I mean, while it sounds bad, it sounds like they'd be guaranteeing that the bandwidth they advertise would be the one you get (and not just in spurts).

Comment on post oh well:
2008-01-07T11:54:24+00:00
Ack! Maybe your water is provided by the electric company?

Comment on post oh well:
2008-01-07T11:41:31+00:00
The only other thing I can think of is that they're tacking on a solid waste pickup fee (garbage) which is usually about $10 a month.

Comment on post oh well:
2008-01-06T11:27:14+00:00
Well, depends on what you're doing I suppose.
The price of water can vary greatly through the US. In most US cities you pay between 0.02 and 0.07 cents/gallon. Your water statement should have a price per gallon on it.

Then just keep in mind that the average shower takes about 2.6 gallons/minute, depending on the toilet you have it uses 1.6 or 3.5 gallons/flush, a dishwasher load consumes about 15 gallons, washing machine depending on the model, between 16 and 39 gallons, etc.
You can certainly do the math. But to answer the question, yes, it does seem a bit high.You're not running a car wash are you? j/k

Comment on post moving on:
2007-09-16T22:20:35+00:00
Coming back to texas, eh? Gimme a call sometime, I'm in the DFW area. My phone # is in my facebook profile.

Comment on post nukes, outing:
2007-09-09T20:53:30+00:00
I actually wanted to submit an answer not on there. They can be outed, personally I would not because of skirting the line of slander and or libel.
But as long as it's legal, let them do it. I don't think it's very ethical, and I think that those who do give up the moral high ground that they normally have over hypocrites and hate mongers.

Comment on post Snickers ad pulled:
2007-02-08T01:41:20+00:00
side note:
I keep getting false parallels. I just want to point out that getting raped cannot be compared to being a homosexual. Getting raped is an action which causes one's life and perspective to be changed, while being a homosexual is a (predetermined or learned, whichever you believe) social (or biochemical) disposition. It's like comparing an amputee to a hispanic. It makes no sense.

To the main point. Ok, even if I admit to all your points in this post. The commercial is not saying something insensitive about your deeply held beliefs, fears or issues. It is making fun of those of the guys terrified that they might be kissing. It's analagous to making fun of little kids who are terrified that because they touched a girl they have the cooties and need a cootie shot.
Furthermore, let me work off an assumption here:

1) The main goal of the homosexual community is to end discrimination and to be treated like every other member of society, with the same rights and responsibilities.
(If this is not the case, I'm wasting my time)

With this assumption in mind, is the community not in fact working contrary to its own goals by objecting to trivial commercials where the insensitivity of the matter portrayed is ambiguous at best? Worse yet, by making this discontent very public, merely serve to undermine and ridicule the homosexual community as hyper-sensitive while other, much more serious and real discriminatory practices are detracted from and even ignored?

These are the main reasons I find all this brouhaha over a commercial so... sad.

Comment on post Snickers ad pulled:
2007-02-08T01:16:32+00:00
I think it's more than that when it takes the form of lobbying and government pressure is brought to bear. After all, isn't that what we complain about with corporate lobbies? It stands to reason that the rules would have to be similar.
In any case, I think everyone already has a feel for where I stand, so unless there are specific questions, I'll leave it at that.

Comment on post Snickers ad pulled:
2007-02-07T10:25:09+00:00
I don't know about that. It's a gray area. Take South Park for example... or Blazing Saddles, or Borat, or Mind of Mencia, or the Daily Show, or Family Guy, Chapelle Show, etc. ad nauseum.
All of these shows are politically incorrect and almost always portray socially unacceptable behavior. It's not so much about what's shown as it is about how it's being shown. Perhaps it was on your last post that someone pointed out just how imbecilic the two guys in the snickers commercial were made out to be. That's part of how it was portrayed.
Now, same commercial, were portrayed in a serious manner, would be offensive. As to your example of the lynching... it would all depend on how it was portrayed. Keep in mind that in this kind of humor the fun is always being poked at the discraminator, not the discriminated, so you're example doesn't quite follow the model. Now if instead there were a lying showing how idiotic the lynchers were, then yes, it would probably be quite funny... something like Blazing Saddles I imagine.

I think that pressure applied to Snickers by activist groups to get them to pull the ad is on the same level to stores changing their signs from "Happy Holidays" to "Merry Christmas" because of threats made by the Christian Coalition.

Comment on post Snickers ad pulled:
2007-02-06T20:15:30+00:00
I would say the commercial is funny.

I'm going to digress here for a moment. What is funny? Funny is something unexpected, something rediculous, or something socially unacceptable.

Humor is politically incorrect by nature. If you take offence at the message of the commercial, I think it just goes to show that you are insecure about your status in society.
Accepting it, chuckling, and moving on is what most of us do, and lets everyone else know that you are accepted, and valued, and are comfortable enough to not resort to the tactics that thos who hate you do.

Sorry, just speaking my mind.
Tav

Comment on post I have a bad feeling about this...:
2006-02-12T11:04:54+00:00
Haha! you haven't heard karaoke until you're heard Mr. Jones butchered by twelve tonedeaf drunk people.

Comment on post 'Topes lose! 'Topes lose!:
2005-10-27T17:48:26+00:00
Watch Alberto Gonzales take her place in front of the Senate, and watch Bush say: "You didn't like her, you don't like him, shucks, you old fogies are just racist an biggoted."

...and then, watch Alberto Gonzales get appointed. *shudders*

Comment on post quick poll:
2005-06-21T14:25:14+00:00
Wait... what about the other option... like killing more people just for the hell of it? It's not one I'd pick, but to be fair, it has to be in there too.

Comment on post Poll tested, mother approved:
2005-03-23T11:40:03+00:00
lol Yes, I can see where that open-ended aspect could go horribly wrong.

Comment on post Poll tested, mother approved:
2005-03-23T10:37:59+00:00
I object: "Chocolate-covered grasshoppers" is not a choice! How am I supposed to make a decision?

Comment on post On Weight Watchers:
2005-01-18T19:24:53+00:00
Hey! I just saw you on livejournal! (I had no clue you had one!)

This backup was done by LJBackup.