Dear Halls Cough Drop People,
Please stop trying to convince the world that "Mentho-lyptus" is really a flavor. It's not. It combines the deliciousness of Eucalyptus, which is loved by koalas all over the word (read: Australia) and "Menthol," which is really only loved by smokers for its valuable ability to poorly disguise the fact that you're sucking on a burning twig. Combining two terrible flavors doesn't make the new flavor any more bearable. You may as well come up with a new flavor called "Bamboo-ijuana," which would be loved by both pandas and pot-heads alike.
While we're on the subject, what the Hell did you people do to Menthol, anyway? It's a crystal made from Peppermint oil, which seems pretty hard to screw up, but somehow you managed to make it taste like deer urine filtered through a lunch-lady's hairnet. (Hey, there's your next flavor idea! I'll give you that one free as long as you promise NOT to give me credit.)
Even worse, Halls Plus, which has actual syrup in the middle. Congratulations, you've discovered something which, at best, makes people say, "No thanks, I'll keep the sore throat," and at worst, makes them beg for the sweet release of death. So, just when you start to think you're almost finished with that vile pseudo-candy rock in your mouth, it spits a ball of goo down the back of your throat... you know, to give you an aftertaste which reminds you all evening of just how delicious a piece of candy can be when it's flavored like trees and cigarettes.
But worst of all has to be the ones which look like candy, so you aren't even expecting the disgustingness you're about to receive. I swear, the next time I grab a red candy from a dish thinking I'm getting "cherry" only to find out I'm getting "Icy Strawberry" or "Cherry-lyptus" I'm suing you for damages.
Thanks, Halls Brothers, for replacing coughs with nausea for over 110 years. And congratulations on your side-businesses, the coconut-mango jelly bean, and the Dum Dum sucker made to taste like hot buttered popcorn.
Sincerely,
People with Tongues
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Friday, April 16, 2010
Support my cause - I Love Waffles!
Okay, so, we as a society really need to stop cannibalizing images to make them stand for our own purposes. Let me just describe the scene for you:
I'm driving down the road on my way to work this morning, and I pass a car with a magnetic ribbon on the back. You've seen these before, they have really good messages of "remembrance," yellow ribbons to remind us of soldiers overseas, pink ribbons to remind us of the fight against breast cancer, even black ribbons in memory of Prisoners of War.
Except, this one was completely different. This was a white ribbon. Okay so far. But here's where it gets odd - the ribbon in question had the words, "I LOVE SOCCER!" scrawled across it. So... what started out as fights against diseases and supporting the troops has turned into the appropriate way to express completely pointless and innocuous things. Don't they have better ways of doing this? Like, bumper stickers, internet message board signatures, or in the depressing silence of your bedroom as you utter a prayer to David Beckham?
Incidentally, this car did NOT have spinner hubcaps, so I'll save that for another blog, as a friend of mine mentioned this as a particular pet peeve.
Back on topic, it's not that supporting a cause is a bad thing, nor is it objectionable to announce to the world your love for certain people, places, things, or ideals. But can't we just leave certain images alone, and allow them to represent that for which they were originally intended? A white "I LOVE SOCCER" ribbon is a bit like having, say, a brown ribbon with the words "I FINISHED THE DENNY'S GRAND SLAM IN UNDER NINE SECONDS SO THEY GAVE IT TO ME FOR FREE."
Or maybe like a Ford logo inside a Jesus Fish....
Don't get me wrong. Like I said, I like the original "cause" ribbons. And I actually like soccer, too. But whereas I can totally understand rallying support for troops overseas and fighting illnesses, I can't wrap my mind around rallying people to support your preference of European foot-sport.
I guess if you can't beat 'em, join 'em, though. If we as a society persist in stealing images and twisting them around to inane purposes, then my first act will be to file a patent on the image of a Crucifix with a "Kilroy was here" painted on it... and also a trademark on Andy Warhol's iconic image of Marilyn Monroe, but with a Photoshopped speech bubble saying, "I love Diet Pepsi!"
I'm driving down the road on my way to work this morning, and I pass a car with a magnetic ribbon on the back. You've seen these before, they have really good messages of "remembrance," yellow ribbons to remind us of soldiers overseas, pink ribbons to remind us of the fight against breast cancer, even black ribbons in memory of Prisoners of War.
