Ship of Fools: OMG! There's no Jesus on this coffee cup! ATTACK! ATTACK!

Thread: OMG! There's no Jesus on this coffee cup! ATTACK! ATTACK! Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=029568

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

Oh dear Jesus God, what the fuck is wrong with people? A fatuous airhead who considers himself a "radical" Christian has launched a war on Starbucks for taking the ornaments and tree branches off their Christmastide coffee cups. Ornaments and branches of course being universally-recognized symbols for the Incarnation.

"There's no Christmas without Christ" he says. Well there sure seems to be no sign of Christ in his Christmas. You know, that Christ who was forgiving and cared about taking care of people.

AUGH!

Discuss.

Posted by HughWillRidmee (# 15614) on :

Others might call him something other than radical - it's Josh after all.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

I was not familiar with Josh before the War on Starbucks broke. What a horrible witness for Christ.

Posted by Humble Servant (# 18391) on :

But it's not Christmas yet - not even Advent. it's only November!

Posted by Martin60 (# 368) on :

Hmmm. Must be slow news day.

Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :

The things some people find to get wound up about amaze me. I might get wound up by Starbucks for all sorts of reasons, but the fact they have not put cheap crappy Christmasy symbols on their coffee cups is not one.

I think there are all sorts of things that I might get fussy about for Christmas, and the commercialisation of it, but this is not top of my list.

That is not radical Christianity. That is pathetic headline-grabbing conservatism. If you want to be radical, there are a whole lot of other things that need to be challenged.

Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :

Make people angry, takes their mind off the other stuff?

Posted by Martin60 (# 368) on :

Sure worked here.

Posted by Ann (# 94) on :

Hang on! I thought they were supposed to be boycotting Starbucks because of its support for same-sex marriage - and now they're supposed to order lots of coffees and say that their name is "Merry Christmas" to make the staff acknowledge Christmas? Starbucks is being boycotted all the way to the bank!

Posted by Crœsos (# 238) on :

So apparently the biggest problem with Christmas these days is that large corporations aren't commercializing it enough?

Posted by fausto (# 13737) on :

Those pridefully pious Christians who get their panties in a knot over removing Christmas trappings from commercial and public displays would be mortified to know that the equally pious English and American Puritans were the ones who began the "War on Christmas" in the first place, for theological reasons. (And they were far more successful at it, too.)

http://jonathanturley.org/2012/11/24/the-pilgrims-war-on-christmas/

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :

Ok, first of all, the cup is still red and green.

Second of all, from what I understand, the graphics removed from the cup were those of snowflakes and snowmen. Kerygmaniacs, you are going to have to remind me the place in the Bible where little Jesus built a snowman, or had a jolly snowball fight with Joseph.

Third, I am willing to bet the decision had nothing to do with avoiding Christmas-- I am sure they are still pimping out the holiday albums and the mugs, canisters, and cupholders to beat the band-- but everything to do with economics. "Stevens, the cup is already red and green. Why are we devoting such a huge chunk of our budget to add cheesy snowflake graphics to a cup we will only be able to distribute for a couple months? Simple red and green is far classier anyway."

Third--as Mousethief said elsewhere Christians, in other parts of the world are facing actual knife point persecution. Throwing a freaking temper tantrum because someone outside of an actual church does not honor religious holidays? That's a war? People having bombs dropped in their backyards and their churches burned to the ground are going to have a hard time seeing the comparison.

Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on :

Maybe we should promote separating Christ from the commercial holiday mis-named "christmas."

You want snowflakes and ornaments and the biggest shopping season of the year, fine, but don't pretend that's got anything to do with the wonder and challenge of incarnation.

Posted by Siegfried (# 29) on :

As Kelly points out, they have never mentioned Christmas on their cups, or had even as much as a proper Christmas Tree on their cups. Some folks just want to be martyred. I'll provide the sprigs of holly to plunge into their chests.

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

Myself, I'm rather more peeved that Starbucks continues to be one of those companies that continues to successfully avoid its social duty to pay a fair amount of taxes on its huge profits. Such companies collectively impoverish the British economy alone to the tune of tens of billions a year and our government's collusion with them is a crime of mind-buggering proportions against the poor, the sick, the disabled, and the old.

If I was going to scribble anything on a coffee cup for the attention of Starbucks' bosses, it would be "Pay your fucking taxes, you vicious capitalist bastards."

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :

Hear freaking hear.

Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
Third--as Mousethief said elsewhere Christians, in other parts of the world are facing actual knife point persecution. Throwing a freaking temper tantrum because someone outside of an actual church does not honor religious holidays? That's a war? People having bombs dropped in their backyards and their churches burned to the ground are going to have a hard time seeing the comparison.

That was exactly my reaction when I read about this. These poor persecuted Christians who can't get snowflakes on the Starbucks cups should have a chat with some of the refugees fleeing for their lives.

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Siegfried:
As Kelly points out, they have never mentioned Christmas on their cups, or had even as much as a proper Christmas Tree on their cups. Some folks just want to be martyred. I'll provide the sprigs of holly to plunge into their chests.

I'm gonna be the bitch who asks where in the Bible conifers covered with hanging balls were a specifically prescribed sacrament.

Yes, I understand that decorated pine trees have a specific devotional message in European Christian traditions but that's just the point-- celebrating snow on the assigned birthday of a man who probably never saw snow, celebrating the flora and fauna of the Steppes rather than the desert, and incorporating bizarre idol worship of some beared white guy who didn't even exist in christianity until 1000 years or so after the fact. The people moaning about the war on Christmas are moaning about having something other than their version of Christmas visible. You don't see these jerks taking to the streets demanding publicly funded Nochebuena parades.

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :

(Sieg-- preaching to the choir, I know but that was a good place to slide that comment.)

Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :

On a local level, all this is really going to do is make the day much harder for the baristas--who have no responsibility for what the company puts on its stupid cups.

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :

For real!

