The IlluminNaughty

I’m not the biggest Michele Bachmann fan, but there’s one thing she stands for I can really get behind, and that’s her light bulb choice legislation! I hate these stupid curly-cue compact fluorescents with their ugly light and their high price tag and their short but very exaggerated lifespans! Plus, I’m not crazy about the fact that when I have to use the bathroom, the bulb takes a few minutes to get going, so I still have to try to find the toilet in the dark. In fact, it is my belief that these bulbs were designed by criminals who mandated their usage so that when we come home, they can overpower us in the dark and rob our homes before the bulbs can warm up enough for us to identify them!

Many others hate these lame light bulbs for various and sundry reasons, among them the fact that they’re toxic cancer machines that require special disposal that nobody will adhere to, especially once gasoline is so expensive, we won’t be able to afford to take them to a special recycling/hazardous waste disposal center for fear of being waylaid by refugees from The Road Warrior. And seriously, when mandating the use of some stupid hippie bullshit, perhaps before we’re all forced to do it, the government might consider whether or not the improper disposal of said mandated products isn’t even more dangerous than letting people use what they want. And a hint: these are way worse for the environment if disposed of incorrectly en masse, which they will be, I’m certain. Even if I have to do it myself, by breaking into the recycling center and stealing all the burnt out bulbs and sneaking them into a landfill, I’m sure they will be improperly disposed of! (Just kidding. I don’t have to do anything. I just know what Americans are like. You see, I am one.)

So I hereby proclaim the need for an underground of rebels to fight back against these illumin-Nazis; true American heroes who will fight for truth, justice, and the American way of lighting their homes! (That’s with incandescent bulbs, in case you were wondering!) This bold group of anti-authoritarian heroes will be called The IlluminNaughty, named after the heroic group of scientists (the Illuminati) who fought the unjust and dictatorial policies of the Catholic Church in the Age of Enlightenment! And what better term to use, when our own government is trying to snuff out the enlightenment in our own homes with the mandated usage of these crappy, poisonous, hazardous, unreliable, hideous compact fluorescent bulbs! I call all the illuminated among us: don’t let the light be turned off on our nation! It’s time for the insurrection of The IlluminNaughty! (We’re called the IlluminNaughty because the government has dictated that it’s naughty to use incandescent bulbs, you see. And as rule-breakers, we’re kind of naughty by definition.)

We in the IlluminNaughty will be a secret society of those who use and provide for others illegal incandescent bulbs. We will live in a secret world of enlightenment, while the rest of the country falls dimly behind the darkness of government oppression! This is a path for heroes and iconoclasts, but beware: we’ll be easy to spot, what with being the only ones with decent lighting in our homes. So draw your curtains at night, and join The IlluminNaughty! Rebel against the start of a new Dark Age, and begin anew the Age of Enlightenment! The IlluminNaughty will illuminate us all!

HP Touchpad Singer Ad

The HP Touchpad has an ad currently running on TV where some brunette singer in a silver glittery dress and an extremely annoying nasaly voice sings “Let Me Entertain You” while the HP Touchpad plays images on it. This singer reminds me of Rebecca Black of “Friday” (in)fame. And every time this ad comes on, her ultra-annoying voice stays with me for a half-an-hour afterwards, and it’s very unwelcome! But the most irritating, face-slappingly unbelievable thing about this ad is that they show us a clip from the movie The Wizard of Oz, where we see Judy Garland (!), probably (probably? She is!) the best female vocalist for the past 100 years! And as we see Judy Garland, we hear this nasaly, annoying voice on the soundtrack! What the hell are they thinking? Honestly!

Maybe some people really like this singer, but she really annoys me. I know she’s on Glee and stuff, and I’m not trying to insult people who like her or anything, but seriously: most of the popular music out there is auto-tuned rap crap, so how could we be expected to have taste in singers nowadays anyway? I mean, nothing personal, but you know…

But anyway, for those of you still reading, this girl may be a great singer; maybe she’s the best alive today, but still: you don’t put a rhinestone next to a diamond and expect it to outshine the diamond. Do you see what I mean? So even if this girl is the best singer on Earth now, it’s still not fair putting her up against a picture of Judy Garland. It’s like putting liquid paper against cream for taste. I mean, sure: they’re both white and all, but one is much better tasting! Seriously: I’m not trying to insult her, but when they put her voice over a picture of Judy Garland, I can’t help it! It’s not my fault: It’s their fault for doing it! And it’s not fair to the girl singing either, because I guarantee you, I’m not the only one who feels this way!

But for those who I may have offended, look: I’m not talking about her voice so much as I’m talking about the juxtaposition of her voice with the image of a woman who could out-sing anyone on Earth, probably ever! And we’re talking about advertising here! Do you put a Big Mac next to a filet mignon in a commercial, and expect people to buy the Big Mac? This is the same thing. Look: A Big Mac is great, but it’s not a filet mignon; sorry. And comparing it to something that’s obviously way, way better than it in an ad is just stupid. And that’s a fact!