Except, this one was completely different. This was a white ribbon. Okay so far. But here's where it gets odd - the ribbon in question had the words, "I LOVE SOCCER!" scrawled across it. So... what started out as fights against diseases and supporting the troops has turned into the appropriate way to express completely pointless and innocuous things. Don't they have better ways of doing this? Like, bumper stickers, internet message board signatures, or in the depressing silence of your bedroom as you utter a prayer to David Beckham?
Incidentally, this car did NOT have spinner hubcaps, so I'll save that for another blog, as a friend of mine mentioned this as a particular pet peeve.
Back on topic, it's not that supporting a cause is a bad thing, nor is it objectionable to announce to the world your love for certain people, places, things, or ideals. But can't we just leave certain images alone, and allow them to represent that for which they were originally intended? A white "I LOVE SOCCER" ribbon is a bit like having, say, a brown ribbon with the words "I FINISHED THE DENNY'S GRAND SLAM IN UNDER NINE SECONDS SO THEY GAVE IT TO ME FOR FREE."
Or maybe like a Ford logo inside a Jesus Fish....
Don't get me wrong. Like I said, I like the original "cause" ribbons. And I actually like soccer, too. But whereas I can totally understand rallying support for troops overseas and fighting illnesses, I can't wrap my mind around rallying people to support your preference of European foot-sport.
I guess if you can't beat 'em, join 'em, though. If we as a society persist in stealing images and twisting them around to inane purposes, then my first act will be to file a patent on the image of a Crucifix with a "Kilroy was here" painted on it... and also a trademark on Andy Warhol's iconic image of Marilyn Monroe, but with a Photoshopped speech bubble saying, "I love Diet Pepsi!"
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Ninja Librarians and Cell Phones
Okay, so, I feel like this is quickly turning into a “Products no one needs” blog, first with Nut Milk and now this… but really, I can’t be the only one who notices these things.
Would everyone here raise his or her hand if you feel you need a phone which will search the internet, your songs, your contacts, and Google maps all for the same word? No one? Okay, that confirms my suspicion. I keep seeing this commercial for Verizon’s “Droid” smart phone, and I just can’t take it anymore. It boasts a phone which can search the internet for sites about the word “Human,” find locations through Google maps with the word Human, find friends with the word Human in their name (which it admits would be weird if you had any… d’ya think?) and can also search for songs that you forgot you downloaded, with the word Human in them.
So, my question would be, what earthly purpose does this serve? On that RARE occasion when this might be useful, are we really so lazy now that we can’t just do a couple of different searches – one in music, one on the web, one in Google maps, etc.? Does it really take that much time?
Usually, though, it won’t be useful at all - I mean, when I search for something on my phone, I usually want one thing, not four or five different things which are all connected by one word. For example, let’s say I want to find a song on my iPhone by the 70’s group Starbuck. (I don’t have any, they sucked, it’s just an example.) Not only do I find the song (entitled “Everybody Be Dancin’” in case you’re wondering; again, please don’t take this as real, it could seriously damage my reputation) I also find directions to the nearest Starbuck’s on Google Maps. Oh, and look, I receive a Wikipedia article with the Character Profile of Starbuck from Moby Dick (stop giggling.) AND, I am stunned to learn that at some point I met the actress who played Starbuck on Battlestar Galactica and put her in my Contacts.
So, this is terribly useful for me if I want to drive to the nearest Starbuck’s, call “Starbuck” on the phone, and explain to her the origin of the name “Starbuck,” all the while playing some groovy “Starbuck” background music. Yeah. That seems really practical.
More often I would think it would be ridiculously annoying, like being assaulted by information you’re not really looking for. I mean, we already can barely do a simple internet search including the word “tiger” without receiving a flood of junk related to Exxon mascots and jackass golfers, when all we were really interested in was learning how many Bengals are left in Asia. Do we really need a phone that multiplies that by four? I don’t think so, but I’ve been wrong before.
