Hmmmmmmmm....
And if you donate to FR you are helping promote drug use because of articles such you post. You are one dangerous person and so are all the FR contributors. ;^)
Funny that it is "George" filling up his SUV.
http://www.mediacampaign.org/mg/index.html
The first ad I ever saw which I found offensive was over 13 years ago: it was a Nike ad with a woman athlete running around saying the typical stupid stuff like 'You have to follow your feet' and 'You have to be dedicated and believe' and all that other idiotic tripe that Nike commercials always spew.
But, the last thing she said in the ad was "And it would help if you stopped eating like a pig." Now, I'm not fat, and given my body type I never will be but the couple times I saw that ad my immediate reaction was "F$#k You."
And ever since then, I've refused to buy Nike products.
Now we have offensive ads which paint certain types of people as evil. Ads that criticize...ads that purposefully annoy...and ads where the vivisection of human body parts is openly shown during prime time.
And I've got news for everyone: it's only going to get worse as the tenor of public discourse becomes more and more tolerate of this type of behavior.
Soon groups like PETA will be showing ads of slaughter-house hot dog lines and anti-abortion groups will be showing fetuses in garbage cans during 'Friends'.
The US is losing it's long-cherished ability to disagree civilly.
Your darn right they do! This attempt to villify the owners of SUVs is straight out of the Liberal handbook. Comparing SUV to drugs is a lame argument from the getgo.
The "big oil companies" are not giving money to terrorists, or sanctioning terrorism in any way. The money for oil is given to the individual leaders of Middle Eatern countries that may, or may not give it to terrorist organizations. Pick out any product that we sell those same countries, and you could make the same bogus argument. For example: Bread producers fund terrorism, so anybody (here in the U.S. ) that eats a sandwich is supporting terrorists.
Recreational drugs on the other hand are illegal. The governments of most of these nations are not engaged in the sale of illegal drugs to fund terrorists. This enterprise is operated by the terrorist organizations themselves, and the criminal underworld.
The SUV owners-suppports-terrorists ads miss the point because SUVs have an overriding beneficial social utility and are virtually indistinguishable from any other vehicle in that respect.
Drugs have no compensating--let alone overriding--social worth or utility. None. Zip. They get bozos high and let Muhammad fly (e.g., 757s into the WTC).
I thought that was a pretty good line. It demonstrates the silliness of the (fill-in-the-blank)=terrorism tat. Propaganda is usually overblown in any arena, and it is often insulting to the intelligence.