'Slutbucks'

[NortheastCynic]

http://www.startribune.com/nation/18969709.html?location_refer=Homepage
This is absolutely hillarious.

A Christian group based in San Diego found grounds for outrage over the new retro-style logo for Starbucks Coffee.

The Resistance says the new image "has a naked woman on it with her legs spread like a prostitute," Mark Dice, founder of the group, said in a news release. "Need I say more? It's extremely poor taste, and the company might as well call themselves Slutbucks."

-NC

[Truth_and_Power]

someone else's reply to this:


The siren depicted on the retro Starbucks label is one which appears in medieval churches and monastaries, yes, that's right, churches and monastaries. She is carved atop columns, in friezes and on entabulature. She appears at the Abbey St. Foy, in Conques, France 1100 CE. Representative of the seven deadly sins perhaps? But for almost 1000 years, church goers have not been offended by her.....

So can we call it the Cuntholic Church also?

[Osborn F. Enready]

ROFLMAO!

Talk about uproar over trivial BS.

[NortheastCynic]

I bet the guy thought the 'slutbucks' line was the greatest comedic triumph in human history.

-NC

[micfranklin]

Who needs priorities anyway?

[Alonzo]

They're not just a wacko christian group, they're a wacko christian, ron paul supporting, conspiracy theorist group! It's the trifecta I've always dreamed of!:

http://www.theresistancemanifesto.com/index.php

Though, that's not to say I'd be opposed to a "slutbucks", if it existed.

[NortheastCynic]

I've never used the word 'batshit' before in my life.

Now seems like as good a time as ever.

-NC

[micfranklin]

Were they trying to play out Assassin's Creed in that video?

[PatrickHenry]

I am on board with most of Resistance/Mark Dice stuff.

The objection to Starbucks retro logo is pointless.

But Starbucks founder is another cheesy Zionist bastard.

[PostmodernProphet]

I bet the guy thought the 'slutbucks' line was the greatest comedic triumph in human history.

-NC

what really sucks is that he forgot to copyright it.....now Starbucks can use it, make a fortune and he gets zilch......

[Alonzo]

I am on board with most of Resistance/Mark Dice stuff.

The objection to Starbucks retro logo is pointless.

But Starbucks founder is another cheesy Zionist bastard.

You scare me sometimes. You're a nice guy and I don't mean anything bad by it, but sometimes you really do scare me.

[PatrickHenry]

You scare me sometimes. You're a nice guy and I don't mean anything bad by it, but sometimes you really do scare me.
Well, vice-versa!

I love the way you administrate the forum, but when I see your radical social agenda and your rapacious desire to shrink my bank account, and I consider that there are millions like you supporting Hillary, I get the shakes... :ecstatic:

[NortheastCynic]

what really sucks is that he forgot to copyright it.....now Starbucks can use it, make a fortune and he gets zilch......:clapper: Very good point, Prophet.

You scare me sometimes. You're a nice guy and I don't mean anything bad by it, but sometimes you really do scare me.
Well, vice-versa!
Democracy Forums: where people from all over the political spectrum can express mutual terror and admiration for each other.:thumbsup:

-NC

[Drocket]

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/144/359697017_6a4a8d900b.jpg?v=0

(From the movie Idiocracy)

[Easy90]

Looking at the logo, for the life of me I can't see any "naked lady with her legs spread." How the hell do they see that? I haven't seen such an absurd conniption since the libs got all hinky when Falwell said something equally stupid about a cartoon sponge.

[Buck Laser]

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/144/359697017_6a4a8d900b.jpg?v=0

(From the movie Idiocracy)
That's the old logo. The new one is a mermaid with exposed breasts, which is probably what they got all upset about.

[Drocket]

That's the old logo. The new one is a mermaid with exposed breasts, which is probably what they got all upset about.

I'm not sure if you're being droll or if you didn't really examine the picture... Either way, the movie Idiocracy is well worth watching :)

[Buck Laser]

I'm not sure if you're being droll or if you didn't really examine the picture... Either way, the movie Idiocracy is well worth watching :)
I guess I'll have to watch the movie. I didn't see that it said "St<a>r8uck's before, but a good many things about the latest pop culture get away from me.

[Drocket]

Actually, it's what it says below that - "Erotic Coffee for Men." Idiocracy takes place 500 years in the future, by which time Starbucks (as well as pretty much every other business) has turned into a brothel.

