Plus, she wants me to use my sleeve as a napkin. I would not want this chick touching me with her green cooties.

This lady is just a liberal. She had been anti-Bush since Day one.

My god. It's like this blog has been transported to a freshman dorm room.

Pass the bong and call for another pizza, man. Them nanny staters aren't gonna slap us down again.

I for one think that Ms. Crow is on to something.

The great TP wasters are women, who use tissue for both [No. 1] and [No. 2].

The male "shake" has saved COUNTLESS old-growth forests from obliteration. Men of the world, give each other a hand! --Just wash first.

Well thank God that Anderson can get into the spirit of the post. Sheesh Hal, grow a sense of humor.

I for one welcome the expansion of law enforcement into the realm of scatological monitoring. The revenue that these potty police could generate by serving up TP usage citations would surely pay for the administrative costs of this new program with enough left over to investigate other innovative ways to eliminate the need for any privacy in our society.

Um, slow news day Steve? : )

The un-funny part of this is, "If a celebrity hypocrite opens his or her yap to say this sort of stuff, and the MSM does not report on it, does the public at large even find out about it?"

Men of the world, give each other a hand!

No offense, Anderson, but I do not want to get that close to you, or any other guy...

Note to self: Never shake hands with Sheryl Crow. We may have a reason why have found the reason why Wes Clark got sick after shaking the hands of all those liberals.

No wonder Rove didn't want to talk to that woman!

Steve, she is just a typical liberal, right up your alley.

M. Murcek's point should be noted. As much as we complain about celebs grandstanding on global and national policy issues we should understand it is the press who amplifies that message to us. The supposed profession of journalism turns out to be less than professional by failing the people it is meant to serve.

The un-funny part of this is, "If a celebrity hypocrite opens his or her yap to say this sort of stuff, and the MSM does not report on it, does the public at large even find out about it?"

Yes I frequently find myself thinking, "if only the MSM could spend a little more time telling me what various celebrities think."

Oh wait...

Somewhere in this story there's a line about “out of my cold, dead, …”.

I for one think that Ms. Crow is on to something.

The great TP wasters are women, who use tissue for both [No. 1] and [No. 2].

The male "shake" has saved COUNTLESS old-growth forests from obliteration. Men of the world, give each other a hand! --Just wash first.

Thanks, Anderson, I almost fried my computer after nearly spewing my coffee while reading your post.

That was brilliant (and so very true)!

No wonder Rove didn't want to talk to that woman!

And that's also why he yelled at her "Don't touch me!"

Excuse the pun, but does anyone give a crap what she says?

No doubt we can all cut back on use of paper products, but I don't need a mediocre singer to tell me how to go about it.

Of course, lets forget about the tractor trailers and buses that Sheryl Crow use while touring. Yes, little Ms. Green, who doesn’t take a dump, travels with three tractor trailers, four buses and six cars. Ahh the hypocrisy of the celebrity class.

Although I agree that Ms. Crow is wrong to promote this particular brand of coerced environmentalism, I would like to raise an objection to this sort of silly (and unfortunately, all too common) Republican talking point.

The idea that Ms. Crow should be required to give up her career before she can be allowed to say a word in favor of conservation is just wrong. She tours, therefore she necessarily will use plenty of fuel for transportation. It's her job. Neither should John Edwards be asked to give up all of his earthly belongings or his expensive haircuts before he can advocate for the poor. He made his money. He can spend it however he likes.

I can't help but feel that the folks who are so fond of bringing up these weak, ad-hominen hypocrisy charges are simply not willing or not able to make an effective argument to the issues.

The idea's so crazy that Sheryl even got flack from Rosie O'Donnell over it. Altogether now, children, can we say, "Lunatic fringe?"

I can only imagine the arraignment hearing:

Judge: On the single count of using more squares than alloted, how do you plead?

Criminal: Innocent, Your Honor. It was the burrito I just ate...

Judge: That's what they all say. Bail is set at $200,000. Next!

The idea that Ms. Crow should be required to give up her career before she can be allowed to say a word in favor of conservation is just wrong.

Who said anything about giving up her career? Oh yeah, not me.

She tours, therefore she necessarily will use plenty of fuel for transportation.

She can use less. Six cars? Three buses? Please.

Neither should John Edwards be asked to give up all of his earthly belongings or his expensive haircuts before he can advocate for the poor. He made his money. He can spend it however he likes.

Of course, but this doesn't change the fact that he, and Ms. Crow, are sanctimonious pricks. Edwards wants to do something for the poor? Sell his house, buy something much more modest and then donate the proceeds to various charities. Before he comes with the coercive power of the state, assuming he gets elected, demanding my money on the pain of punishment perhaps he should look to his own ginormous house.

I can't help but feel that the folks who are so fond of bringing up these weak, ad-hominen hypocrisy charges are simply not willing or not able to make an effective argument to the issues.

It isn't an ad-hominem. Crow and David feel that AGW is a serious issue, but instead of changing their lifestyles they want to force everybody else to change so that they can maintain their own. In short, pointing out hypocrisy is not an ad hominem.