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

If Starbucks claimed to be a Christian organisation (whatever that could possibly mean for a business) we could hold up the plumb line to judge their claim to faith by their actions:

Do all the farmers who grow their coffee, chocolate and other ingredients got a fair price?
Do all those farmers etc respect the environment, pay their workers a living wage, deal fairly with their suppliers?
Do Starbucks pay all their staff at least the living wage? Do they get adequate leave, sick allowances, medical insurance, etc?
Does the company pay their taxes for profit made in the countries where they have shops? "Render unto Caesar" and all that
Do they support the needs of the communities where they have their shops? Do they provide coffee to the homeless? Offer jobs to the disadvantaged?

If the answer to those questions is "Yes" all the way down, then maybe we can see if they put Nativity scenes on their cups at Christmas, Resurrection scenes at Easter and multi-lingual gospel messages at Pentecost.

Posted by Nicolemr (# 28) on :

Oh for crying out loud this is the most absurd controversy ever. Don't people who get involved in this sort of thing have any real problems to complain about that they have to make up reasons for being offended as silly as this? I'd love to live a life that uncomplicated. [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Mere Nick (# 11827) on :

This sounds like a good idea for a Hallmark movie. A fellow goes in a coffee shop, notices a lack of Christmas spirit displayed on their coffee cups, tells the beautiful waitress about it and finds out she is upset about it, too. They convince the store to change policies and it ends with the couple becoming engaged to be married and as they start kissing each other the snow begins to fall.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
I'm gonna be the bitch who asks where in the Bible conifers covered with hanging balls were a specifically prescribed sacrament.

My lover meets me among the cedars,
Yea among the trees of Lebanon.
For lo, he comes prepared to delight me
With hanging balls he meets me there
--Second Song of Solomon 1:1-2

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
celebrating snow on the assigned birthday of a man who probably never saw snow,

Unless the Jerusalem area is considerably colder now than it was 2000 years ago, this is just wrong.

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :

...
WELL, HE PROBABLY WASN'T BORN IN THE WINTER! SO THERE!

(Song of Solomon. Har Har. )

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :

(Fuck. Now I wanna go to Jerusalem and play in the snow. [Frown]

)

Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :

So did Jesus plop down in the snow and make snow angels? And did they come alive, like the clay birds in that apocryphal story?

Posted by Palimpsest (# 16772) on :

For those who want to go to the Holy Land to play in the snow; sadly things are going the other way.
Parts of the Persian Gulf could be too hot for humans at century's end.

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :

God bless you for that little ray of sunshine...

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
So did Jesus plop down in the snow and make snow angels? And did they come alive, like the clay birds in that apocryphal story?

I was trying to think of a joke about snowmen along those lines.

Perhaps our Christmas Village needs a Snow Golem?

Posted by Beenster (# 242) on :

I really needed that little laugh today. What a warrior for Jesus, carrying his gun to piss off Starbucks and saying his name is Merry Christmas.

Posted by Ricardus (# 8757) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Oh dear Jesus God, what the fuck is wrong with people? A fatuous airhead who considers himself a "radical" Christian has launched a war on Starbucks for taking the ornaments and tree branches off their Christmastide coffee cups. Ornaments and branches of course being universally-recognized symbols for the Incarnation.

"There's no Christmas without Christ" he says. Well there sure seems to be no sign of Christ in his Christmas. You know, that Christ who was forgiving and cared about taking care of people.

AUGH!

Discuss.

I love the fact that the sponsored links immediately underneath that article are mostly get-rich-quick schemes of the 'Mom from the same city as the reader's IP address shares her secret to making £400 per hour at home watching cat videos' type.

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

Anyone else old enough to remember when we complained about money-grubbing corporations ruining our sacred celebration of Christmas with all their crass commercialism? Now we complain if they don't.

Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on :

"We"?

I'm pretty sure people like this guy never complained about the over-commercialization of Christmas. Criticism of consumerism is largely a left-wing concern, which isn't usually associated with people who boast about how they carry guns into coffee shops.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
I'm pretty sure people like this guy never complained about the over-commercialization of Christmas.

Yes and no. They complain about the "secularization" of Christmas, which if they could but see it goes hand in hand with the commercialization. They are flip sides of the same coin.

But jokers like this guy are perfectly fine with people selling tree ornaments made of nails to look like the Cross, or pine boughs on coffee cups, or 50% off sales at the Bible Bookshop, or unwrapping gifts on Christmas morning instead of going to church. Because they don't recognize that those things are, in fact, a product of the secularization of Christmas.

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :

Surely it goes further than that: these folk have either failed to question the consumer ideology or have actively bought into it.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Surely it goes further than that: these folk have either failed to question the consumer ideology or have actively bought into it.

Oh I agree. They have actively bought into it, because they have so identified a fantasy of 1950's American Christmas, perhaps as extrapolated from popular songs and movies, with the Christian feast of the Nativity, that they cannot distinguish the two. Part of the American Civil Religion.

Although you probably have nutcases of this variety in other countries, we seem to abound with them. Like the Old Willow in Tom Bombadil's forest, America is the center from which the evil radiates.

Although I say that as one who probably shouldn't. St. Clive wrote a devastating essay about the commercialization/secularization of Christmas back in 1954.

[ 08. November 2015, 14:59: Message edited by: mousethief ]

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
"We"?

I'm pretty sure people like this guy never complained about the over-commercialization of Christmas. Criticism of consumerism is largely a left-wing concern, which isn't usually associated with people who boast about how they carry guns into coffee shops.

No, back in the day, at least in the US, you'd also hear conservative Christians complaining-- not so much out of the kinds of critical concerns about consumerism/ consumption that you hear today from the left, but simply that all the plastic Santas and cutesy elves populating the shelves of every department store and gas station were undermining a sacred and holy celebration. That's what "keep Christ in Christmas" used to mean.

While it very often had a grumpy "get off my lawn!"/"no fun of any kind!"/"you don't get to celebrate MY holiday" tenor to it, at least there was a kernel of truth-- at least compared to the current faux-persecution complex.

Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
I'm pretty sure people like this guy never complained about the over-commercialization of Christmas.
Yes and no. They complain about the "secularization" of Christmas, which if they could but see it goes hand in hand with the commercialization.

But you see, I think there's a substantial population like this guy who never complained about secularization either. He's probably fine with anything that looks like public validation of his beliefs, and isn't terribly bothered by concerns about sincerity and authenticity.

There probably is some overlap between those who complain about the secularization of Christmas and those who complain about the absence of public symbols. I'm not denying that your criticism has a target - I just don't think it's this guy. (For one thing, he doesn't seem like the kind of guy who uses words like "secularization". Google me wrong if you can!)

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

Agreed. I wasn't saying that THIS guy was on both sides-- I'm saying the same GROUP of people/ theological camp that used to complain about commercialization is now the same group of people (or their descendants) complaining about the lack of commercialization and even wailing that the lack of commercialization is somehow religious persecution. I'm sure the Syrian Christians weep for them and their un-decorated coffee cups.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
But you see, I think there's a substantial population like this guy who never complained about secularization either. He's probably fine with anything that looks like public validation of his beliefs, and isn't terribly bothered by concerns about sincerity and authenticity.

Of course he doesn't use the word "secularization." It probably has more syllables than his short-term memory is capable of juggling. But he uses the phrase "keep Christ in Christmas." For him the issue is not layering stuff on (trees, Santa, Black Friday sales, etc.) but taking the one thing out (mentions of Jesus, however insincere).

As you say, the sincerity of it seems to mean little to them. As long as there's a creche on the lawn of Town Hall, that's good, whether or not anybody who works inside the building believes it.

But I think lurking behind the scenes, the real issue is that (in these people's minds) everybody DOES believe it, except for a small number of atheist elites who happen to have power over what gets displayed on the Town Hall lawn. These evil atheists are preventing the good, God-loving Americans (or Brits or Australians or whatever) from keeping Christ in Christmas out of nefarious ends that they masquerade as fairness to Jews and shit like that.

Posted by Stetson (# 9597) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
"We"?

I'm pretty sure people like this guy never complained about the over-commercialization of Christmas. Criticism of consumerism is largely a left-wing concern, which isn't usually associated with people who boast about how they carry guns into coffee shops.

Actually, there is a bit of overlap between left-wing and right-wing rhetoric around cultural issues. I sometimes joke to myself that the only difference is that left-wingers think that throwing the word "corporatized" into the critique somehow distinguishes them from the mouth-breathing rednecks who object on "moral" grounds.

An example of this is teenaged fahsion supposedly being too sexual. I've listened to progressive parents go into convulsions trying to explain how, when THEY raise concerns about their daughters wearing(for example) low-riding jeans to school, it's not the same as when bible-thumping prudes raise the same concerns.

"Well, it's not because I'm worried about revealing clothes, you understand, it's just that I'm concerned kids are having their fashion choices defined by corporate media images, rather than making an autonnomous decision about what to wear."

Which is a fair enough distinction, though I suspect that if their daughters were wearing baggy trousers to school, they wouldn't worry so much, if at all, about whether or not it was an autonomous decision.

[ 08. November 2015, 15:17: Message edited by: Stetson ]

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
But he uses the phrase "keep Christ in Christmas." For him the issue is not layering stuff on (trees, Santa, Black Friday sales, etc.) but taking the one thing out (mentions of Jesus, however insincere).

After some thought I think this doesn't explain enough. Why is taking pine boughs off a coffee cup equivalent to taking Christ out of Christmas? Some explanation of this mindset should be attempted.

I think that the accretion of things into Christmas -- Santa, elves, Rudolph, the Little Drummer Boy, Christmas trees, and on and on and on -- makes them PART of Jesus somehow. They have become firmly affixed to Jesus in such a way that if you take the pine boughs off the cup, it's taking Christ out of Christmas. Because "Christ" is this undifferentiated lump that contains everything that has gone into the making and marketing of Christmas in English-speaking lands for the last 100 or more years. (Well, since Dickens.)

It's idolatry in its most basic and literal sense: substituting something other than God for God. The baby in the manger has been fused with Santa and trees and presents and turkey (or goose) dinner. They are functionally indistinguishable. Taking any one of them away is taking Christ out of Christmas.

Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on :

quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Agreed. I wasn't saying that THIS guy was on both sides-- I'm saying the same GROUP of people/ theological camp that used to complain about commercialization is now the same group of people (or their descendants) complaining about the lack of commercialization and even wailing that the lack of commercialization is somehow religious persecution.

What you said was "we" - which is kind of weird unless you're actually identifying with that group, which I'm pretty sure you're not. (And seriously - "or their descendants"? Why not just call them "all the people I don't like"?)

But I don't think it's even substantially the same group of people. I highly doubt that this guy (for instance) ever complained about commercialization.

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :

@ Mousethief: [Overused]

Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on :

I think that take is probably closer to what's really going on, MT.

You could probably widen the focus a little bit more; it includes obsession with the familiar ornamentation of childhood memories, as you note - but somehow carrying guns(!) also gets mixed up in there. I don't know what else you might find tied up together in that guy's noggin, and I'm not sure I want to know.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Is it just me, or do others think that the logo on the 'Christless' Starbuck cup actually looks like Our Blessed Lady, Queen of Heaven, Virgin Mother of Our Lord, Co-Redemptrix et al ?

I'll get me coat....

I.

Posted by Stetson (# 9597) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
I think that take is probably closer to what's really going on, MT.

You could probably widen the focus a little bit more; it includes obsession with the familiar ornamentation of childhood memories, as you note - but somehow carrying guns(!) also gets mixed up in there. I don't know what else you might find tied up together in that guy's noggin, and I'm not sure I want to know.

I think it's probably a combination of a couple of things...

The guy is heavily into the "Christian" routine of complaining every year about how irreligious Christmas has become, and basically walks around looking for targets.

As Mousthief noted, a lot of things have been conflated into the general idea of Christmas, and this guy has sort of passively absorbed it all into his head, while still maintaining the inappropriate label "Christian Holiday" over the whole promiscuous mishmash of imagery.

