Deep Thoughts and Random Rants.
Isn't buying a two-wheel drive Jeep kinda like drinking a non-alcoholic beer? Really now. What's the point?
Does having "reduced carb" Orowheat bread with my bowl of penne and marinara count as an Atkins friendly meal? And how do you reduce the carbs in BREAD? Ya wanna know? They make the slices smaller. Marketers are all going straight to hell.
Does ANYONE know what David Lee Roth sings in the chorus of "Ice Cream Man?" Shit, Dave. I've been listening to that song for almost twenty years and I haven't a clue. Neither does the internet as it gives several different options. Good ol' lemonade? Puddin Pie banana? And since when do ice cream men serve Dixie cups?
Can someone please tell me if there is a writer on the internet more deserving of a book contract than her ? This last piece was tender and dirty and nostalgic and hopeful and demure and erotic and just exhibitionistic enough to satisfy the countless digital voyeurs who read her every day. Myself included. Sarah, be mine.
Can someone please explain to me how, while in an election year, in the worst job market in forty years, with the most divided population in decades, while at war, with Osama Bin Laden STILL on the loose, that the most contentious political issue of the day is whether or not gay people can marry? How on Earth can so many people get so upset about this? How does this POSSIBLY impact their lives? How? I want all you moral majority fuckers to email me or post in this blog PRECISELY how the marriage of people you probably don’t know and certainly don’t associate with will change ANYTHING in your day to day life. What? Are you worried that once gay people can marry you will have a harder time finding a decorator? What pisses me off is that half the hypocrites screaming about this are more than likely beating off to lesbian porn on the internet right fucking now. The “sanctity of marriage?” In a country with a 50% divorce rate? I think the sanctity of marriage gets compromised every time one of you right-wing schmucks marries another trophy wife. The “protection of the family?” I think the protection of the family is violated every time a 16 year old girl pumps out an unwanted baby from an abusive, absentee father. God forbid that two adults who love one another and who are not hurting their family or your family or kids or old people or puppies and are contributing members of society should be able to enjoy equal rights under law. God forbid they should be able to publicly commit their lives to the person they love who loves them in return.
Oh. Right. That's your reason. God forbid it. I thought he forbid lying and stealing and killing too. How about we toss a few stones at those people in Washington first before we begin launching boulders at people who love each other. How bout it? Too much to ask?
Thought so.
And for the record, am I the only person who thought Kerry’s support of “civil unions” as opposed to gay “marriage” was the biggest fucking copout since “don’t ask, don’t tell?” His reason is that “marriage” is a religious, spiritual union defined as the joining of a man and a woman. Ok Captain Eggo, if that’s the case, then under separation of church and state the government should have no involvement in marriages whatsoever. Find some balls John, and do the right thing.
Comments
Re John Kerry: Hear Hear!
What bums me out about his recent success is that he's so deliberately conservative in his views so as to avoid scaring off voters. If you're campaigning for change, IMO you should present an option substantially different from the status quo.
And you're right: his stance on gay marriage is just "don't ask, don't tell" all over again. It was a cop-out when Clinton did it, and it's a cop-out now.
Posted by: bridget | February 16, 2004 07:57 PM
Way to put a typo in all caps, Jimbo. (duck - sorry, copy editors are all geeks and should burn in hell)
No, seriously ... nice rant. I agree on everything except the blog you referenced, and only because I have not read her yet and therefore can't say one way or another (but am sure I will dig her, as other people I dig seem to).
It gets way worse than the low-carb bread, man. I saw reduced-sugar orange juice at Giant (they put fucking sucralose in OJ!) and reduced-carb MILK. What is wrong with people?
Posted by: sid | February 16, 2004 08:17 PM
i don't see it sid. i made a style change as a result, but i still haven't found the typo.
i seriously need a copy editor. it generally takes me a dozen reads before i find all my errors. many, many, MANY errors.
Posted by: the mighty jimbo | February 16, 2004 09:47 PM
Awww, Jim — you don't have to read it that many times, as long as you read it PRECISELY.
Posted by: sid | February 16, 2004 09:50 PM
duh. i need to stop trusting spell check. thanks sid!
Posted by: the mighty jimbo | February 16, 2004 09:55 PM
wow - sounds like someone needs to get laid....
Posted by: susan | February 16, 2004 11:16 PM
What I just loooove (with sarcasm oozing out) is that they want to change the friggin' constitution to ban gay marriage. Yes, I would loooove to have a constitution that discriminates and persecutes. Fanfrickintastic.
