THIS is how I feel about it...

nycparrothead · Post by **nycparrothead** » November 19, 2004 9:53 am

PHBeerman wrote:Dude, I am sorry but you are a moron.

See, I don't care who you are, that's just straight up funny!!

nycparrothead · Post by **nycparrothead** » November 19, 2004 9:57 am

mexcooker12 wrote:Dang it I cant even copy and paste an article right.

I guess Troy was right...

mexcooker12 · Post by **mexcooker12** » November 19, 2004 10:02 am

Guys its tougher than you think, I dont think we give JahFin enough credit.

semitruths · Post by **semitruths** » November 19, 2004 10:04 am

mexcooker12 wrote:Guys its tougher than you think, I dont think we give JahFin enough credit.

The trick has a name ........ it's called 'PREVIEW'

buffettbride · Post by **buffettbride** » November 19, 2004 10:34 am

mexcooker12 wrote:Dang it I cant even copy and paste an article right.

Obviously not enough studying of the "master". Ctrl C > Ctrl V.

Practice makes perfect.

bumper · Post by **bumper** » November 19, 2004 10:44 am

To make a fair comparison it would have to be Peyton Manning and say, Naomi Campbell or the likes of. Not sure how anyone does not see the implication of racial sterotypes. Successful black man, top of the heap, blond hair, blue eyed barbi type. Black women I am sure see the significance.

Key Lime Lee · Post by **Key Lime Lee** » November 19, 2004 11:02 am

And here I thought there was nudity in the spot, considering the size of the fuss... what a disappointment.

I hope this isn't the front edge of a larger wave of moral self-righteousness from the religious right. Unfortunately, based on several news stories on several topics and the fact that I got a fundraising call from a so-called "family values" group yesterday, I think the "morals police" are feeling empowered by the election results.

These people need to spend more time raising their children right so they don't HAVE to worry about what they may see or hear.

nycparrothead · Post by **nycparrothead** » November 19, 2004 11:04 am

Key Lime Lee wrote:These people need to spend more time raising their children right so they don't HAVE to worry about what they may see or hear.

AMEN BROTHER LEE!!!!

It's about damn time you said something I agree with.

PHBeerman · Post by **PHBeerman** » November 19, 2004 11:07 am

Key Lime Lee wrote:And here I thought there was nudity in the spot, considering the size of the fuss... what a disappointment.

I hope this isn't the front edge of a larger wave of moral self-righteousness from the religious right. Unfortunately, based on several news stories on several topics and the fact that I got a fundraising call from a so-called "family values" group yesterday, I think the "morals police" are feeling empowered by the election results.

These people need to spend more time raising their children right so they don't HAVE to worry about what they may see or hear.

Lee while I think these folks are over the top, they have just as much right to lobby as your legalize mary jane group!!!

Key Lime Lee · Post by **Key Lime Lee** » November 19, 2004 11:12 am

PHBeerman wrote: Lee while I think these folks are over the top, they have just as much right to lobby as your legalize mary jane group!!!

1) I don't smoke - sorry not to play into your stereotype.

2) I don't believe I ever said they DON'T have the right to lobby.

PHBeerman · Post by **PHBeerman** » November 19, 2004 11:14 am

Key Lime Lee wrote:
PHBeerman wrote: Lee while I think these folks are over the top, they have just as much right to lobby as your legalize mary jane group!!!
1) I don't smoke - sorry not to play into your stereotype.

2) I don't believe I ever said they DON'T have the right to lobby.

So why do you keep complaining about it?

Key Lime Lee · Post by **Key Lime Lee** » November 19, 2004 11:17 am

PHBeerman wrote:
Key Lime Lee wrote:
PHBeerman wrote: Lee while I think these folks are over the top, they have just as much right to lobby as your legalize mary jane group!!!
1) I don't smoke - sorry not to play into your stereotype.

2) I don't believe I ever said they DON'T have the right to lobby.
So why do you keep complaining about it?