He's basically the real-life version of the apocryphal hick yelling "If English was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for me!!" Granted, that one involves an actual false belief, but one that emerges from a similar intellectual trajectory...

"Jesus = America = English"

Or in the case under discussion...

"Jesus = Christmas = holly on the coffee cups"

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
You could probably widen the focus a little bit more; it includes obsession with the familiar ornamentation of childhood memories, as you note - but somehow carrying guns(!) also gets mixed up in there.

I think people like this guy drag guns into everything. I don't think the gun part particularly has to do with Christmas.

quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
"Jesus = Christmas = holly on the coffee cups"

I think you've nailed it.

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Is it just me, or do others think that the logo on the 'Christless' Starbuck cup actually looks like Our Blessed Lady, Queen of Heaven, Virgin Mother of Our Lord, Co-Redemptrix et al ?

Yes. Or the former "Sun" editor Rebecca Brooks.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Oo-er.....is it possible that the lovely Rebecca B. might just be our Co-Redemptrix and all that......? [Confused]

Back to the whisky bottle, I think. It's been a long day......

I.

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
This sounds like a good idea for a Hallmark movie. A fellow goes in a coffee shop, notices a lack of Christmas spirit displayed on their coffee cups, tells the beautiful waitress about it and finds out she is upset about it, too. They convince the store to change policies and it ends with the couple becoming engaged to be married and as they start kissing each other the snow begins to fall.

You've left out an important part of the plot. The girl has been secretly trained by her dying father in combat skills. They have stashed a lockup garage full of heavy duty military hardware they have obtained by mail order. The couple find the coffee shop is a front for a conspiracy of left wingers, Islamic fundamentalists and corrupt multinationals to destroy not just Christmas but America itself. There's a fantastic shoot up involving spectacular visual effects before the couple destroy all the conspirators. Only then do they end up kissing as the snow begins to fall.

Posted by Photo Geek (# 9757) on :

This "War on Christmas!!" nonsense starts earlier every year. If the war is on anything, it is on Advent.

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:

quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
This sounds like a good idea for a Hallmark movie. A fellow goes in a coffee shop, notices a lack of Christmas spirit displayed on their coffee cups, tells the beautiful waitress about it and finds out she is upset about it, too. They convince the store to change policies and it ends with the couple becoming engaged to be married and as they start kissing each other the snow begins to fall.
You've left out an important part of the plot. The girl has been secretly trained by her dying father in combat skills. They have stashed a lockup garage full of heavy duty military hardware they have obtained by mail order. The couple find the coffee shop is a front for a conspiracy of left wingers, Islamic fundamentalists and corrupt multinationals to destroy not just Christmas but America itself. There's a fantastic shoot up involving spectacular visual effects before the couple destroy all the conspirators. Only then do they end up kissing as the snow begins to fall.

That wouldn't be Hallmark, that would be Spike.

Posted by Kyzyl (# 374) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:

quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
So did Jesus plop down in the snow and make snow angels? And did they come alive, like the clay birds in that apocryphal story?
I was trying to think of a joke about snowmen along those lines.

Perhaps our Christmas Village needs a Snow Golem?

Such a thing is possible in Minecraft...
Snow Golem

Posted by VirginiaKneeling (# 18414) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Photo Geek:
This "War on Christmas!!" nonsense starts earlier every year. If the war is on anything, it is on Advent.

BOOM! Folks, we have a winner! [Overused]

And here in the States, it's not even Thanksgiving yet....*sigh*

Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :

So this Josh guy...

From his last name, I surmise he has some Jewish background. But he's a Christian, and a pastor at that. Which is absolutely fine.

But I wonder if that makes him feel he has to be more militant and defensive about anything Christian? "I'm a Christian! See? I really, really am! I'm so much for Christ that I make the big, nasty corporation say his name! See, God? See?"

[ 08. November 2015, 22:15: Message edited by: Golden Key ]

Posted by Mere Nick (# 11827) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:

quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
This sounds like a good idea for a Hallmark movie. A fellow goes in a coffee shop, notices a lack of Christmas spirit displayed on their coffee cups, tells the beautiful waitress about it and finds out she is upset about it, too. They convince the store to change policies and it ends with the couple becoming engaged to be married and as they start kissing each other the snow begins to fall.
You've left out an important part of the plot. The girl has been secretly trained by her dying father in combat skills. They have stashed a lockup garage full of heavy duty military hardware they have obtained by mail order. The couple find the coffee shop is a front for a conspiracy of left wingers, Islamic fundamentalists and corrupt multinationals to destroy not just Christmas but America itself. There's a fantastic shoot up involving spectacular visual effects before the couple destroy all the conspirators. Only then do they end up kissing as the snow begins to fall.

Ah, excellent! If, while they are kissing in the new falling snow, would it strain credulity for the camera to be slowly pulled back and reveal a few zombies walking down the street with a couple of them eating a guy dressed as Santa?

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
If, while they are kissing in the new falling snow, would it strain credulity for the camera to be slowly pulled back and reveal a few zombies walking down the street with a couple of them eating a guy dressed as Santa?

Kinda. Everything else in the movie falls under Poe's Law.

Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:

quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:

quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
This sounds like a good idea for a Hallmark movie. A fellow goes in a coffee shop, notices a lack of Christmas spirit displayed on their coffee cups, tells the beautiful waitress about it and finds out she is upset about it, too. They convince the store to change policies and it ends with the couple becoming engaged to be married and as they start kissing each other the snow begins to fall.
You've left out an important part of the plot. The girl has been secretly trained by her dying father in combat skills. They have stashed a lockup garage full of heavy duty military hardware they have obtained by mail order. The couple find the coffee shop is a front for a conspiracy of left wingers, Islamic fundamentalists and corrupt multinationals to destroy not just Christmas but America itself. There's a fantastic shoot up involving spectacular visual effects before the couple destroy all the conspirators. Only then do they end up kissing as the snow begins to fall.
That wouldn't be Hallmark, that would be Spike.