Oh, and I must be right about this, since HP announced today that they’re ending their tablet market! (This was an ad for their tablet.) Here’s that story:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/HewlettPackard-Co-to-end-apf-707823588.html?x=0

And here’s the ad:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_kjnLdJnMw

Lone Wolf Attack

There is a lot of concern about a “lone wolf” style attack happening on the 10-year anniversary of 9/11. Now, I could be wrong, but I think I know who’s going to do it: Michael McKean! Now I know it’s been a long time, and I think that’s what he’s counting on, but if you remember back to the 1970s, McKean played a character named “Lenny” on a TV show called Laverne & Shirley, and what did he have on the back of his jacket? That’s right: “Lone Wolf”! Actually, the letter “L” had fallen off, so it really said “One Wolf”, but Laverne noticed it, and in an act of friendship, she sewed one of her signature monogram “L’s” on to his jacket so it would say: “Lone Wolf” (!). That proves he’s the one!

So now that the NSA is claiming they’re concerned about a “Lone Wolf”, I think it’s my patriotic duty to turn this guy in! After all, he tried to corrupt our youth with his vile heavy metal music in Spinal Tap, so we know he must hate America! Plus, he pretended to be British for that role, so need I say more? And, on top of it all, another Spinal Tap guy was seen in that movie doing a “dry run” for an attack, trying to sneak that thing through airport security in his pants! It couldn’t be clearer!

So look out for Lenny, NSA guys! He’s the “Lone Wolf”! See?:

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgDhAzsMVadS4NYpkivtXjeliePJvIoh0imInUMdwFICYUutLV7fohiecuSNhHhoUdlWBX6CEB9RWou0VlAt6Xyj9izRdGCiLuF-K9FBlE2YuGkLPh_3kExatIYU_hgfn4CozT6aUN81H0/s1600/lonewolf.jpg

That’s the incriminating picture he doesn’t want you to see! And here’s the IMDB page for Laverne & Shirley:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074016/

Hot Dog Wars

Let’s be frank: Oscar Mayer and Sara Lee are suing each other over false advertising claims about their hot dog brands (Sara Lee owns Ball Park Franks). Now I always heard that nobody doesn’t love Sara Lee, but after this lawsuit, that’s going to be false advertising, since Oscar Mayer will hate her for sure! (Maybe Oscar Mayer can sue her back on that advertising claim!)

So what’s at issue here? Basically, Sara Lee is trying to say that it’s a lie that kids want to be an Oscar Meyer wiener, since that would suggest kids wish to be cannibalized by their peers. Then, I guess Oscar Mayer is mad because Ball Park Franks said they would poke the bricks out of people’s chimneys and ruin them (Remember? They plump when you cook ‘em: smash, smash, smash!), but that they don’t plump that much in reality. Or is that not what this lawsuit is about?

I think what’s going on here is that they both say they’re using 100% beef, but that they’ve both sent spies to check up on one another, and these spies have disappeared, presumably into the hot dogs meat! And they think that by filing suit soon enough, they can get to test the hot dog meat and see if it contains any human meat. But my guess is that these spies simply took a higher bid from the competitor and went off to some vacation destination for the whole thing to blow over. But I guess you never know…

So, if you’ve ever been fascinated by the horror movie and fantastic fiction claims that eating human flesh would grant you everlasting youth, perhaps now’s the time to test it! Hey, you never know! It could be true!

But this whole thing is pretty dumb, if you ask me. Anybody who makes hot dogs should want to suppress what goes into them as much as possible, I’d think. But by suing each other, aren’t we all going to find out how many stray cats, etc., go into them? It’s just a lose/lose as I see it. But what the hell: maybe we’ll all become vegans as a result! But I doubt it. (But hey: Could PeTA secretly be behind this whole thing? You never know! Maybe they’ve got a mole inside both companies!)

Here’s the story (Wiener dog fight!):

http://napervillesun.suntimes.com/business/7100534-420/sara-lee-and-kraft-in-a-wiener-dog-fight.html

BTW: If you don’t usually read the linked articles, you might just want to start with this one. It’s pretty funny, especially the judge’s behavior.

QE3

The economy is sputtering, and both sides disagree about what to do. The Democrats say we need to print more money to help create jobs, but Republicans say this will only make things worse. There seems to be no way to get around this stalemate, unless…

What if we could have our cake and eat it too? I propose that the Federal Reserve print up lots and lots of money, but then say publicly that they won’t use it, and that it was a mistake to print it, etc. Then, they could just leave it out back behind their office building with the trash, and say that they “hope nobody takes it…” Then everybody could just go grab all the cash they need to create jobs and stimulate the economy, but the Fed can still say they didn’t introduce any extra money into the system! So we’d be doing both policies at once! It would be the best of both worlds!

I say it’s a win/win! Let’s do it tomorrow!

The Heiress Remake

Anyone who loves old movies has probably seen The Heiress. I just saw a trailer for it on TCM. It’s really great, but it struck me recently how if it were remade now, her just not answering the door would be too passive of a revenge for today’s audiences. After all, we’ve got ass-kickers like Zoe Saldana and Uma Thurman now, and unless there’s a Samurai sword involved, it didn’t really get paid back, right? But you have to remember: this is a period piece; so no Samurai swords or machine guns, okay? But somehow, that ending wouldn’t quite work today anyway.