[G.B.]

I hope that guy never tours Rome. He'd be apoplectic.

[Mia]

They're not just a wacko christian group, they're a wacko christian, ron paul supporting, conspiracy theorist group! It's the trifecta I've always dreamed of!:

http://www.theresistancemanifesto.com/index.php



LOL! Must've made your day!

[Alonzo]

LOL! Must've made your day!

Yup, now I just need to see one of these nuts in person so I can actually talk to one.

Well, vice-versa!

I love the way you administrate the forum, but when I see your radical social agenda and your rapacious desire to shrink my bank account, and I consider that there are millions like you supporting Hillary, I get the shakes... :ecstatic:

Damn, I sound evil. I hope I never meet me.

[Mia]

Sidebar:

Zo, I know you don't care about my opinion, but I want to second what PH said regardless.

I find you to be fair in your administration of this forum, and a good administrator. My criticism of many of your arguments, and you overall debate style and tactics is separate from that.

[NortheastCynic]

Personally, I hate all of you.:shock:

-NC

[Alonzo]

Sidebar:

Zo, I know you don't care about my opinion, but I want to second what PH said regardless.

I find you to be fair in your administration of this forum, and a good administrator. My criticism of many of your arguments, and you overall debate style and tactics is separate from that.

Thank you. And to be honest I much prefer that than if you liked my debate style but hated the way I ran the forum.

I also never said I don't care about your opinion, just your insults. :)

[PatrickHenry]

Isn't that why we come here? To find a viciously argumentative but fairly-run forum?

[Mia]

Isn't that why we come here? To find a viciously argumentative but fairly-run forum?

YES, that's why I love it here! :clapper:

Although vicious is a little farther then I like to go, or for others to, in concept I agree. :thumbsup:

[PostmodernProphet]

The new one is a mermaid

how does a mermaid spread her legs?.....

[micfranklin]

They probably can but since they're wrapped in fish fins you can't see it.

[PostmodernProphet]

lol, could be a woman carrying a pair of halibutt......

http://www.wordlab.com/images/Starbucks.Logo.Original.jpg


{and yes I know that isn't how you spell halibut.....}

just think of all the uproar they could have avoided if they had just had Rachel Ray dress her in a decorative scarf......

[micfranklin]

Neither case makes any fucking sense to me.

[Osborn F. Enready]

That is one hideous picture with the "mermaid"......

Crappy selection in my opinion for a logo, but then again, I think Starbucks is crappy for the most part, so it is fitting at least. ;)

[Truth_and_Power]

I'm not sure if you're being droll or if you didn't really examine the picture... Either way, the movie Idiocracy is well worth watching :)

It's got 'lectrolytes!

[micfranklin]

Crappy selection in my opinion for a logo, but then again, I think Starbucks is crappy for the most part, so it is fitting at least. ;)

How dare you!!!!:fight:

[Easy90]

I dislike Starbucks because their coffee is overpriced, and IMHO, tastes horrible (and I like coffee)...but I can't bring myself to give a damn what their corporate logo looks like. Their popularity is a mystery for me. I know a lady who is very overweight...constantly on some kind of diet...and is always short of cash...who (I'm sure, unwittingly) spends about $6.00 a DAY in Starbucks buying some kind of gooky sugary 2,000 calorie, fat laden, "coffee based" milkshake concoction... It must have some kind of addictive drug in it.

[cronic]

I dislike Starbucks because their coffee is overpriced, and IMHO, tastes horrible...but I can't bring myself to give a damn what their corporate logo looks like. Their popularity is a mystery for me. I know a lady who is very overweight...constantly on some kind of diet...and is always short of cash...who (I'm sure, unwittingly) spends about $6.00 a DAY in Starbucks buying some kind of gooky 2,000 calorie, fat laden, "coffee based" milkshake concoction... It must have some kind of addictive drug in it.


I was about to say the same thing.. except a little shorter version

I think they are over priced and the coffee isn't to good either.
If given a choice between
Starbucks and Mcdonalds coffee..
I'll be drivin thru Micky Dees

[piratemonkey]

The Resistance says the new image "has a naked woman on it with her legs spread like a prostitute," Mark Dice, founder of the group, said in a news release. "Need I say more? It's extremely poor taste, and the company might as well call themselves Slutbucks."


1) I wonder how Mr. Dice has sex with his wife, if she doesn't spread her legs "like a prostitute"... I guess he's not into missionary.