That would be Spike and Hallmark having a love child.

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
So this Josh guy...

From his last name, I surmise he has some Jewish background. But he's a Christian, and a pastor at that. Which is absolutely fine.

But I wonder if that makes him feel he has to be more militant and defensive about anything Christian? "I'm a Christian! See? I really, really am! I'm so much for Christ that I make the big, nasty corporation say his name! See, God? See?"

He's so Christian in fact that he drinks an Islamic drink. He must be strong in the faith to drink that which has been sacrificed to idolatorous Islam. But, has he no thought for the weaker brethren?

Posted by Ricardus (# 8757) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
After some thought I think this doesn't explain enough. Why is taking pine boughs off a coffee cup equivalent to taking Christ out of Christmas? Some explanation of this mindset should be attempted.

If you click on the 'as we reported earlier' link in Mr Feuerstein's post*, his reasoning is explained with admirable cogency.

One of his mates wrote to Starbucks to ask why the change, and the marketing department gave a response that included the words 'more open'.

Open = tolerant = political correctness = atheist Muslim Marxists taking away our guns QED.

* I do recommend this - the hilarity of the post is unbelievable.

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
This sounds like a good idea for a Hallmark movie. A fellow goes in a coffee shop, notices a lack of Christmas spirit displayed on their coffee cups, tells the beautiful waitress about it and finds out she is upset about it, too. They convince the store to change policies and it ends with the couple becoming engaged to be married and as they start kissing each other the snow begins to fall.

If this Josh character could do that, there might be some merit in his activities. I'd even put up with him filming it. He may however fall under suspicion of becoming a "librul" by doing so.

As things stand though he seems to be doing a great job spreading the word for atheism.

Posted by The Riv (# 3553) on :

I don't really feel as if these stories are spread for any other reason, at this point, than to re-emphasize the narrow, small-mindedness of the Josh-y element of society. Certainly, now, this is not news of any originality or quality (not that the same couldn't be said of most news coverage, but that is a different thread). When the reaction of those of us who object to Josh-y views echo Josh's sentiments about an alleged annual assault on a Christian holiday, the circle has come fully round, and it's time to ignore such shouts as the misinformed, myopic Me-ism that it is.

Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :

(The Riv! Good to see you! I hope that you are keeping well.)

Good point about paying mind (or not) to the fringies and not getting entangled in the old, old cultural angst.

Don't Feed the Troll(s). [Disappointed]

Words to live by.

Posted by Stetson (# 9597) on :

It's always good to be a bit wary about joining in a pile-on, especially when the piled upon is an easy target like some obscure blog.

However(and yes, this could be read as apologia for my own involvement here), I think the blog in question was pretty symptomatic of the whole "There's a war on Christmas" mentality, which is a legitimate subject of criticism, given what a prominent aspect it is of holiday culture. It's not as if the people who complain about that incessantly are just going about minding their own business, they are clearly trying to put the issue front and centre. And are having a bit of success, judging by media attention.

The fact that the blogger thinks green and red hollies are a meaningful religious symbol might tell us something about how messed up a lot of the WOC crowd are. But I'd be interested to know how many of them would be as incredulous as we are at the shallowness of the blogger's critique.

[ 09. November 2015, 17:55: Message edited by: Stetson ]

Posted by Alwyn (# 4380) on :

Meanwhile, in related news, a British Conservative MP reportedly said (source):

“What is Christmas about?” he said. “It’s CHRIST-Mass.”

“This is utter madness. Who was the idiot who thought this up? He should be sacked!”

This latest outburst from the Outraged by Political Correctness Brigade follows (as mousethief said in the OP) a reported decision to replace "snowmen, stars, and other symbols" with a plain red design on coffee cups.

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

Did anyone organise the Sweepstake for the first use of the "political correctness gone mad" phrase?

It is telling that Starbucks have made a commercial (is anyone under any illusion that the bottom line figures heavily?) decision to not go into the over-the-top smaltz of the months running up to Christmas, their defence that they provide a place of calm to escape the pressures of the season says loads about how over board the rest of the High Street is.

Come off it people, Starbucks is a place to take a wee break from the stresses induced by the commercial greed of the season. Starbucks? Shouldn't the churches be providing that place of refuge?

Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Starbucks is a place to take a wee break from the stresses induced by the commercial greed of the season. Starbucks? Shouldn't the churches be providing that place of refuge?

Might be interesting to compare the number of people in church on any given Sunday with the number of customers at the Starbucks just down the street.

Posted by Kwesi (# 10274) on :

What's Christian about hanging fetishes on a tree?

Posted by Humble Servant (# 18391) on :

This image popped up on f***book this morning. Perhaps they should run it for Easter!

Posted by The Riv (# 3553) on :

Thanks, Lyda*Rose!

I think, perhaps, that we're missing the whole point, here. Starbucks is simply bypassing Christmas to get to the really good and meaningful stuff: Easter. Like all comprehensive Christmas traditions, these plain, Blood-of-the-Lamb red cups merely point to the world's salvation through the full and final sacrifice of Jesus. Starbucks isn't fighting against Christians, it's actually leading their charge. It's not "Gloria in excelsis," but "Christus vincit!" Bless you, Starbucks, bless you!

[ 10. November 2015, 13:22: Message edited by: The Riv ]

Posted by Pine Marten (# 11068) on :

I've not heard of Josh before, so I thought it was a send-up until I watched his video and realised that it probably wasn't.

The thing that struck me most was that as well as wearing his Jesus tee shirt he carried his GUN! Peace on earth, Josh, and all that crap [Eek!]

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:

quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Starbucks is a place to take a wee break from the stresses induced by the commercial greed of the season. Starbucks? Shouldn't the churches be providing that place of refuge?
Might be interesting to compare the number of people in church on any given Sunday with the number of customers at the Starbucks just down the street.

some of ours go to have coffee before mass

Posted by Ricardus (# 8757) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Alwyn:
Meanwhile, in related news, a British Conservative MP reportedly said (source):

“What is Christmas about?” he said. “It’s CHRIST-Mass.”

