or have your head explode if you're one of those. Great commercial for everyone who isn't one of those.
Is Coca Cola Afraid to Run This Commercial in the US?
Is Coca Cola Afraid to Run This Commercial in the US?
Have a Coke and a smile
- Thread starter LDB
- Start date
Tennesseahawk
Veteran Expediter
Awesome commercial!
You won't see this one in America, either.
LiveLeak.com - Russian Commercial
And it's a lead pipe cinch we'll never see this ad from McDonald's Israel for the "Big America" burger here on American television:
Here's a very, very NSFW commercial for eyeglasses that you'll never see here in Puritanical America, at a link you didn't get from me. I have no idea how that link got here. I don't even know what YouTube is.
commercial for glasses - YouTube
LiveLeak.com - Russian Commercial
And it's a lead pipe cinch we'll never see this ad from McDonald's Israel for the "Big America" burger here on American television:
Here's a very, very NSFW commercial for eyeglasses that you'll never see here in Puritanical America, at a link you didn't get from me. I have no idea how that link got here. I don't even know what YouTube is.
commercial for glasses - YouTube
I loved it! It is a real look at parenthood, which isn't all sweet & cuddly baby powder scented moments, but is worth every sleepless night, IF you want to be a parent.
LDB and DaveKC are wrong, though: per the comments following the article, it has been shown in the US. And nobody's head exploded, either.
The writer of the article is pretty much off the rails, as well, in the following description: "It's a bright spot in a culture that seems to idolize childless marriages and promotes abortion as a sacrament."
Wrong on both counts. As a culture, we still assume every wife should be a mother, and that she wants to. Women who choose not to are considered selfish, if not 'unnatural'. Ask them, they'll tell you. They certainly say so in the many women's magazines, whenever the subject is mentioned, but I guess the author never read any of those.
Abortion, "a sacrament"? No. It's a legal right that we'd all like to see used rarely, but have different ideas on accomplishing the goal. I think we should focus on prevention of unwanted pregnancies, through realistic sex education [because 'abstinence only' does not work] and the availability of contraception for men and women. Choices and consequences, that's how we teach responsibility.
Others [especially many elected in the Tea Party surge of 2010] want to make it rare by closing down the clinics with unjustified regulation [but they hate regulations!] and patronizing attempts to change a woman's mind via mandatory sonograms, 'counseling', waiting periods, etc.
We already know what happens when sex education is insufficient and abortion illegal, because we lived with the results, every day, already - why would anyone want to go back?
Every baby deserves to be wanted, and we can make that happen.
LDB and DaveKC are wrong, though: per the comments following the article, it has been shown in the US. And nobody's head exploded, either.
The writer of the article is pretty much off the rails, as well, in the following description: "It's a bright spot in a culture that seems to idolize childless marriages and promotes abortion as a sacrament."
Wrong on both counts. As a culture, we still assume every wife should be a mother, and that she wants to. Women who choose not to are considered selfish, if not 'unnatural'. Ask them, they'll tell you. They certainly say so in the many women's magazines, whenever the subject is mentioned, but I guess the author never read any of those.
Abortion, "a sacrament"? No. It's a legal right that we'd all like to see used rarely, but have different ideas on accomplishing the goal. I think we should focus on prevention of unwanted pregnancies, through realistic sex education [because 'abstinence only' does not work] and the availability of contraception for men and women. Choices and consequences, that's how we teach responsibility.
Others [especially many elected in the Tea Party surge of 2010] want to make it rare by closing down the clinics with unjustified regulation [but they hate regulations!] and patronizing attempts to change a woman's mind via mandatory sonograms, 'counseling', waiting periods, etc.
We already know what happens when sex education is insufficient and abortion illegal, because we lived with the results, every day, already - why would anyone want to go back?
Every baby deserves to be wanted, and we can make that happen.
I don't know if that is accurate or not with someone saying they seen in Michigan in the comments section. Maybe a test run in a small market? I live in two markets and I have never seen it.
I think most are looking for responsible parenting. Which we have a drastic shortage of. Same with abortion clinics or planned parenthood. Planned parenthood has turned into more of a political machine.
I don't think it should be government funded. That is different than whether one supports the legalization of it. Same thing with Sandra Fluke mess. Why would I or should I pay for her birth control?
That is the real question.
Last edited:
"Why would I or should I pay for her birth control?
That is the real question."
If I were not being calm I could REALLY fire up things on this one! LOL!!
That is the real question."
If I were not being calm I could REALLY fire up things on this one! LOL!!
Calm can be good.
