2004-01-31
(no subject)
The funniest thing I read all day long was a bit in People about Elijah saying that he's amused by all the rumors going around the internet about him being gay, particularly the one where he and Dom are having a secret love affair and Dom's dating his sister as a cover story.
And I suddenly thought, "I just had a dozen mental comebacks to that, and none of them were even close to, 'Yeah, those rumors are just hysterically bogus, aren't they?'"
Truth be told, I think about seven of them involved Dom and Elijah being in the middle of some kind of sordid sex act when he said that.
So, just in case you were wondering if you all had quite thoroughly corrupted me ... yes. Yes, you have.
And also, I picked up a book at Borders today that was, according to the cover, about sex slaves. How many sex scenes did it have in it? One ... at least, I think that one counted.
*picks up new book and tries to shake another sex scene out*
Damn it, there's not enough porn in my porn.
And I suddenly thought, "I just had a dozen mental comebacks to that, and none of them were even close to, 'Yeah, those rumors are just hysterically bogus, aren't they?'"
Truth be told, I think about seven of them involved Dom and Elijah being in the middle of some kind of sordid sex act when he said that.
So, just in case you were wondering if you all had quite thoroughly corrupted me ... yes. Yes, you have.
And also, I picked up a book at Borders today that was, according to the cover, about sex slaves. How many sex scenes did it have in it? One ... at least, I think that one counted.
*picks up new book and tries to shake another sex scene out*
Damn it, there's not enough porn in my porn.
(no subject)
You know, I've been thinking about it for a few days now, and I have this to say about the CBS/MoveOn.org debacle.
I'm on MoveOn.org's side. I like the commercial. I think it's cute, smart, and it gets the point across. But it's not bloody censorship and it's not violating MoveOn.org's First Amendment rights.
If their rights were being violated, none of us would have seen it. But we have, by going to the website.
CBS is a company, and it has company policies. The particular policy that blocks their showing the commercial during the Super Bowl has been in place for decades. Which means that either a.) MoveOn.org didn't do enough research to find out something so simple before their ad contest, or b.) they knew damn well they wouldn't get it shown, and were trying for the publicity that they could get if they complained. As someone who's behind the sentiment of the commercial, both options piss me off.
If MoveOn.org is so intent on showing their commercial, I'm sure there are plenty of other networks that would be willing to show it. And considering they could afford the Super Bowl price (what is it now, half a million?), I'm sure they can buy even more airtime on a network that could use the publicity.
Sheesh. *steps off soapbox*
I'm on MoveOn.org's side. I like the commercial. I think it's cute, smart, and it gets the point across. But it's not bloody censorship and it's not violating MoveOn.org's First Amendment rights.
If their rights were being violated, none of us would have seen it. But we have, by going to the website.
CBS is a company, and it has company policies. The particular policy that blocks their showing the commercial during the Super Bowl has been in place for decades. Which means that either a.) MoveOn.org didn't do enough research to find out something so simple before their ad contest, or b.) they knew damn well they wouldn't get it shown, and were trying for the publicity that they could get if they complained. As someone who's behind the sentiment of the commercial, both options piss me off.
If MoveOn.org is so intent on showing their commercial, I'm sure there are plenty of other networks that would be willing to show it. And considering they could afford the Super Bowl price (what is it now, half a million?), I'm sure they can buy even more airtime on a network that could use the publicity.
Sheesh. *steps off soapbox*