So here is what I propose, for when they remake The Heiress: Obviously they’d have to use Ryan Phillipe for the Montgomery Clift role, right? Because he’s the guy who’s slipperiest and most social-climbiest, right? Or maybe I just can’t get over his role in Gosford Park. But that’s his fault for playing it so well anyway, so there! But anyway, so at the end of the movie, when the jerky not-show-up-at-the-altar-y guy finally shows up at the rematch, she can’t just not answer the door, right? That’s too old-school! So what she has to do is, she opens the door, and as he starts walking in, she kicks him in the nuts, and as he falls forward in pain, she pokes him in both eyes with her fingers like in The Three Stooges, and then she kicks him back down the stairs and slams the door.

Oh, but it’s not over yet! For she calls the cops on him and says he tried to rape her, and everyone on her payroll has to agree, or else they’re killed horribly! So then he’s not just rejected, but he’s scorned for life as a sex-offender, and he’ll never get married again! It’s perfect!

And after all these new revenge-themed movies, I guess we’ll have to get Zoe Saldana to play the role of the heiress of the title. But we’ll all want her to be shooting people and stuff, right? Well, okay, then there’s got to be some sub-plots about her saving his life from mercenaries and the CIA and the KGB and Al Qaida and stuff, but he still rejects her, standing her up at the altar even though she saved his life and she’s a super-rich heiress! So he doubly deserves it! (Especially in this economy!) Well, in that case, I think she ought to be allowed to use a bazooka to blow him away at the end! Just think of it: He believes they’re gong to be married, but she just blows him away right as she opens the door, and the only thing left of him is the sizzling, smoking corsage that falls at her feet! And then, in her final act of revenge, she stamps out the corsage like a cigarette with her leather boots, grinding it to dust in the red granite stone of her stoop! Now wouldn’t that be perfect?

So, when are they going to make that remake? I can’t wait to see it now!

Here’s the IMDB page for The Heiress, and think of how much better it will be with machine guns, bazookas, kung fu, and skimpy underwear! You know you want to see it!:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0041452/

Foster Farms “Mountain Men” Arkansas Plates Ad

Yes, this ad has the Foster Farms Imposter chickens, this time in an old car that looks like an old Dodge Dart or a Tornado, and they’re wearing safety helmets or something. So they ask some girl for directions, and they say they’re Foster Farms chickens. So she says they don’t seem like Foster Farms chickens, since Foster Farms chickens are from California, and their license plates say “Arkansas”. So they make some excuse, she blows them off, and the announcer tells us that Foster Farms chickens are only from California.

So, here we have established that while happy cows come from California, miserable chickens are ruthlessly killed there. But they make it seem great, so they can attract other chickens to come visit, and then they murder them and try to pretend they were Foster Farms chickens all along by disposing of the out-of-state license plates and chopping the cars up for parts and stuff. So they make twice as much money that way, selling both the chicken carcasses, and all their cars and worldly possessions. What a racket!

Or at least, that's what this ad makes it look like they're doing! (That’s a joke, son…)

These “Imposters” ads are great, and I’ve always thought they were lots of fun. But when you think about it, they’re the same idea (only funnier) as Charlie the tuna from the old Star Kist commercials, right? Just like Charlie, these chickens want nothing more in life than to be killed, packaged, marketed, sold and eaten under a specific brand name; but they’re not good enough, and they know they’re not good enough, but they’re scraping and scamming anyway. So not only are these guys charlatans and fraudsters, but they’re also mentally ill, with a very specific death wish! And when a suicidal guy doesn’t get what he wants, you never know what he’ll do! So I think Foster Farms ought to just kill them like they want, and then just throw their carcasses away, or sell them to some lesser brand for some extra cash. Otherwise, these guys might become violent, and kill all the farm employees and package them as Foster Farms chicken! (You never know: it could happen eventually! These guys have gone to a lot of trouble to get this far; rejection now might make them desperate!) Or are the Foster Farms people afraid they might be haunted forever by the restless ghosts of these chickens for scamming them back? You never know!

You know, Foster Farms keeps showing us these chickens who aren’t good enough to be Foster Farms chickens, but we never get to see the ones that are good enough: not while they’re alive, anyway! Why not show us the real chickens from Foster Farms, so we can see how much better they are than these imposters side-by-side, and then they can kill the good chickens, while the imposters are sprayed with the blood of the ones that are good enough. Maybe then, the imposters will revel in the fact that they’re not good enough, and just learn to love themselves the way they are! It might be an important lesson for them. I mean, unless the Foster Farms slaughterhouse employees want to make sure there are no witnesses! Then, they’ll be killed after all, but for nothing! Oh, what a waste! What a tragic comedy! Oh, misguided wishful food sources, when will you ever learn?

But these ads are great, and they’re really funny! But what a psychiatrist could make of them…

Here’s the ad, but you have to click the title “Mountain Men”, and then click on the play arrow:

http://www.fosterfarms.com/about/imposters/tv_commercials.asp