What's going on, Albuquerque?

If a lawyer is running ads in a bathroom, you may want to think twice about hiring him.

While out and about today, I noticed some conspicuous advertising. I posted this first on my personal blog, but when I realized that I had a picture that included attorney Russ Whitener on it, I needed to post this here on Duke City Fix, too.

I'm still in Albuquerque, as I've noted previously, and thus I missed out on what could have been my first ever experience of an earthquake. I called up a good friend of mine there when I heard about it, and she was like, "Ho hum, the ground shook a bit, but it wasn't anything to write home about. Good times." I'm sure had I been there myself, I would have completely exaggerated the whole event in my head, and convinced myself that the ground shook so much it knocked me on my ass. But I wasn't there, and so am still left without ever experiencing such a natural phenomenon.

What I did get to do today, though, was go out to lunch. Robert and I met up with a friend of ours neither of us had seen in far too long. When you meet up at 11:30 and don't leave until 2:30, you know you've had a nice time.

At some point during the meal, I had to excuse myself to use the restroom. And, awkward as it is to admit this, I couldn't resist taking a picture of something that caught my eye while there. Ever heard of Johnny Boards? Basically, the concept is that an ideal placement for advertisements is in a place people always have to go: the John.

Normally, I don't think much of it, but today was a different story. It pretty much speaks for itself.

And I think it definitely merited taking a picture in the restroom. Just saying.

0 members like this

< Previous Post

Comment by Robert S. on July 30, 2008 at 5:24am: I imagine it'd be a bar.

I hope those Social Security Disablility lawyers would have their ads in the men's urinal, so I can do my business on their ad. It makes me sick that they help borderline or lazy, non-disabled people mooch off of the money coming out of our paychecks (and apparently it must be a cottage industry with more and more bottomfeeders advertising services to help people get their SS disability.

Comment by Pat O. on July 30, 2008 at 8:33am: My aunt was disabled by repetitive stress injuries when she worked as a mail sorter for the Postal Service in Indiana (this happened in the Sixties, before OSHA and automated mail sorters). The injuries affected her hands, arms and back. She was eligible for SS Disability, but Social Security disallowed her request. That's where a Social Security disability lawyer stepped in, and got benefits for her.

Comment by Masshole in Fringecrest on July 30, 2008 at 9:15am: It's a shame that State DOT (and/or Bernalillo County) felt they should pay for their "DWI- you can't afford it" ad. EVERY Bar in the city and county should be REQUIRED to display whatever may be the latest marketing campaign for DWI awareness. Over the bar, in the bathrooms, at the door, in the parking lot, subliminal mindfuck, whathaveyou... small aside, the campaign should have said, "DWI- you can't afford it, unless you have the same kind of money and connections as Jason Daskalos...."

Comment by Phil on July 30, 2008 at 9:41am: Sophie: Actually, it wasn't even a bar. It was Bumblebee's Baja Grill on Central. I guess that's, in part, why I found it so curious.

Robert: Abuses like that in any form are not cool. I like that at least they had Russ Whitener on the ad, because what's not to love about a tough guy act that involves posing after tearing a tiny piece of paper?

Pat: Sounds like that's exactly what those lawyers are meant to be doing. Sounds like getting that was about as hard as getting Workman's Comp can be.

Masshole: I agree, those ads should be required all over. There's nothing wrong with drinking, and honestly, it's not that hard to be responsible and get a DD. I think New Mexico should step up and fight DWI harder. If they're going to let people off as easily as they seem to, then perhaps it's time they think about barring entry into a bar if you've gotten a DWI.

Comment by Barelas Babe on July 30, 2008 at 9:50am: Phil - now I'm wondering what the ads are in the women's bathroom!

Great to catch up with you and Robert yesterday...

Comment by once banned twice shy on July 30, 2008 at 10:29am: Barring entry into a bar if you've had one DWI? So, I suppose you have no problem with losing your drivers' license after having had one speeding ticket? Did you know that speeding kills more people that DWI? No, the way to combat DWI is to liberalize the liquor licensing in this state. If every neighborhood had a bar, people could walk to their favorite watering hole and there would be less driving. More public transport would be nice, too.