2) Since when does a mermaid have legs?

[micfranklin]

The coffee's only $3.00 and you can always get a frappucino or something.

[NortheastCynic]

Well, Pirate, I think non-traditional sex positions would be out [doggy-style implies some sort of evolution] and because we all know sex is exclusively for child creation, artificial insemination is probably how Mr. Dice gets down.

2. Maybe the flippers are just long socks?

-NC

[Osborn F. Enready]

I think starbucks is DEFINITELY over-priced, which is why I don't go there.

Mic said:
The coffee's only $3.00 and you can always get a frappucino or something.

ONLY?!?

I can buy a whole 1 POUND CAN of coffee for less than three cups at Starbucks..... that is WAY expensive, and why I boycott their business by not shopping there.

I can eat a good meal for $3.00, and I would take a meal over a cup of coffee anyday when I have water or tea or homemade coffee to quench that thirst.

[Alonzo]

I can buy a whole 1 POUND CAN of coffee for less than three cups at Starbucks..... that is WAY expensive, and why I boycott their business by not shopping there.

Well, if you don't mind the coffee pickers getting whipped for picking too slowly, and the farmers being taken advantage of even more than fair trade or starbucks (not as good as fair trade, not as bad as regular coffee) does.

But where can you get a meal for $3? Are we talking the imitation food they sell at McDonalds?

[ECW]

Damn. I thought this was going to be a thread where someone had put Lindsay Lohan's picture on a dollar bill and got in trouble for it.

Coffee? It's too damned hot here to drink coffee.

[Osborn F. Enready]

Alonzo said:
Well, if you don't mind the coffee pickers getting whipped for picking too slowly, and the farmers being taken advantage of even more than fair trade or starbucks (not as good as fair trade, not as bad as regular coffee) does.

I make my choices based on my prefrences, availability, price all relevant to other options available and their prices.

If that coffee is being obtained through slave labor, its BOTH governments fault, not mine as the purchaser. You SHOULD try holding them accountable for marketing products using slave labor, not the purchaser of said products who rarely know where their products come from because they CAN'T in many cases obtain that information.

However, that would mean holding your beloved Bi-Partisan monopoly on power accountable, and I know you don't want to do that.... its much easier to blame liberty and individuals in your opinion.....

Alonzo said:
But where can you get a meal for $3? Are we talking the imitation food they sell at McDonalds?

LOL,..... sometimes....but it is actual food, not just imitation.

When I quoted the price of $3.00 for a meal, I was thinking of Taco Bell, but it could also be obtained even cheaper if you simply fix your own meals from store bought goods.

[PatrickHenry]

YES, that's why I love it here! :clapper:

Although vicious is a little farther then I like to go, or for others to, in concept I agree. :thumbsup:It's not a vicious forum. That would be an adjective.

It's an argumentative forum, and viciously is the adverb modifying the adjective, capische?

I would never want to be vicious to my friends and correspondents on this forum.

Just viciously argumentative. :dork:

[micfranklin]

But where can you get a meal for $3? Are we talking the imitation food they sell at McDonalds?

The only meal that's even close to $3 at McDonalds is a Happy meal and every other meal isn't less than $4.00

[Osborn F. Enready]

I can eat well, and stay full for hours on a $3.00 meal from taco bell, and its relatively healthy as far as fast food goes.

I still like Ray Croc and McDonalds though.....

[Alonzo]

If that coffee is being obtained through slave labor, its BOTH governments fault, not mine as the purchaser. You SHOULD try holding them accountable for marketing products using slave labor, not the purchaser of said products who rarely know where their products come from because they CAN'T in many cases obtain that information.

You're right Osborn, they take advantage of people because it's fun. They'd continue to do so even if people refused to buy such products.

I think this argument contradicts your argument that consumers can influence businesses by choosing what to purchase.

[NortheastCynic]

Zo, I find this odd.

In several arguments you've gotten into with PatrickHenry, you've often taken the side that there is no true objective right or wrong [correct me if I'm wrong]...Yet we're to believe that there is some objective 'fairness' somewhere and that it can be universally applied in the international market?

Additionally, do you truly believe that workers would stop being whipped if they were working for someone other than Starbucks? That is to say, if Starbucks was boycotted and went under, do you really believe work-place abuse would just stop?

I would also like to pose the question, "did the workers know that they could be whipped before they signed up to work?"

