Yesterday was the first day since Sunday that I didn't cry.
.... progress.
Friday, December 30, 2005
Wednesday, December 28, 2005
betrayal
How could two people who claimed to be my friends do something so horrible?
How can people be so cruel and deceitful?
How could they put our mutual friends in such an awful position?
I have never been hurt and betrayed like this. I wouldn't wish this pain on anyone.
...
They are selfish, lying cowards, and they have to live with the guilt of hurting me so deeply and with the knowledge that they destroyed our friendship.
I, on the other hand, am rid of two people who clearly had no respect for me or my friends. I also have a huge group of people who love, support and respect me.
I win.
To my true friends, thank you so much for your love and support. I am truly blessed to call you my friends.
How can people be so cruel and deceitful?
How could they put our mutual friends in such an awful position?
I have never been hurt and betrayed like this. I wouldn't wish this pain on anyone.
...
They are selfish, lying cowards, and they have to live with the guilt of hurting me so deeply and with the knowledge that they destroyed our friendship.
I, on the other hand, am rid of two people who clearly had no respect for me or my friends. I also have a huge group of people who love, support and respect me.
I win.
To my true friends, thank you so much for your love and support. I am truly blessed to call you my friends.
Friday, December 23, 2005
Welcome to Bizzaro World
I feel like I'm in some alternate universe. Does anyone else find it unsettling to see Johnny Damon in pinstripes?My brain hurts.
Thursday, December 22, 2005
cool site
http://www.world66.com
You can create maps of countries you've visited, or US states/Canadian Provinces/European countries that you've visited.
Here's my US map:
A slight East Coast bias, although I would love to visit Washington, Oregon, Alaska and Hawaii.
My world map, unfortunately, is not very interesting. I've never left the US... So, instead, here is my map of places I'd like to visit:
38 countries... I'd better get busy. :)
Oh, in case you didn't notice, I decided to change my template. Enjoy!
You can create maps of countries you've visited, or US states/Canadian Provinces/European countries that you've visited.
Here's my US map:
A slight East Coast bias, although I would love to visit Washington, Oregon, Alaska and Hawaii.
My world map, unfortunately, is not very interesting. I've never left the US... So, instead, here is my map of places I'd like to visit:
38 countries... I'd better get busy. :)
Oh, in case you didn't notice, I decided to change my template. Enjoy!
Friday, December 16, 2005
Ford Pulls Some Ads From Gay Press
Ford Pulls Some Ads From Gay Press
Move Follows Boycott By a Religious Group
By Sholnn Freeman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 7, 2005; D01
Ford Motor Co. said it will stop running ads for its Jaguar and Land Rover brands in the gay press, helping to avoid a confrontation with conservative Christians but setting up a fight with gays and lesbians.
The American Family Association, a conservative religious group, launched a boycott of Ford this year for extending marriage benefits to same-sex couples and giving "thousands of dollars to support homosexual groups and their agenda," the group said in written statement. The group criticized Ford for supporting gay commitment ceremonies and gay pride parades.
Ford spokesman Mike Moran said the move to stop advertising Jaguars and Land Rovers in gay publications such as the Advocate was based on a decision to streamline marketing budgets. Moran would not say what other magazine categories might be affected, citing competitive reasons.
Volvo, another Ford-owned luxury brand, will continue to advertise in gay publications. Ford has not advertised its U.S. brands, which include Ford, Mercury and Lincoln, in gay publications and does not plan to start, Moran said. "We've made it clear that decisions on where Ford brands advertise are made for business reasons, not as a social statement one way or the other," he said.
Ford has focused on niche markets at various times -- for example, trying to reach black families though marketing at churches and by supporting gospel music.
Gay groups denounced Ford's decision as a capitulation to the religious right. "It looks pretty clear that they have bowed to the American Family Association's demands," said Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights advocacy group.
Ford is the latest company to be ensnared in the culture wars over homosexuality, religion and American culture. Microsoft Corp. became a target of religious groups this year for its support of a Washington state bill to ban discrimination against gays and lesbians. The company withdrew its support for the bill, saying it was not caving to pressure but wanted to avoid taking a stand on a politically sensitive issue. After protest by employees, Microsoft reinstated its support for the anti-discrimination bill.