“This is utter madness. Who was the idiot who thought this up? He should be sacked!”

Bu-bu-bu

I was just beginning to think that a.) Stetson is right and b.) how splendid it is to be British where the religious nutcases are lower-profile, and then I read that article.

[Waterworks]

I WANT TO BE A BUDDHIST AND LIVE IN ICELAND [Waterworks]

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

What's not to like about them? A nice, bright red - the correct liturgical colour for Kingdom Season - with a picture of the Blessed Mother of Our Lord, to remind us of the Incarnation.

Full marks to Starbucks, IMHO (as long as they alter the colour to purple or blue from Advent Sunday).

I.

Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
What's not to like about them? A nice, bright red - the correct liturgical colour for Kingdom Season - with a picture of the Blessed Mother of Our Lord, to remind us of the Incarnation.

The Mother of Our Lord is a Siren?
[Eek!]

(Apparently a single tail is a mermaid, a double tail is a siren.)

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

quote:
Pigwidgeon: The Mother of Our Lord is a Siren?

Some Afro-American religious expressions identify her with a siren.

Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on :

My son spent a year in Palestine, Ramallah, to be precise. It actually snowed twice while he was there so, yes, it could be theoretically possible that as a boy Jesus may have had the chance to build a snowman, though there is no record of it, not even in the Gospel of Thomas.

Just today Starbucks announced that it was contributing $350,000 to Lutheran World Relief for the purpose of helping to develop sustainable farming communities in the coffee and cocoa growing regions. Here is the website for their foundation which explains their charitable giving program

http://www.starbucks.com/responsibility/community/starbucks-foundation

Of particular note to me, since I am a veteran having served in the United States Air Force is their commitment to hiring up to 10,000 veterans in the next few years.

If people want Merry Christmas on their cups they can put it on themselves, but, in my book, I think Starbucks is honoring the Christmas spirit with their charitable giving.

Posted by Ikkyu (# 15207) on :

quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:

quote:
Pigwidgeon: The Mother of Our Lord is a Siren?

Some Afro-American religious expressions identify her with a siren.

Yes! Google Yemaya and Saint together and look at the images. But Oshun who is not a mermaid is more commonly identified with our lady of charity.

Posted by Mere Nick (# 11827) on :

I rarely go to Starbucks but in trying to put myself in the place of a local Starbucks store owner it seems the cups are a great idea. They are red and green. Those are generally accepted as Christmas colors. That will work during the Christmas season. What do I do with left over cups after Christmas? Use them. What's wrong with a red and green cup? Having lots of Christmasy decorations on a cup in the middle of January might send the message to folks that the business is hurting.

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

quote:
Ikkyu: But Oshun who is not a mermaid is more commonly identified with our lady of charity.

It varies a bit from place to place. Where I live in Brazil, the siren Yemaya is identified with Our Lady of the Immaculate Conception, and Oshun with Our Lady of Mount Carmel.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Well, wot I sed anyhoo.....

I.

[Paranoid]

Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
I WANT TO BE A BUDDHIST AND LIVE IN ICELAND

By your command:

Buddhism in Iceland (Wikipedia).

[Smile]

Posted by Crœsos (# 238) on :

Mark Rothko's War On Christmas.

Posted by georgiaboy (# 11294) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
My lover meets me among the cedars,
Yea among the trees of Lebanon.
For lo, he comes prepared to delight me
With hanging balls he meets me there
--Second Song of Solomon 1:1-2

This is the second time in a week that I've spewed my coffee all over my keyboard! And it sounded so 'authentic' that I did a double-take on the last line.

Off to find a coffee-proof keyboard (if such exists?)

Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :

Hmmm...Protestant Bibles don't have 2nd Song of Solomon. If they did, my childhood fundie church would've had some interesting sermons...
[Biased]

Posted by saysay (# 6645) on :

A protest that involves the outraged giving money to the company they hate?

Anyone else suspect this is manufactured outrage so everyone can play another round of 'let's laugh at the idiot Christians?'

Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :

Starbucks has certainly gotten more free publicity from this than they could possibly have dreamed. Great marketing strategy.

Posted by Crœsos (# 238) on :

quote:
Originally posted by saysay:
Anyone else suspect this is manufactured outrage so everyone can play another round of 'let's laugh at the idiot Christians?'

Poe's law is always in play in these sorts of situations, but it's no more idiotic than any of the rest of the alleged "War on Christmas". They can't all be fakes.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by saysay:
Anyone else suspect this is manufactured outrage so everyone can play another round of 'let's laugh at the idiot Christians?'

Sorry, my "believe stupid conspiracy theories" module is at the shop.

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
My son spent a year in Palestine, Ramallah, to be precise. It actually snowed twice while he was there so, yes, it could be theoretically possible that as a boy Jesus may have had the chance to build a snowman, though there is no record of it, not even in the Gospel of Thomas.

Snow isn't unusual in parts of the Southern med - but enough snow to make a significant covering is a 20-50 year event.

But this is all irrelevant, of course. Snow at Christmas is a romantic fantasy invented by Europeans. And popularised by Dickens.

[ 11. November 2015, 07:18: Message edited by: mr cheesy ]

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
Starbucks has certainly gotten more free publicity from this than they could possibly have dreamed. Great marketing strategy.

It's also brought their tax avoision schemes into focus, which isn't so good for them.

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

quote:
Originally posted by saysay:
A protest that involves the outraged giving money to the company they hate?

Wait.. what?

quote:
Anyone else suspect this is manufactured outrage so everyone can play another round of 'let's laugh at the idiot Christians?'

How are you thinking this is happening? Are you saying some journalist at the New Yorker notices something on his starbucks cup and whips up his own story which explodes onto social media?

It can happen (cake anyone?).. but it does require willing acquiescence of the outraged. So for this to become a story, it actually needs someone to make outraged statements about it.