-NC

[Alonzo]

In several arguments you've gotten into with PatrickHenry, you've often taken the side that there is no true objective right or wrong...Yet we're to believe that there is some objective 'fairness' somewhere and that it can be universally applied in the international market?

There isn't. But I think you'd be hard pressed to argue that better working conditions for workers is a bad thing.

Additionally, do you truly believe that workers would stop being whipped if they were working for someone other than Starbucks? That is to say, if Starbucks was boycotted and went under, do you really believe work-place abuse would just stop?

The risk of such abuses would be lower for fair trade and starbucks coffee. Starbucks, from what I understand, has suppliers that have better conditions for workers than the likes of Dunkin Donuts, folgers or any other cheap coffee maker. They're step below fair trade, and have behaved ruthlessly in the international coffee market before, but they're better than the bulk of them.

I would also like to pose the question, "did the workers know that they could be whipped before they signed up to work?"

I don't think that matters other than for the length of time the owners of such plantation should be jailed.

[NortheastCynic]

There isn't. Then why the use of this 'fair trade' buzzword?

But I think you'd be hard pressed to argue that better working conditions for workers is a bad thing.Better conditions for workers are not necessarily a bad thing [it all depends on how they are achieved]. In this case a law should be made [or enforced] in the country that these workers live in outlawing flogging in the workplace.

Starbucks, from what I understand, has suppliers that have better conditions for workers than the likes of Dunkin Donuts, folgers or any other cheap coffee maker. They're step below fair trade, and have behaved ruthlessly in the international coffee market before, but they're better than the bulk of them. Again, what is this 'fairness' of which you speak?

-NC

[Alonzo]

Then why the use of this 'fair trade' buzzword?

To designate higher prices paid for coffee, as well as more humane treatment of works and less harm to the environment.

Better conditions for workers are not necessarily a bad thing [it all depends on how they are achieved]. In this case a law should be made [or enforced] in the country that these workers live in outlawing flogging in the workplace.

Whipping was just something I said, I'm not sure about how often it occurs (though I have heard of it). I simply used that as an example of treatment that, in the u.s., would be illegal.

As for requiring countries to enforce it, many countries have laws that are unenforced. But since we buy it, and we're the reason the demand is so high, why isn't it partly our responsibility too?

Again, what is this 'fairness' of which you speak?

-NC

You do realize that "fair trade" is an actual term, such as "organic", not merely a description. It is something that must be certified by one of the fair trade groups.

[NortheastCynic]

That should have been the question I asked. I didn't realize you were using the technical definition of 'fair trade', Zo...Sorry for the confusion.

-NC

[Mia]

I dislike Starbucks because their coffee is overpriced, and IMHO, tastes horrible (and I like coffee)...but I can't bring myself to give a damn what their corporate logo looks like. Their popularity is a mystery for me. I know a lady who is very overweight...constantly on some kind of diet...and is always short of cash...who (I'm sure, unwittingly) spends about $6.00 a DAY in Starbucks buying some kind of gooky sugary 2,000 calorie, fat laden, "coffee based" milkshake concoction... It must have some kind of addictive drug in it.

It is horrible! IF I'm going to purchase a fancy coffee, it's from independent shops that make it worth the price.

Starbucks is like Mcdonald's to me: the food isn't very good, but there is something addicting about it that caused the whole nation to not be able to live without it.

I haven't had enough of either to fall into this, thank goodness.

OK, I'm lying a little. I got addicted to McDonald's hash browns. The only thing that saves me from eating them every day is that they are only served between 4-10 AM.

I can have willpower for that duration. If they ever serve them 24/7, I'm f'ed :help:

[apdst]

I think the logo should show some cooter.

[PostmodernProphet]

speaking of coffee drinks have any of you tried these, I love em.....

http://www.energyfiend.com/wp-content/java.jpg

[preservanation]

how does a mermaid spread her legs?.....
They're more like misshaped pineapples.
This is by far the silliest threads I've read in a while.
Thanx, I needed that!
:D

[Easy90]

"Whipping was just something I said" (Zo)

LOL! Zo...everything you say is just...something you said..

[Alonzo]

"Whipping was just something I said" (Zo)

LOL! Zo...everything you say is just...something you said..

Your fascination with whipping is making me uncomfortable. :scared:

[G.B.]

I think the logo should show some cooter.

:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::roflmao::roflmao::