Ford became a target of the American Family Association in May. The association was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of a United Methodist church in Mississippi at the time. It claims to be one of the largest pro-family organizations in the country with nearly 3 million supporters. The association owns 200 radio stations under the American Family Radio name, according to its Web site. In the past, the group has targeted Walt Disney Co. for extending benefits to gay couples and criticized the Fox television series "Boston Public" for sexually oriented story lines.
The prospect of a boycott from the American Family Association, which gathered 110,000 signatures on an anti-Ford petition, worried some Ford dealers in the South, such as Jerry Reynolds of Texas. Reynolds said he started getting calls from customers and realized that a boycott would hurt business, so he faxed a letter to the association. "I said I am a dealer and I am the one who is going to get the brunt of the boycott," he said.
Reynolds and five other dealers met with Wildmon during the minister's subsequent visit to Dallas. In the meeting, he said, Wildmon agreed to give the dealers time to work things out with Ford officials. Subsequently, Ford executives held discussions with the association, including a meeting last month at the AFA's headquarters in Tupelo, Miss. After the meeting, the association agreed to call off the Ford boycott, saying in a written statement that its concerns were being addressed by the company.
Neither Reynolds nor Ford executives would specify what was discussed. Representatives from the American Family Association also declined to comment.
Reynolds said no deal was made on advertising. "There was no agreement struck -- period," he said. The AFA, he said, seemed to appreciate the fact that the dealers and Ford would simply sit down and talk. "Everybody wants there to be something. But there wasn't. We just talked."
Ford's success in heading off a confrontation with the AFA appears to have pushed the company into a new fight. Solmonese, of the Human Rights Campaign, said he spoke yesterday with a top Ford executive in Washington but was not satisfied with the company's explanation.
"Ford Motor Co. has a big public relations mess on its hands that it needs to clean up in short order," Solmonese said. He said his group is galvanizing its 600,000 members to protest Ford's advertising decision with letters and e-mails.
"Ford has been a friend to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender consumers and employees in the past," the group said in an e-mailed "Action Alert." "E-mail Ford today -- ask them to reject the American Family Association's assertions . . . and reaffirm their support for fairness."
Late yesterday Ford noted in a written statement that it would not change its employment policies: "Ford's commitment to diversity as an employer and corporate citizen remains unchanged. Any suggestion to the contrary is just plain wrong."
Move Follows Boycott By a Religious Group
By Sholnn Freeman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 7, 2005; D01
Ford Motor Co. said it will stop running ads for its Jaguar and Land Rover brands in the gay press, helping to avoid a confrontation with conservative Christians but setting up a fight with gays and lesbians.
The American Family Association, a conservative religious group, launched a boycott of Ford this year for extending marriage benefits to same-sex couples and giving "thousands of dollars to support homosexual groups and their agenda," the group said in written statement. The group criticized Ford for supporting gay commitment ceremonies and gay pride parades.
Ford spokesman Mike Moran said the move to stop advertising Jaguars and Land Rovers in gay publications such as the Advocate was based on a decision to streamline marketing budgets. Moran would not say what other magazine categories might be affected, citing competitive reasons.
Volvo, another Ford-owned luxury brand, will continue to advertise in gay publications. Ford has not advertised its U.S. brands, which include Ford, Mercury and Lincoln, in gay publications and does not plan to start, Moran said. "We've made it clear that decisions on where Ford brands advertise are made for business reasons, not as a social statement one way or the other," he said.
Ford has focused on niche markets at various times -- for example, trying to reach black families though marketing at churches and by supporting gospel music.
Gay groups denounced Ford's decision as a capitulation to the religious right. "It looks pretty clear that they have bowed to the American Family Association's demands," said Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights advocacy group.
Ford is the latest company to be ensnared in the culture wars over homosexuality, religion and American culture. Microsoft Corp. became a target of religious groups this year for its support of a Washington state bill to ban discrimination against gays and lesbians. The company withdrew its support for the bill, saying it was not caving to pressure but wanted to avoid taking a stand on a politically sensitive issue. After protest by employees, Microsoft reinstated its support for the anti-discrimination bill.