If that DOES sound useful, look at it another way: imagine going to a library (one of those brick-and-mortar places with all the books that sadly almost no one uses anymore) and looking for a National Geographic article on quicksand. You’re thrilled to find the article almost immediately. But, before you can find your way out of the stacks, you find yourself suddenly buried under a pile of old Mythbusters DVDs about Quicksand, various editions of Don Quixote, and a hundred encyclopedias all containing entries starting with Q. (Don’t ask me how that would happen, I’m just saying… maybe the librarian used some crazy Ninja Librarian skills to get above you and dump them on your head….) My point is, that would be kind of like what the Droid does for you. It’s a Ninja Librarian that helps you find the 10 page article you’re looking for, then crushes you under a thousand pounds of books you didn’t want. Or something like that.
Would everyone here raise his or her hand if you feel you need a phone which will search the internet, your songs, your contacts, and Google maps all for the same word? No one? Okay, that confirms my suspicion. I keep seeing this commercial for Verizon’s “Droid” smart phone, and I just can’t take it anymore. It boasts a phone which can search the internet for sites about the word “Human,” find locations through Google maps with the word Human, find friends with the word Human in their name (which it admits would be weird if you had any… d’ya think?) and can also search for songs that you forgot you downloaded, with the word Human in them.
So, my question would be, what earthly purpose does this serve? On that RARE occasion when this might be useful, are we really so lazy now that we can’t just do a couple of different searches – one in music, one on the web, one in Google maps, etc.? Does it really take that much time?
Usually, though, it won’t be useful at all - I mean, when I search for something on my phone, I usually want one thing, not four or five different things which are all connected by one word. For example, let’s say I want to find a song on my iPhone by the 70’s group Starbuck. (I don’t have any, they sucked, it’s just an example.) Not only do I find the song (entitled “Everybody Be Dancin’” in case you’re wondering; again, please don’t take this as real, it could seriously damage my reputation) I also find directions to the nearest Starbuck’s on Google Maps. Oh, and look, I receive a Wikipedia article with the Character Profile of Starbuck from Moby Dick (stop giggling.) AND, I am stunned to learn that at some point I met the actress who played Starbuck on Battlestar Galactica and put her in my Contacts.
So, this is terribly useful for me if I want to drive to the nearest Starbuck’s, call “Starbuck” on the phone, and explain to her the origin of the name “Starbuck,” all the while playing some groovy “Starbuck” background music. Yeah. That seems really practical.
More often I would think it would be ridiculously annoying, like being assaulted by information you’re not really looking for. I mean, we already can barely do a simple internet search including the word “tiger” without receiving a flood of junk related to Exxon mascots and jackass golfers, when all we were really interested in was learning how many Bengals are left in Asia. Do we really need a phone that multiplies that by four? I don’t think so, but I’ve been wrong before.
If that DOES sound useful, look at it another way: imagine going to a library (one of those brick-and-mortar places with all the books that sadly almost no one uses anymore) and looking for a National Geographic article on quicksand. You’re thrilled to find the article almost immediately. But, before you can find your way out of the stacks, you find yourself suddenly buried under a pile of old Mythbusters DVDs about Quicksand, various editions of Don Quixote, and a hundred encyclopedias all containing entries starting with Q. (Don’t ask me how that would happen, I’m just saying… maybe the librarian used some crazy Ninja Librarian skills to get above you and dump them on your head….) My point is, that would be kind of like what the Droid does for you. It’s a Ninja Librarian that helps you find the 10 page article you’re looking for, then crushes you under a thousand pounds of books you didn’t want. Or something like that.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Open Letter to the Almond Milk People
Dear Almond Breeze,
No thank you. While I do love milk, and I do love almonds, I do not need milk made from almonds, for a host of reasons. First, even for the people who have lactose intolerance, there are several different types of lactose-free milk which taste EXACTLY like regular milk. I have tasted them, so I'm not just giving an empty testimonial.
Oh, and, if it is made from other things, is it really milk? I'm going a long way to use the term "milk" with Soy Milk, let alone Almond Milk.... Making milk from almonds is like Quincy Jones remaking We Are the World with today's artists; no matter how much like the original you try to make it, it's clear to everyone that there were lots of nuts involved.
I'm just going to float this phrase out there. Nut milk. 'Nuff said. Doesn't that just scream "deliciousness" right in your face? No. And by the way, I don't really need a food (or anything else for that matter) which could potentially invite any number of inappropriate comments. Especially from 8th graders. Or George Carlin. Or the city of Amsterdam.