Yes, it is. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHUMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM! MONOPATRY OHMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
Would it be possible for you to resist the temptation to jump into a serious discussion with utter nonsense? Because it is really, really RUDE. If you have nothing to say, DON'T SAY IT.
Thank you.
There were several comments referring to having seen it - that's all I know.
Planned Parenthood never intended nor wanted to be any part of politics. It was conservatives who dragged it in, because they object to abortion, and contraceptives, and effective sex education.
All of which combines to hike the birthrate among teens and low income women - brilliant strategy, eh? Now, thanks to the conservatives, women can't get mammograms, PAP smears, or other GYN services, either, cause Planned Parenthood locations are disappearing.
Same with Sandra Fluke: she had no intention of politicizing her medical care, but Rush Limbaugh thought otherwise. [The moron who thinks one takes more or less birth control pills if one is having more or less sex ought to keep his mouth shut, lol]
Why should you pay for it? How about because if you don't, she will probably get pregnant [it happens to the best of us. Speaking of which: half of all abortions are for married women, because neither contraceptives, nor humans, are prefect.] and then you [and me, and all taxpayers] will have to pay her to stay home from the job she can't get while in the last stages of pregnancy, at the very least.
That's in case the simple "because it's the right thing to do" [for society, I mean, same as funding the 'arts'. I hate opera & art galleries, why should I support them?] argument doesn't work.
ALL unearned "benefits" should be eliminated. Nothing earned, nothing gained.
Short of specific historical artifacts, the government shouldn't be involved in the arts. That we agree on. As for planned parenthood, they are nothing short of a political machine. Their agenda goes far beyond just abortion.
Planned Parenthood plots largest-ever campaign blitz in 2014 | Fox News
Your post just provides the reason why there should be a specific time limit for welfare. We incentivize these folks to have kids. We even do it with illegals. They receive no benefits but their children do. Guess what?
Take the incentives out, and amazingly, the problem drops. History tells us so. Go back 30 years and you didn't have this problem. Throwing money at it doesn't solve it either. We are 17 trillion in debt now and the problem is still here. Can't say it was or is the economy because you had all these issues under Carter in the 70's.
What is the common denominator now. Follow the money and free stuff. Of course some people in entertainment don't help the cause either.
As for Sandra Fluke, sure she wanted the public exposure. That is why she is studying to be a lawyer and gave testimony at a Congressional hearing. If she didn't want public exposure, she wouldn't be there. Limbaugh's comments came AFTER her testimony.
"The right thing to do" is to teach responsibility and not excuse bad or foolish behavior. I give women enough credit to think if there are consequences for their actions )as in no free stuff), the majority (certainly not all) will make the right call.
When there was no free stuff, it is amazing how this wasn't a big problem.
I repeat: it was the conservatives [particularly the Tea Party] that pushed PP into the limelight of politics. I was a client for many years before that happened, so I know that their core mission hasn't changed, but they've been forced to respond to the many 'defunding' efforts and attacks provoked by politics.
We don't 'incentivize' people to have babies [another debunked myth!] but neither do we penalize children. I agree with you on illegals, because we haven't the resources to take care of our own - adding more is unfair to those of us who didn't break the law .Unfortunately, our views on immigration have been overlooked, because those who hire want cheap labor.
What you call 'free stuff' is a joke, and you should know that. The idea that it's available [if not plentiful] is belied by reality: neither the Fed nor the states give anything to poor people willingly, or easily, or in amounts adequate to live on. It's just enough to keep from starvation, and the Welfare Reform enacted decades ago ensures it doesn't go to anyone who isn't trying to get work or an education. Y'all act like poor people just hold out their hands, and the money drops in, but reality is VERY different.
I'm not understanding how Fluke's testimony equates to wanting 'public exposure"? People testify in front of Congress all the time, without any notice taken at all. [Especially by Congress]. If she wanted anything exposed, it was the issue of access to and costs for contraception, which is what Congress requested testimony about, not herself and/or her personal life. Rush Limbaugh crudely made it all about her private affairs, strictly for the titillation of himself & his audience. Would he like his own sex life [imaginary, I presume] speculated upon by the opposite sex on the public airwaves? If he had any actual knowledge of the subject, he'd know that contraceptives are often prescribed for reasons unrelated to contraception, because the hormones they contain can be effective in other ways, as well. Only prurient leches believe it's all about sex & the single woman - intelligent people know that married women rely on birth control too. Even Catholic married women, lol.
It is possible there is a calming effect on people. I'm sure a group of experts can be found to prove that determination. Another group of experts will disprove it equally well. That's not the issue. The issue is being far beyond bankruptcy and unable to afford it. That's reality. It's time for people to wake up and realize many things have to be eliminated and many others have to be significantly curtailed.