Ford became a target of the American Family Association in May. The association was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of a United Methodist church in Mississippi at the time. It claims to be one of the largest pro-family organizations in the country with nearly 3 million supporters. The association owns 200 radio stations under the American Family Radio name, according to its Web site. In the past, the group has targeted Walt Disney Co. for extending benefits to gay couples and criticized the Fox television series "Boston Public" for sexually oriented story lines.
The prospect of a boycott from the American Family Association, which gathered 110,000 signatures on an anti-Ford petition, worried some Ford dealers in the South, such as Jerry Reynolds of Texas. Reynolds said he started getting calls from customers and realized that a boycott would hurt business, so he faxed a letter to the association. "I said I am a dealer and I am the one who is going to get the brunt of the boycott," he said.
Reynolds and five other dealers met with Wildmon during the minister's subsequent visit to Dallas. In the meeting, he said, Wildmon agreed to give the dealers time to work things out with Ford officials. Subsequently, Ford executives held discussions with the association, including a meeting last month at the AFA's headquarters in Tupelo, Miss. After the meeting, the association agreed to call off the Ford boycott, saying in a written statement that its concerns were being addressed by the company.
Neither Reynolds nor Ford executives would specify what was discussed. Representatives from the American Family Association also declined to comment.
Reynolds said no deal was made on advertising. "There was no agreement struck -- period," he said. The AFA, he said, seemed to appreciate the fact that the dealers and Ford would simply sit down and talk. "Everybody wants there to be something. But there wasn't. We just talked."
Ford's success in heading off a confrontation with the AFA appears to have pushed the company into a new fight. Solmonese, of the Human Rights Campaign, said he spoke yesterday with a top Ford executive in Washington but was not satisfied with the company's explanation.
"Ford Motor Co. has a big public relations mess on its hands that it needs to clean up in short order," Solmonese said. He said his group is galvanizing its 600,000 members to protest Ford's advertising decision with letters and e-mails.
"Ford has been a friend to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender consumers and employees in the past," the group said in an e-mailed "Action Alert." "E-mail Ford today -- ask them to reject the American Family Association's assertions . . . and reaffirm their support for fairness."
Late yesterday Ford noted in a written statement that it would not change its employment policies: "Ford's commitment to diversity as an employer and corporate citizen remains unchanged. Any suggestion to the contrary is just plain wrong."
'Holiday' Cards Ring Hollow for Some on Bushes' List
'Holiday' Cards Ring Hollow for Some on Bushes' List
By Alan Cooperman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 7, 2005; A01
What's missing from the White House Christmas card? Christmas.
This month, as in every December since he took office, President Bush sent out cards with a generic end-of-the-year message, wishing 1.4 million of his close friends and supporters a happy "holiday season."
Many people are thrilled to get a White House Christmas card, no matter what the greeting inside. But some conservative Christians are reacting as if Bush stuck coal in their stockings.
"This clearly demonstrates that the Bush administration has suffered a loss of will and that they have capitulated to the worst elements in our culture," said William A. Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights.
Bush "claims to be a born-again, evangelical Christian. But he sure doesn't act like one," said Joseph Farah, editor of the conservative Web site WorldNetDaily.com. "I threw out my White House card as soon as I got it."
Religious conservatives are miffed because they have been pressuring stores to advertise Christmas sales rather than "holiday specials" and urging schools to let students out for Christmas vacation rather than for "winter break." They celebrated when House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) insisted that the sparkling spectacle on the Capitol lawn should be called the Capitol Christmas Tree, not a holiday spruce.
Then along comes a generic season's greeting from the White House, paid for by the Republican National Committee. The cover art is also secular, if not humanist: It shows the presidential pets -- two dogs and a cat -- frolicking on a snowy White House lawn.
"Certainly President and Mrs. Bush, because of their faith, celebrate Christmas," said Susan Whitson, Laura Bush's press secretary. "Their cards in recent years have included best wishes for a holiday season, rather than Christmas wishes, because they are sent to people of all faiths."
That is the same rationale offered by major retailers for generic holiday catalogues, and it is accepted by groups such as the National Council of Churches. "I think it's more important to put Christ back into our war planning than into our Christmas cards," said the council's general secretary, the Rev. Bob Edgar, a former Democratic congressman.