Posted by: Nicole | February 17, 2004 07:47 AM
Hmm...copy editors who edit even when they're not getting paid for it. Curious! I used to do that, too, but now I figure if I'm not getting paid to edit, I can let everyone write the way they want. It reminds me that my skills are still useful. ;-)
BTW, Jim, I agree wholeheartedly on the gay marriage issue. Shouldn't even be an issue, in my opinion. People loving each other, and being willing to commit to that love publicly: This is a bad thing...how? Sanctity of marriage, my ass. How many people crying about the sanctity of marriage are secretly balling the mailman when their partner's away? Folks are afraid of changing the status quo, and try to justify it any way possible in order to avoid saying they're unthinkingly fearful. 'Tis human nature, after all -- historically, folks who stuck with the tried and true (e.g., didn't eat the weird berries in the forest) tended to survive better -- but it's not necessarily appropriate in all instances. Some change is critical to refining civilization.
But you knew that.
Love is a good thing.
Posted by: Beth | February 17, 2004 08:32 AM
Fabulous, Jimbo.
I {heart} you for your sentiment.
Posted by: Daniella | February 17, 2004 09:31 AM
Regarding the 'sanctity' of marriage -- why don't people get up in arms about folks getting married at 4am while hammered in Vegas (and annulled days later)?
That would seem to be a much bigger issue concerning preserving the ideas of marriage, committment and love.
Not that there's anything wrong with a drunken sham wedding. I'm just saying...
Posted by: jim (k a y a) | February 17, 2004 02:36 PM
Amen on the same-sex marriages. The person I know who is most strongly against gay marriages is a crotchety old racist fart (unfortunately my grandfather through marriage)... who has been married and divorced three times. Not exactly a person I would think has any authority to comment on whether other people should be allowed to get married..
Posted by: Chair | February 17, 2004 07:34 PM
Couldn't agree more on all counts.
Except...while I, too, disagree with Kerry's stance, the sad reality is that most of America is not as enlightened as you are, Jimbo. It still annoys me, but I'm willing to let him cop out on this issue if it means we'll get rid of the crotch rats currently in office.
Posted by: peter | February 18, 2004 09:59 AM
Actually, I don't see anything wrong with all marriages being civil unions. If you want the sacramental marriage, do it in a church, but then all of us who don't want that can just get married in peace. (including gays and lesbians)
I got married by a justice of the peace and there was NO WAY you could have dragged me into a church to be married. (My Christian husband knew that before we got married.) So if they want to call my marriage a civil union, so be it.
Posted by: dawn | February 21, 2004 10:47 PM
What I'm not seeing is why the gays & lesbians want marriage and aren't satisfied w/civil unions? Seems like if civil unions offer all the legal and financial protections (see alimony) of marriage, the difference they're seeking is religious or "spiritual." So the whole "separation of church & state" argument doesn't justify either position.
The fact that there may be other, possibly more pressing, issues with the institution of marriage (divorce rate, domestic abuse, etc.) doesn't negate the validity of the anti-gay marriage position.
An anti-gay-marriage person's hypocrisy doesn't negate it either. Just because someone has ever been in a failed marriage doesn't mean their logic is flawed on the whole issue of marriage. An alcholic should still be able to tell their kid not smoke crack. Sometimes the ones who have failed can offer a lot of pertinent advice on that very topic.
What is the big deal about saying a marriage is the union of a man and a woman? This isn't about banning love. This isn't about banning the ability for two people to live together. This isn't about banning legal unions. This is only about marriage. 8-year olds can't get married either. John Doe can't marry his younger brother. There are plenty of examples where there could be "2 people full of love for each other" where most of us would be against them having the legal right to marriage. The gays & lesbians are making this out to be some kind of holy grail of equality and fair treatment.
As far as the God argument and throwing stones at people in DC-- again, by that logic, we should stop pursuing child molestors and rapists until we've locked up all the murderers. Just because something more pressing exists doesn't mean the issue isn't worth addressing. If, by your argument, God forbade gay marriages, lying, stealing, and killing, and we should strive to prevent what God forbids, then everything on that list should be avoided-- not just the worst items.
I'm not trying to pick a fight. Just seemed like when you called out the moral majority, nobody answered so I thought I'd take a stab.
Posted by: Paul Nedney | February 23, 2004 03:08 PM
I am from California and now living in Florida. I cannot fined Orowheat, Winter Wheat bread here, or the Cracker Wheat, or even the great wheat dinner rolls. Can anyone tell me where to fined them in the Sarasota or Bradenton Fl area.
Thank You
From the Deck of Joyce Molinari
Posted by: Joyce Molinari | December 2, 2004 09:38 AM