Singer Sheryl Crow has been mentioned in nine Bob McCarty Writes posts since April 23 when she first appeared on this blog under the headline, Sheryl Crow Touts ‘One-Square-Per-Visit’ Future.
Today, I couldn’t help but think of the nightmare scenario “One-Sheet Sheryl” might envision if she reads a recent Associated Press article, China Public Restroom Has 1,000 Stalls.
The article describes how people are “flush with pride in a southwestern Chinese city where a recently-opened porcelain palace features an Egyptian facade, soothing music and more than 1,000 toilets spread out over 32,290 square feet.”
Even if each toilet is used only once per day and, in turn, only one sheet of toilet paper is used per visit, Crow is going to have to come to grips with the fact that one-thousand sheets of toilet paper fall through the cracks daily.
Finally, did I mention the carbon footprint one thousand toilets much generate? It makes me feel flush just thinking about it.
1 response so far ↓
1 Yeziam // Jul 7, 2007 at 9:02 am
OK, so Sheryl messed up and she’s trying to clean up her act, that’s not a bad thing. But if she’s going to do it right, she needs to start at the top and work her way to the bottom.
BUT, since she doesn’t I’d like to take a dab at it and my first cut is the deepest.
This “issue” is as much about egos as it is about environmentalist who have made global warming a partisan issue. Sheryl’s attempt to persuade us it is all about the earth, fails miserably when she makes her argument partisan:
“Clearly, the issue of global warming remains a partisan issue in the minds of many conservatives…rather than accepting the peer-reviewed science that is so clearly laid out for us earthlings”
Unlike Sheryl and Laurie David, I’m not mired in the opinion of those who produced “An Inconvenient Truth”. I DO consider alternative interpretations and from what I have read there is no definitive science or consensus among the experts. So, when Sheryl labels me a conservative because I don’t believe what she does, it chaps my rear. Oh yeah, that reminds me, back to the subject at hand:
Conserving our resources. Laurie is quoted on IMDB as saying “This is not about perfection. I don’t expect anybody else to be perfect either. That’s what hurts the environmental movement – holding people to a standard they cannot meet. That just pushes people away.” So with that information in mind, my desire to conserve when those who preach don’t, pushes me away.
If on the other hand we lived our lives with compassion as Sheryl proposed, we would look toward how our actions affect the many vs the privilege of the few.
A clear example of another inconvenient truth and rationalization to stroke the privileged minds and egos of those who say they care, is the upcoming “Live Aid” concert. The consumption/pollution generated as a result of that event is just another example of how the privileged few shouldn’t have to live up to a standard, because, well, it wouldn’t be fun.
In my humble opinion, we could flush the whole concert down the drain and it would make little difference in this debate until we all become responsible for our actions, no matter how small. One sheet at a time.
Leave a Comment