Your statement and your question aren't even related.

PHBeerman · Post by **PHBeerman** » November 19, 2004 11:23 am

Key Lime Lee wrote:
PHBeerman wrote:
Key Lime Lee wrote:
PHBeerman wrote: Lee while I think these folks are over the top, they have just as much right to lobby as your legalize mary jane group!!!
1) I don't smoke - sorry not to play into your stereotype.

2) I don't believe I ever said they DON'T have the right to lobby.
So why do you keep complaining about it?
Your statement and your question aren't even related.

Sorry let me clarify the question.

It seems you have only been coming around to chat when you want to b**** about some made up group of “morality police” among us. Yet, you believe that they have just as much right to lobby as the activist groups whose views better fit your own. Yet you keep bitching about them expressing their views. Why?

RinglingRingling · Post by **RinglingRingling** » November 19, 2004 11:23 am

mexcooker12 wrote:I meant that I think people are making such a big deal about it is that underneath a lot of America sees it as a rich black man with a beautiful white woman and a lot of people although claim not to be racist still are uncomfortable with the whole interracial relationship aspect. If it was a superstar white guy this story would have been over tuesday morning.

no. it would not have. There would have still been a bunch of half-wits bitching about it like they were after the Superbowl. And look how long the effects of that little incident have stuck with us...

Mr Play · Post by **Mr Play** » November 19, 2004 11:23 am

I was watching with my 5 year old when this happened, and I'm ok with it. He sees my wife walking around in a towel when she gets out of the shower, and he's seen her take it off before. I remember Calgon commercials of naked women in tubs from when I was a kid, and I'm ok (for the most part anyway). Even as a fairly conservative parent this really wasn't that big a deal to me.

buffettbride · Post by **buffettbride** » November 19, 2004 11:25 am

wFPs.

Mr Play · Post by **Mr Play** » November 19, 2004 11:26 am

buffettbride wrote:wFPs.

You were watching with my 5 year old when this happened?

RinglingRingling · Post by **RinglingRingling** » November 19, 2004 11:27 am

Key Lime Lee wrote:And here I thought there was nudity in the spot, considering the size of the fuss... what a disappointment.

I hope this isn't the front edge of a larger wave of moral self-righteousness from the religious right. Unfortunately, based on several news stories on several topics and the fact that I got a fundraising call from a so-called "family values" group yesterday, I think the "morals police" are feeling empowered by the election results.

These people need to spend more time raising their children right so they don't HAVE to worry about what they may see or hear.

exactly. The whole exercise prior to Election Day was to turn out the fundamentalist born-againers and get them to vote a moral agenda (losing sight of the concept that in a democracy/republic, you can't legislate morality).

With any luck at all, the "moral majority" 'tards will overstep themselves, and we can get back to worrying about bigger things than nudity on TV.

PHBeerman · Post by **PHBeerman** » November 19, 2004 11:27 am

buffettbride wrote:wFPs.

Less the conservative part.

PHBeerman · Post by **PHBeerman** » November 19, 2004 11:29 am

RinglingRingling wrote:
Key Lime Lee wrote:And here I thought there was nudity in the spot, considering the size of the fuss... what a disappointment.

I hope this isn't the front edge of a larger wave of moral self-righteousness from the religious right. Unfortunately, based on several news stories on several topics and the fact that I got a fundraising call from a so-called "family values" group yesterday, I think the "morals police" are feeling empowered by the election results.

These people need to spend more time raising their children right so they don't HAVE to worry about what they may see or hear.
exactly. The whole exercise prior to Election Day was to turn out the fundamentalist born-againers and get them to vote a moral agenda (losing sight of the concept that in a democracy/republic, you can't legislate morality).

With any luck at all, the "moral majority" 'tards will overstep themselves, and we can get back to worrying about bigger things than nudity on TV.

So in a democracy people should not vote based on their core values?