I’m a liberal. You didn’t need to be told that, but I am. You could easily glean from my various tirades that I’m anti-Bush, generally anti-religion (I cringe at typing that, though), pro-civil rights, pro-choice (redundant, I know), and also pro-America to the maximum.

However, I’m also severely pro common sense. I like being aware of people’s feelings to an extent, but I realize that coddling everyone who may be offended at anything is simply ridiculous. For example, I don’t like religious texts or icons being put in state-owned buildings, but you can turn your house into a giant Nativity Scene if you’d like.

So you can imagine my dismay at this overreaction to a “homophobic” Snickers ad I found on everyone’s favorite AMERICAblog.

The Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender civil rights organization, is calling on the makers of Snickers, and its parent company Mars Inc., to pull the ad campaign launched yesterday during the Superbowl. The ad features two presumably straight men who accidentally engage in a kiss and then try to distance themselves from any perception of being gay by “doing something manly.”

Three alternate endings to the commercial spot are posted on the Snickers website, one of which includes the two men violently attacking one another – which sends a dangerous message to the public condoning violence against gay Americans.

Now, the ad is absolutely impossible to find on Snickers site itself, and the copy of the “secret” version on YouTube is more than a little FUBAR’d, but for anyone unaware of the ad in general here’s the one that aired during the Bowl:

[youtube]JHkoZ7ngAM0[/youtube]

Whew, look at all that homophobia! Now while I haven’t been able to find the “violent” ad, the ad that won the campaign (apparently, since it was aired) paints a fairly clear picture. Two rather dimwitted guys overreact out of fear that they might have done something a little gay, so they do something idiotic to “get back their manhood.” It’s lampooning homophobia in a humorous way.

You wouldn’t know that if you read the comments on the above linked blog, though. Here’s a nice little sampling.

So I wrote to the candyman:

I am greatly disheartened to see that you are promoting murder of gays and suicide for those who aren’t murdered.

Please answer these questions to me in writing: How can you live with yourselves? How are you going to feel the next time a gay person is killed with a wrench or a tire iron? How would you feel if murdering you was a joke on a commercial?

Wow.

From the way these people write, you’d think the ad was Fred Phelps himself eating a Snickers bar and giving a thumbs up while saying “I love Snickers almost as much as I hate fags!” I’m all for responsibility in advertising, but this is just out of control. If we banned all ads that could possibly be offensive to someone, there’d be no ads at all.

The Mars company is not condoning hate crimes, they aren’t encouraging violence against gays. They made a joke at the expense of homophobics, but the oversensitive wing of my side of the spectrum just sees “joke about gays and something violent happening” and flips their collective wigs. Wigs that I’m sure are very stylish.

I’ve also gotten wind of a complaint by a Fast Food Union of some kind that’s complaining about the K-Fed ad (a “life comes at you fast” spot that shows K-Fed singing into a security camera at a fast food joint). You want to know why liberals get painted as PC-Nazis? Here’s your answer.

AND SOME MORE: What is potentially the most harmful is that this kind of “go after anything that’s mildly offensive” could prove polarizing. When average joes, or even people like me, see a massive campaign against an ad we saw as harmless, it creates animosity akin to the guy in California who went to court over the “under God” in the pledge.

Does that foster change? No, it increases the anger in those the fight is supposedly against and sours the ones who don’t have a side. Pick your battles, folks. Pick your battles.

It’s believable that the Republicans in the Senate are more than a little malicious toward those who oppose the surge (a lot of them, anyway). What’s unbelievable is that they’d filibuster the debate itself, not just vote their beliefs.

The vote was 49-47, or 11 short of the 60 needed to go ahead with debate, and left the fate of the measure uncertain.

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky described the test vote as merely a “bump in the road” and added that GOP lawmakers “welcome the debate and are happy to have it.

McConnell defended himself by saying that “the minority must be represented”. I can’t help but wonder how he would have treated a similar measure in the other direction prior to losing the legislative branch.

It simply baffles me. These guys aren’t even willing to talk about it. George W Bush has become godlike in the eyes of his followers. He is infallible, all he does is good, and you’re not allowed to speak out against him or you’re falling into the devil’s eager hands.

This may be the greatest video I have seen in months. Joe Scarborough, Pat Buchanan, Joe Klein, and some other guy debate the “surge”. Watch Joe illustrate the kind of true conservative attitude that I have nothing but respect for, with great commentary by Pat Buchanan who I’m normally not a fan of.

[youtube]lL9jTqPrYjY[/youtube]

Beautiful.