Sunday, May 13, 2007

sheryl crow

This topic was first covered over at Bent My Wookie. The only reason I'm covering it here is that there has been a new development.

Here is a couple of quotes from the article

SINGER Sheryl Crowe has proposed a unique way in which to beat global warming - limit the use of toilet paper.

Crowe says: "I have spent the better part of this tour trying to come up with easy ways for us all to become a part of the solution to global warming.

"Now, I don't want to rob any law-abiding American of his or her God-given rights,
but I think we are an industrious enough people that we can make it work with only one square per restroom visit, except, of course, on those pesky occasions where 2 to 3 could be required."

My first complaint is the word "BUT" that I bolded. She doesn't want to rob anybody. BUT she is going to do it anyway. Nice.

By the way did gawd really gives us the right to toilet paper? Oh yeah! The fig leaves!!!

I can see it know. People queing up at WalMart, Charmin in hand, and having to show their National ID card to requisition toilet paper. "But you don't understand, I've had the trots for 2 days now, I need more toilet paper!!!! Using the local newspaper is leaving ink tracks in my underpants."

Now for the best part....

Sheryl Crow has adopted herself a 2 week old baby boy.

Awwwwww isn't that special?

So Ms. Crow....Does a wet-wipe count as 1 squre or 2 squares of toilet paper?

Any parents out there actually manage to change a poopy diaper with 1 wet wipe????

The chances of babies having an immaculate turd are a little bit better than the chance of a fundy reversing her position on evolution.

Sheryl Crow hypocrit or really bad mommy. I wonder which one she will pick.

6 comments:

Hound Doggy said...

Yeah, she said later that that was a joke. Whatever. On Oprah there was someone talking about every person uses 9? paper napkins a day. If everyone could only use 8 it would save the world or something? Paper napkins? I never use paper napkins. Maybe its just me.
Why don't they go after the junk mail people? I get all sorts of "trees" every day that I don't even look at and throw in the trash.
In my little community they don't have curbside recycling and barely any other kind. I've heard for a lot of it it costs more to do the recycling process that it saves.
Sorry for the long post but one more thing. If there were $$ in green all sorts of people would get excited. If water ran cars we'd be paying $3.14 for that.

Fiery Ewok said...

As for comment length- no worries! :-) I love reading other people's thoughts on almost any topic.

I had no idea that Sheryl Crow had recanted her toilet paper theory. It sounded to me like she really meant it in the article. She probably said she was kidding when someone OUTSIDE her circle of yes-men said "That's a crap idea, Sheryl, no one will ever buy it."

I never use napkins either. Somebody must be going through a TON of those things. That or they are factoring in all the restaurant usage.

I completely agree that if recycling and "green living" were cost effective LOTS of people would be doing it. Why wouldn't they. I imagine very few people choose NON-recycled products because of the principle of the thing.

I will use whatever gas is cheaper. I will drive whatever car costs the least amount of money- barring reasonable expectations for runability.

I will buy recycled anything if it's cheaper than the regular stuff. Except for toilet paper. I think I'm going to have to insist that the toilet paper be original. :-)

But I can't afford to buy "green" when it is 3x the price of fresh stuff.

I wish I could. But 2 adults and 2 kids on a single income doesn't give me that luxury.

King Aardvark said...

I kill way more trees than any of you. I'm a civil engineer, and we go through ludicrous amounts of paper for our drawings. Our drawings tend to be around 3.5'x2.5' so they're big. The fact that we have a few dozen working copies at a time for each job, then once it's done we send off more copies to all the interested parties/government agencies, results in many many dead trees. We do recycle most of the paper though.

Fiery Ewok said...

King Aardvark- have I welcomed you to my blog yet? If not WELCOME! And thanks for stopping by and adding your 2 bits!

There are definitely ways that people could work toward less paper usage, while recycling what we do use.

I can't see toilet paper playing a significant role in it.

I'd like to start with junk mail. At least you can delete spam. But that snail-mail glossy junk mail you can't even recycle.

How about phone books? Or even the regular paperback books? A lot of them are unrecyclable because of the glue used. So unless you cut the glued portion (spine) off, the recylce places won't accept them.

None of it, however, should be compulsory from the government. Within the workforce, fine. But not legislated.

Christian said...

I had to.. paper use huh... I print on average 70,000 a4 pages an hour 7.5 hrs a day!!! How's that for tree killing!! Murdererer

Fiery said...

Well look at you, mining the archives. ;) This post actually still gets me shaking my head, what a moron. She may have recanted her story, but not only did she THINK of this idea she actually SAID this idea in public during an interview.

The "duh" factor runs a bit high on this one. Someone should check in with her on those diaper wipes now.