But the White House's explanation does not satisfy the groups -- which have grown in number in recent years -- that believe there is, in the words of the Heritage Foundation, a "war on Christmas" involving an "ever-stronger push toward a neutered 'holiday' season so that non-Christians won't be even the slightest bit offended."
One of the generals on the pro-Christmas side is Tim Wildmon, president of the American Family Association in Tupelo, Miss. "Sometimes it's hard to tell whether this is sinister -- it's the purging of Christ from Christmas -- or whether it's just political correctness run amok," he said. "I think in the case of the White House, it's just political correctness."
Wildmon does not give retailers the same benefit of the doubt. This year, he has called for a consumer boycott of Target stores because the chain issued a holiday advertising circular that did not mention Christmas. Last year, he aimed a similar boycott at Macy's Inc., which averted a repeat this December by proclaiming "Merry Christmas" in its advertising and in-store displays.
"It bothers me that the White House card leaves off any reference to Jesus, while we've got Ramadan celebrations in the White House," Wildmon said. "What's going on there?"
At the Catholic League, Donohue had just announced a boycott of the Lands' End catalogue when he received his White House holiday card. True, he said, the Bushes included a verse from Psalm 28, but Psalms are in the Old Testament and do not mention Jesus' birth.
"They'd better address this, because they're no better than the retailers who have lost the will to say 'Merry Christmas,' " he said.
Donohue said that Wal-Mart, facing a threatened boycott, added a Christmas page to its Web site and fired a customer relations employee who wrote a letter linking Christmas to "Siberian shamanism." He was not mollified by a letter from Lands' End saying it "adopted the 'holiday' terminology as a way to comply with one of the basic freedoms granted to all Americans: freedom of religion."
"Ninety-six percent of Americans celebrate Christmas," Donohue said. "Spare me the diversity lecture."
Diversity has been a hallmark of White House greeting cards for some time, according to Mary Evans Seeley of Tampa, Fla., author of "Season's Greetings From the White House." The last presidential Christmas card that mentioned Christmas was in 1992. It was sent by George H.W. and Barbara Bush, parents of the current president.
Seeley said the first president to send out true Christmas cards, as opposed to signed photographs or handwritten letters, was Franklin D. Roosevelt. "Merry Christmas From the President and Mrs. Roosevelt," said his first annual card, in 1933.
Like many modern touches, the generic New Year's card was introduced to the White House by John and Jacqueline Kennedy. In 1962, they had Hallmark print 2,000 cards, of which 1,800 cards said "The President and Mrs. Kennedy Wish You a Blessed Christmas" and 200 said "With Best Wishes for a Happy New Year."
Lyndon and Lady Bird Johnson continued that tradition for a couple of years, but it required keeping track of Christian and non-Christian recipients. Beginning in 1966, they wished everyone a "Joyous Christmas," and no president has attempted the two-card trick since.
Seeley dates the politicization of the White House Christmas card to Richard M. Nixon, who increased the number of recipients tenfold, to 40,000, in his first year. The numbers since have snowballed, hitting 125,000 under Jimmy Carter, topping 400,000 under Bill Clinton and rising to more than a million under the current Bushes, with each president's political party paying the bill.
The wording, meanwhile, has often flip-flopped. Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter put "Merry Christmas" in their 1977 card and then switched to "Holiday Season" for the next three years. Ronald and Nancy Reagan, similarly, began with a "Joyous Christmas" in 1981 and 1982 but doled out generic holiday wishes from 1983 to 1988. The elder President Bush stayed in the "Merry Christmas" spirit all four years, and the Clintons opted for inclusive greetings for all of their eight years.
The current Bush has straddled the divide, offering generic greetings along with an Old Testament verse. To some religious conservatives, that makes all the difference.
"There's a verse from Scripture in it. I don't mind that at all, as long as we don't try to pretend we're not a nation under God," said the Rev. Jerry Falwell.
By Alan Cooperman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 7, 2005; A01
What's missing from the White House Christmas card? Christmas.
This month, as in every December since he took office, President Bush sent out cards with a generic end-of-the-year message, wishing 1.4 million of his close friends and supporters a happy "holiday season."