If a journalist kept phoning up religious leaders and politicians for comment and they just replied "huh, that's not a story, stop wasting my time", he'd soon stop. Like isn't long enough to force a story that nobody is biting on.

Unless you are the Daily Mail, of course.

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

If you were with the Daily Mail you wouldn't bother phoning anyone. You'd just write the story and not worry about whether there's any truth in it.

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :

quote:
Originally posted by georgiaboy:
Off to find a coffee-proof keyboard (if such exists?)

They do (other models are available).

Posted by The Phantom Flan Flinger (# 8891) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
So this Josh guy...

From his last name, I surmise he has some Jewish background. But he's a Christian, and a pastor at that. Which is absolutely fine.

But I wonder if that makes him feel he has to be more militant and defensive about anything Christian? "I'm a Christian! See? I really, really am! I'm so much for Christ that I make the big, nasty corporation say his name! See, God? See?"

Or he could just be a prat.

Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :

That, too.

Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:

quote:
Originally posted by saysay:
A protest that involves the outraged giving money to the company they hate?
Wait.. what?

The protest gimmick is to give your name as "Merry Christmas" when you place your order, so that the barista will be forced to say the (supposedly banned) words "Merry Christmas" when calling you to the counter to pick up your drink.

Josh doesn't say so explicitly, but I think you are then supposed to pay for it. I suspect even he would recognize placing an order and then running out without paying for it as the dick move that it is.

Posted by The Phantom Flan Flinger (# 8891) on :

But if everybody does that, how will they know whose drink is whose?

Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on :

Hmm. I don't know - middle initials? "Merry F. Christmas!"

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

The thing is, they never thought that far ahead. If they thought at all.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Merry 'Fecking' Christmas? Father Jack Hackett is alive and well!

I.

Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
Josh doesn't say so explicitly, but I think you are then supposed to pay for it. I suspect even he would recognize placing an order and then running out without paying for it as the dick move that it is.

I've been to Starbucks about three times in my life, but don't you have to pay when you place your order?

Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :

You do. No pay, no drink.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
Josh doesn't say so explicitly, but I think you are then supposed to pay for it. I suspect even he would recognize placing an order and then running out without paying for it as the dick move that it is.

You give him far more credit than he has earned.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

Even the GOP Idiot-in-Chief has waded into the psuedo-controversy. "If I'm elected president, we'll all be saying 'Merry Christmas' again," says the Donald.

You mean people aren't saying that now because it's against the law, and as president you will find a way to set aside that law? Or do you mean you will force people to say it whether or not they want to?

Or are you just blathering impotent nonsense to pander to the idiot American religious right, who feel under siege and attacked because they and their customs are losing hegemony in a multi-cultural society? Yes. Yes, that's more likely.

Posted by Soror Magna (# 9881) on :

I rarely use my real name when ordering at *$s or the Fallen Arches; I always use "Mary". Perhaps I'll upgrade that to "Mary Theotokos" for the holidaze just for the fun of making the clerk say, "Mary who?" Two can play that game, Mr. Josh. [Two face]

Posted by saysay (# 6645) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:

quote:
Originally posted by saysay:
Anyone else suspect this is manufactured outrage so everyone can play another round of 'let's laugh at the idiot Christians?'
How are you thinking this is happening? Are you saying some journalist at the New Yorker notices something on his starbucks cup and whips up his own story which explodes onto social media?

No, I'm not suggesting that journalists are completely making it up. Josh clearly exists and obviously posted a video.

But apart from half a dozen tweets, the only evidence anyone offered that this was any kind of a massive movement was the number of times the video had been viewed or shared. But most of the shares I saw were critical, not in support of it.

The guy is a self-described social media personality. I'm fairly certain he just engaged in some master-level trolling in getting members of the liberal media to cover the story and allow its readers to engage in their daily dose of hate. Which he then gets to use as evidence that the librul elite really is engaging in a war against Christianity, they're just too smart to come out and say it most of the time.

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

quote:
Originally posted by saysay:

But apart from half a dozen tweets, the only evidence anyone offered that this was any kind of a massive movement was the number of times the video had been viewed or shared. But most of the shares I saw were critical, not in support of it.

The guy is a self-described social media personality. I'm fairly certain he just engaged in some master-level trolling in getting members of the liberal media to cover the story and allow its readers to engage in their daily dose of hate. Which he then gets to use as evidence that the librul elite really is engaging in a war against Christianity, they're just too smart to come out and say it most of the time.

Spot on.

Which only makes the Trumpster weighing in all the more ridiculous. The cherry on top of the clown car.

Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:

quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
Josh doesn't say so explicitly, but I think you are then supposed to pay for it. I suspect even he would recognize placing an order and then running out without paying for it as the dick move that it is.
I've been to Starbucks about three times in my life, but don't you have to pay when you place your order?

Yeah, as Brenda notes, I guess you're right. So Josh's followers will definitely have to pay Starbucks for their cunning plan to work.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by saysay:
The guy is a self-described social media personality. I'm fairly certain he just engaged in some master-level trolling in getting members of the liberal media to cover the story and allow its readers to engage in their daily dose of hate.

Cover what story? There would have been no story if his legions of wannabe fellators didn't pick it up and run with hate-filled tweets. It's not like the evil nasty twisted liberals just picked up this one guy's comments and fabricated a story out of it. His followers created the story. The media reported it (there is no such thing as a "liberal media' in this country unless you mean Mother Jones and Rolling Stone but that's a story for another day).

TLDR: No. That's bupkis. The hate was there first, THEN the liberal reaction. Thanks for playing. BYE.

Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :

Stephen Colbert went after Josh and his campaign Wed. night (the 11th)! For several minutes. Really good.

The show is still on right now, but the video should be available here, sometime Thursday. It's in the early part of the show.

Posted by Ricardus (# 8757) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:

TLDR: No. That's bupkis. Tyhe hate was there first, THEN the liberal reaction. Thanks for playing. BYE.

