How much wood would a woodchuck chuck?
Feb. 2nd, 2005 05:04 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
vovatSo, are we having six more weeks of winter? And is Bill Murray doomed to relive this day 80,000 times in a row?
Anyway, on my Internet welcome screen today, there was a headline that I thought said, "Math use rising for kids." I thought, "Well, that's a good thing, right?" Then I looked again, and saw that the headline was actually, "METH use rising for kids," which, well, isn't so good.
Speaking of drugs, on one of those Religious Right radio stations, they were talking about something called Modern Drunkard magazine. Two guys weighed in on the subject, the first one doing the typical kind of shtick about how the magazine's founder and the thousands of subscribers were being contemptuous of the gifts that God gave them. The second one agreed (of course), but added something about how our society was hypocritical, because there were so many drinking songs out there today, "especially in country music." He concluded with something like, "We take our magazines seriously, but our pop songs not seriously enough. Maybe it should be the other way around." This really seems to emphasize something that a lot of these types seem to think, namely that listening to a song about something will make you want to do it. Really, though, have you ever heard of ANYONE who got drunk, did drugs, had an extramarital affair, became gay, voted a certain way, or whatever because they heard about it in a song? It's like how the good people at Plugged In think kids shouldn't listen to "Maxwell's Silver Hammer," because it would turn them into mass murderers.
For the record, Modern Drunkard sounds like a really stupid idea, only a step or two above High Times. At the same time, though, I'm rather amused that it exists.
Anyway, on my Internet welcome screen today, there was a headline that I thought said, "Math use rising for kids." I thought, "Well, that's a good thing, right?" Then I looked again, and saw that the headline was actually, "METH use rising for kids," which, well, isn't so good.
Speaking of drugs, on one of those Religious Right radio stations, they were talking about something called Modern Drunkard magazine. Two guys weighed in on the subject, the first one doing the typical kind of shtick about how the magazine's founder and the thousands of subscribers were being contemptuous of the gifts that God gave them. The second one agreed (of course), but added something about how our society was hypocritical, because there were so many drinking songs out there today, "especially in country music." He concluded with something like, "We take our magazines seriously, but our pop songs not seriously enough. Maybe it should be the other way around." This really seems to emphasize something that a lot of these types seem to think, namely that listening to a song about something will make you want to do it. Really, though, have you ever heard of ANYONE who got drunk, did drugs, had an extramarital affair, became gay, voted a certain way, or whatever because they heard about it in a song? It's like how the good people at Plugged In think kids shouldn't listen to "Maxwell's Silver Hammer," because it would turn them into mass murderers.
For the record, Modern Drunkard sounds like a really stupid idea, only a step or two above High Times. At the same time, though, I'm rather amused that it exists.