Many people are thrilled to get a White House Christmas card, no matter what the greeting inside. But some conservative Christians are reacting as if Bush stuck coal in their stockings.
"This clearly demonstrates that the Bush administration has suffered a loss of will and that they have capitulated to the worst elements in our culture," said William A. Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights.
Bush "claims to be a born-again, evangelical Christian. But he sure doesn't act like one," said Joseph Farah, editor of the conservative Web site WorldNetDaily.com. "I threw out my White House card as soon as I got it."
Religious conservatives are miffed because they have been pressuring stores to advertise Christmas sales rather than "holiday specials" and urging schools to let students out for Christmas vacation rather than for "winter break." They celebrated when House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) insisted that the sparkling spectacle on the Capitol lawn should be called the Capitol Christmas Tree, not a holiday spruce.
Then along comes a generic season's greeting from the White House, paid for by the Republican National Committee. The cover art is also secular, if not humanist: It shows the presidential pets -- two dogs and a cat -- frolicking on a snowy White House lawn.
"Certainly President and Mrs. Bush, because of their faith, celebrate Christmas," said Susan Whitson, Laura Bush's press secretary. "Their cards in recent years have included best wishes for a holiday season, rather than Christmas wishes, because they are sent to people of all faiths."
That is the same rationale offered by major retailers for generic holiday catalogues, and it is accepted by groups such as the National Council of Churches. "I think it's more important to put Christ back into our war planning than into our Christmas cards," said the council's general secretary, the Rev. Bob Edgar, a former Democratic congressman.
But the White House's explanation does not satisfy the groups -- which have grown in number in recent years -- that believe there is, in the words of the Heritage Foundation, a "war on Christmas" involving an "ever-stronger push toward a neutered 'holiday' season so that non-Christians won't be even the slightest bit offended."
One of the generals on the pro-Christmas side is Tim Wildmon, president of the American Family Association in Tupelo, Miss. "Sometimes it's hard to tell whether this is sinister -- it's the purging of Christ from Christmas -- or whether it's just political correctness run amok," he said. "I think in the case of the White House, it's just political correctness."
Wildmon does not give retailers the same benefit of the doubt. This year, he has called for a consumer boycott of Target stores because the chain issued a holiday advertising circular that did not mention Christmas. Last year, he aimed a similar boycott at Macy's Inc., which averted a repeat this December by proclaiming "Merry Christmas" in its advertising and in-store displays.
"It bothers me that the White House card leaves off any reference to Jesus, while we've got Ramadan celebrations in the White House," Wildmon said. "What's going on there?"
At the Catholic League, Donohue had just announced a boycott of the Lands' End catalogue when he received his White House holiday card. True, he said, the Bushes included a verse from Psalm 28, but Psalms are in the Old Testament and do not mention Jesus' birth.
"They'd better address this, because they're no better than the retailers who have lost the will to say 'Merry Christmas,' " he said.
Donohue said that Wal-Mart, facing a threatened boycott, added a Christmas page to its Web site and fired a customer relations employee who wrote a letter linking Christmas to "Siberian shamanism." He was not mollified by a letter from Lands' End saying it "adopted the 'holiday' terminology as a way to comply with one of the basic freedoms granted to all Americans: freedom of religion."
"Ninety-six percent of Americans celebrate Christmas," Donohue said. "Spare me the diversity lecture."
Diversity has been a hallmark of White House greeting cards for some time, according to Mary Evans Seeley of Tampa, Fla., author of "Season's Greetings From the White House." The last presidential Christmas card that mentioned Christmas was in 1992. It was sent by George H.W. and Barbara Bush, parents of the current president.
Seeley said the first president to send out true Christmas cards, as opposed to signed photographs or handwritten letters, was Franklin D. Roosevelt. "Merry Christmas From the President and Mrs. Roosevelt," said his first annual card, in 1933.
Like many modern touches, the generic New Year's card was introduced to the White House by John and Jacqueline Kennedy. In 1962, they had Hallmark print 2,000 cards, of which 1,800 cards said "The President and Mrs. Kennedy Wish You a Blessed Christmas" and 200 said "With Best Wishes for a Happy New Year."