Tbh I suspect you are both right. I am convinced that there are Christian lobby groups in this country who deliberately pick unwinnable fights* so that when they inevitably lose, they can point to their defeat as evidence of increasing Christian marginalisation and justify their existence as a lobby group. I suspect Mr Feuerstein comes from a similar stable. As you say, though, this strategy relies on a pre-existing group being gullible and paranoid enough to believe their case has merit.

* NHS nurses not being allowed to wear dangly crosses for reasons of infection control being the most egregious.

Posted by Stetson (# 9597) on :

Mousethief wrote:

quote:
Even the GOP Idiot-in-Chief has waded into the psuedo-controversy. "If I'm elected president, we'll all be saying 'Merry Christmas' again," says the Donald.

You mean people aren't saying that now because it's against the law, and as president you will find a way to set aside that law? Or do you mean you will force people to say it whether or not they want to?

Maybe he's gonna change his name to "Merry Christmas".

[ 12. November 2015, 10:56: Message edited by: Stetson ]

Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :

I would be good with that if only all the hotels, casinos, golf courses and so on had to change to match.

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:

quote:
Pigwidgeon: The Mother of Our Lord is a Siren?

Some Afro-American religious expressions identify her with a siren.

So what? That no more makes them right or entitle them to be given credence as the statement 'Some Euro-Americans identify Jesus with self-help capitalism' obliges us to take that seriously.

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

quote:
Ricardus: I am convinced that there are Christian lobby groups in this country who deliberately pick unwinnable fights* so that when they inevitably lose, they can point to their defeat as evidence of increasing Christian marginalisation and justify their existence as a lobby group.

I also suspect there is money to be made in this, sending panicky chain e-mails saying that people need to send money to fight this.

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

quote:
Enoch: So what? That no more makes them right or entitle them to be given credence as the statement 'Some Euro-Americans identify Jesus with self-help capitalism' obliges us to take that seriously.

Er ... some people on this thread compared the siren in the Starbucks logo with the Holy Mother. This reminded me that there are in fact religious practices where she is identified with a siren, and I just wanted to point that out. I didn't ask you to see this as right, or to give them credence.

Posted by Martin60 (# 368) on :

mousethief has given me an assist here: from 'the Donald' to Duck Fart, rich with Spooneristic potential. Donald is Cockney rhyming slang of course. As in, "I'm absolutely Donald". Can't wait for him to be President, he'll make Dubbyer look Ivy League. ...

[ 15. November 2015, 14:41: Message edited by: Martin60 ]

Posted by irish_lord99 (# 16250) on :

A mere technicality I know, but W. did in fact have a BA from Yale, and MBA from Harvard.

Lord help us if Trumps actually elected, though I'm pretty sure his nomination would seal eventual victory for Hillary.

[ 15. November 2015, 19:14: Message edited by: irish_lord99 ]

Posted by Martin60 (# 368) on :

Hence my ellipsis.

Posted by Moo (# 107) on :

quote:
Originally posted by irish_lord99:
A mere technicality I know, but W. did in fact have a BA from Yale, and MBA from Harvard.

AIUI W. had a slightly higher grade-point average at Yale than Gore did.

Moo

Posted by crunt (# 1321) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Moo:

quote:
Originally posted by irish_lord99:
A mere technicality I know, but W. did in fact have a BA from Yale, and MBA from Harvard.
AIUI W. had a slightly higher grade-point average at Yale than Gore did.

Moo

I thought Dubya offended a lot of his former classmates during an alumni event by saying he didn't do too badly (became POTUS) for a C student.

Posted by Moo (# 107) on :

quote:
Originally posted by crunt:
I thought Dubya offended a lot of his former classmates during an alumni event by saying he didn't do too badly (became POTUS) for a C student.

At a commencement address he congratulated those who graduated with honors. Then he said to those with C averages that they might become president some day. He didn't say anything about his own grades.

I was wrong when I said Bush did better than Gore; it was Kerry he bested. According to this site, Kerry had a cumulative score of 76 and Bush had one of 77.

Moo

Posted by Crœsos (# 238) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Moo:

quote:
Originally posted by irish_lord99:
A mere technicality I know, but W. did in fact have a BA from Yale, and MBA from Harvard.
AIUI W. had a slightly higher grade-point average at Yale than Gore did.

quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
I was wrong when I said Bush did better than Gore; it was Kerry he bested. According to this site, Kerry had a cumulative score of 76 and Bush had one of 77.

Plus Al Gore never attended Yale. He was a Harvard man.

Posted by HughWillRidmee (# 15614) on :

Christian Evangelist Joshua Feuerstein Put Subliminal Dollar Bill Images in His Latest Video

Posted by Martin60 (# 368) on :

Wheat, tares. Or shout it be tares, wheat! ?

Posted by chris stiles (# 12641) on :

quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:

I also suspect there is money to be made in this, sending panicky chain e-mails saying that people need to send money to fight this.

This is reality, there are a number of people who have trodden this path, a perfect example of whom is Richard Viguerie:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Viguerie#Life_and_career

http://thebaffler.com/salvos/the-long-con

"It brought the message of the New Right to the masses, but it kept nearly all the revenue streams locked down in Viguerie’s proprietary control. Here was a key to the hustle: typically, only 10 to 15 percent of the haul went to the intended beneficiaries. The rest went back to Viguerie’s company. In one too-perfect example, Viguerie raised $802,028 for a client seeking to distribute Bibles in Asia—who paid $889,255 for the service."

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :

I was wondering why this thread had been bumped. Holy shit, was he stupid enough to think flashing money would convince us to send money to him? All it provokes in me is the subconcious desire for hundred dollar bills of my own.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

Perhaps if he flashed cheques that said "PAY TO THE ORDER OF JOSHUA FEUERSTEIN"....

Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
I was wondering why this thread had been bumped. Holy shit, was he stupid enough to think flashing money would convince us to send money to him? All it provokes in me is the subconcious desire for hundred dollar bills of my own.

Just as if someone were to flash pictures of chocolate -- it would only create cravings of my own.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0