Robert S.: Clearly you know absolutely nothing about how SSD works. You see, Social Security operates on a "deny first, see if they fight it" theory. For everyone. Imagine if you are truly disabled--such as with multiple sclerosis--and being told you cannot have your SSD. Incidentally, the SSD payment comes out of whatever a person may have paid into the Social Security system through withholding during their working life. Indeed, attorneys assist those who are truly disabled--because it is very difficult to fight the system when you are disabled. Do you know for a fact that attorneys are out there looking for lazy, non-disabled persons for whom to get SSD? Because, you know, that would be fraud. Any attorney engaging in helping a person to defraud the SS system would lose his/her license. All for a few hundred dollars. Also, Robert S., you may be interested to know that SSD payments are quite low--usually between $300 and $600 a month. Could YOU live on that? I hope you never, ever have to visit the hell that is the SSD system, Robert S.

Comment by Zoe on July 30, 2008 at 10:48am: I had a very good friend who had to go on disability. She had to fight like hell to get it. This became progressively harder as her brain was ravaged by her brain tumor. She died. At 31. Left two precious children. So, thank God she won't be mooching from you any longer, Robert.

Comment by Phil on July 30, 2008 at 11:44am: Interesting turn this comment thread has taken. I didn't realize a light-hearted post about advertising placement could spark such passionate debate.

Once banned: You make a good case, to be sure. Neighborhood bars and increased public transportation would definitely be an improvement. I'd be interesting to see some articles about speeding compared to DWI. If you know of any, let me know. However, I think the deeper issue here is that New Mexico has an awful lot of repeat DWI offenders. I don't pretend to know a lot about every issue involved, but I wonder what studies have been regarding alcohol addiction to DWI. So on the one hand, yes, I don't think it's unfair to say that people who receive a DWI should not be drinking. I threw the idea of denying entry into a bar based on that idea. Many people go to bars and enjoy themselves safely, so there's really no one perfect answer. I had jury duty last year and saw some pretty interesting haps go down regarding one woman's DWI; it was eye-opening to see it from that sort of inside perspective.

Once Banned & Zoe: There's no question that systems involving compensation force you to work very hard to receive that funding. I have not had any dealings with SSD, but I have had to file for Worker's Comp, and it took me months just to get the company to cover the cost of x-rays and an ER visit from an accident I had while working. I imagine SSD is an even more difficult process.

Comment by once banned twice shy on July 30, 2008 at 2:23pm: Phil: Most of the repeat DWI offenders DO have an alcohol abuse problem. Some are able to hire attorneys and make the DWI go away, some aren't. But here's one solution I can suggest, which will never, ever grow wings and fly: equip all bars with breathalyzers. You blow in the breathalyzer before being served--for each drink you order. Once you are over the limit, you will not longer be served and will be prohibited from leaving the bar until you can blow under the legal limit (although Darren White will tell you that you are still a hazard until you blow 0.0). If you come in and blow over the legal limit, you will still be prohibited from leaving. That will solve the DWI problem from bars--also any place that sells package would have to do the same. This won't prevent people from buying booze sober, taking it home, getting trashed and driving, but I suppose mandatory universal interlocks on ALL cars would solve that problem.

Comment by Phil on July 30, 2008 at 6:40pm: Once banned: That would definitely be interesting. Unfortunately, it seems that the actions of few affect the lives of many. Those who do drink responsibly may take offense to the idea that every action they take is under such close scrutiny. For instance, if you had a designated driver, who had had nothing to drink and could thus leave the bar, would that DD be able to take a friend home who is over the legal limit? Ensuring that they leave safely would mean walking them out to the car and watching them leave, or keeping an eye on them via security cameras, or what have you.

The reason I'd be interested in seeing a study about people who have had DWIs is because I think it might be telling to learn why it is that someone intoxicated chose to get behind the wheel of a car. Sure, judgment is impaired, but there's got to be something else going on to trigger that decision. Social stigma? Family difficulties? Depression? Reasons are most likely limitless, but I'm curious if there might be common thread(s). Of course, now that I think about it, I think back on the DWI case from my jury duty, and it seemed to me that her reason for driving was just her making a stupid decision. I guess she was "having too much fun" and got carried away in the moment, or something. The more I think about this, the more miffed I become.

Comment