Lyndon and Lady Bird Johnson continued that tradition for a couple of years, but it required keeping track of Christian and non-Christian recipients. Beginning in 1966, they wished everyone a "Joyous Christmas," and no president has attempted the two-card trick since.
Seeley dates the politicization of the White House Christmas card to Richard M. Nixon, who increased the number of recipients tenfold, to 40,000, in his first year. The numbers since have snowballed, hitting 125,000 under Jimmy Carter, topping 400,000 under Bill Clinton and rising to more than a million under the current Bushes, with each president's political party paying the bill.
The wording, meanwhile, has often flip-flopped. Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter put "Merry Christmas" in their 1977 card and then switched to "Holiday Season" for the next three years. Ronald and Nancy Reagan, similarly, began with a "Joyous Christmas" in 1981 and 1982 but doled out generic holiday wishes from 1983 to 1988. The elder President Bush stayed in the "Merry Christmas" spirit all four years, and the Clintons opted for inclusive greetings for all of their eight years.
The current Bush has straddled the divide, offering generic greetings along with an Old Testament verse. To some religious conservatives, that makes all the difference.
"There's a verse from Scripture in it. I don't mind that at all, as long as we don't try to pretend we're not a nation under God," said the Rev. Jerry Falwell.
Wednesday, December 07, 2005
The religious right is really pissing me off today
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/06/AR2005120601900.html
There are so many things in the article that piss me off, I almost don't know where to start. First, I think it's kind of funny that the president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights says that the Bush Administration has "capitulated to the worst elements in our culture." And just what are those "elements?" The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution (also known as that thing that the President is supposed to serve and protect).
Second, I'm curious that statistic that "Ninety-six percent of Americans celebrate Christmas." 96%? 15% of Americans don't believe in God and more than 5% of Americans are affiliated with a non-Christian religion, so I really doubt that 96% celebrate Christmas. A little fuzzy math, perhaps? (Sorry, I couldn't help myself.)
This is America folks. A country founded on the idea of freedom. That includes freedom of speach, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, and freedom to word greeting cards however the heck you want!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/06/AR2005120601733.html
Wait, do gays not drive cars? Ford, this is rediculous. You made a wonderful decision to give marriage benefits to employees in same-sex relationships. And you are still advertising Volvos in the gay press... So, why pull adds for Jaguars and Land Rovers?
And to the American Family Association (as long as that family consists of a mom, dad, 2.3 kids and a golden retriever), I just don't know what to say. Ford has the right to advertise where it wants and the right to give it's employees whatever benefits it wants (as long as their don't hurt the shareholders). So, just give it a rest!
On the plus side:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/06/AR2005120600871.html
D.C. is getting really close to banning smoking in bars, restaurants and other indoor public places. w00t!
There are so many things in the article that piss me off, I almost don't know where to start. First, I think it's kind of funny that the president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights says that the Bush Administration has "capitulated to the worst elements in our culture." And just what are those "elements?" The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution (also known as that thing that the President is supposed to serve and protect).
Second, I'm curious that statistic that "Ninety-six percent of Americans celebrate Christmas." 96%? 15% of Americans don't believe in God and more than 5% of Americans are affiliated with a non-Christian religion, so I really doubt that 96% celebrate Christmas. A little fuzzy math, perhaps? (Sorry, I couldn't help myself.)
This is America folks. A country founded on the idea of freedom. That includes freedom of speach, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, and freedom to word greeting cards however the heck you want!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/06/AR2005120601733.html
Wait, do gays not drive cars? Ford, this is rediculous. You made a wonderful decision to give marriage benefits to employees in same-sex relationships. And you are still advertising Volvos in the gay press... So, why pull adds for Jaguars and Land Rovers?
And to the American Family Association (as long as that family consists of a mom, dad, 2.3 kids and a golden retriever), I just don't know what to say. Ford has the right to advertise where it wants and the right to give it's employees whatever benefits it wants (as long as their don't hurt the shareholders). So, just give it a rest!
On the plus side:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/06/AR2005120600871.html
D.C. is getting really close to banning smoking in bars, restaurants and other indoor public places. w00t!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