We're sorry to be blunt. But look at it this way: now your company can get back to your more profitable projects, like Sawdust Steak, the SPAMCar, and the amazing TurkeyShirt - the shirt made from 100% reprocessed turkey!
Sincerely,
Earth
No thank you. While I do love milk, and I do love almonds, I do not need milk made from almonds, for a host of reasons. First, even for the people who have lactose intolerance, there are several different types of lactose-free milk which taste EXACTLY like regular milk. I have tasted them, so I'm not just giving an empty testimonial.
Oh, and, if it is made from other things, is it really milk? I'm going a long way to use the term "milk" with Soy Milk, let alone Almond Milk.... Making milk from almonds is like Quincy Jones remaking We Are the World with today's artists; no matter how much like the original you try to make it, it's clear to everyone that there were lots of nuts involved.
I'm just going to float this phrase out there. Nut milk. 'Nuff said. Doesn't that just scream "deliciousness" right in your face? No. And by the way, I don't really need a food (or anything else for that matter) which could potentially invite any number of inappropriate comments. Especially from 8th graders. Or George Carlin. Or the city of Amsterdam.
We're sorry to be blunt. But look at it this way: now your company can get back to your more profitable projects, like Sawdust Steak, the SPAMCar, and the amazing TurkeyShirt - the shirt made from 100% reprocessed turkey!
Sincerely,
Earth
Friday, February 26, 2010
Robotic Groundhogs, the Colonial Army, and You
Okay, I've been thinking about doing this for a while but have never really made the time. So, you know it had to be something important to get me to commit to writing a blog. What type of subject could possibly motivate me so? You guessed it. The idea of replacing Punxsutawney Phil with a robot.
Let me say that again.
PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) has suggested replacing Punxsutawney Phil with a robot. Now, I love the folks at PETA, they stand for a good ideal, and cruelty to animals is never acceptable. But I disagree with them on this, for one key reason. It's not that I think poor old Phil should continue to be dragged from his burrow (or rather, the fake tree stump they pretend is his burrow) every Groundhog Day. Rather, I'm saying the whole practice of Groundhog Day should be retired.
I hear the collective gasp now. How could I possibly advocate ending Groundhog Day? Well, how much time do you have? Let me hit the main points. First of all, the most obvious complaint is the issue of relevance. It seems entirely appropriate for Phil to have "predicted" six more weeks of winter this year, or any other year for that matter. And do you know why we'll have six more weeks of winter? Because we actually have six more weeks of winter! No matter what, when Phil pops out of his fiberglass tree stump on February 2, there will still be a little over six weeks before the First Day of Spring. Way to go out on a limb, there, Philly-boy.
But, my sarcasm is directed unfairly at Phil, because really, he has nothing to do with it. I'm always just slightly irritated when they pull the rodent out of his hole, and then, after a brief "conversation" with Phil... they unfurl a piece of vellum from which they read Phil's prediction. So... I'm curious. Did Phil have a little typewriter down there with him, to prepare his words? Oh, I know, I bet it was an Underwood! Ahem.... Or, did Phil submit his prediction in advance, in which case, emerging from the hole on the 2nd has nothing to do with it - think of the scandal if the world learns the prediction is actually made on the - GASP - 1st of February! Talk about a bombshell - Tiger who?
Then again, of course the shadow-viewing couldn't actually take place when they say it does... because when they pull him out of his hole, it's usually around 6 or 7 AM, so the sun is barely up... the lighting when I see it on the news seems like you could never see a shadow, regardless, especially surrounded by all of those trees. So, does the shadow come from the lights erected by the various local news networks? If so, what if he see's that multi-shadow common when several lights are pointed at you from several different directions? If he sees 8 shadows, could we be in for another 48 weeks of winter (and the onset of a new ice age?)
It's kind of sad to think that the real answer is that a bunch of oddly-dressed Pennsylvania Dandies are just using Phil to not-so-cleverly disguise the mundane fact that they all know how to read the Farmer's Almanac.... (Coincidentally, the "Pennsylvania Dandies" were also the least-intimidating regiment in the Colonial Army. "Jebediah, is my tri-corn straight? Oh, fiddlesticks, I've been shot." Fun fact.) Honestly, this band of prolific purveyors of prognostication have come to look like something out of a Nicolas Cage movie... not the early, Leaving Las Vegas-era Cage. I'm talking post-Ghost Rider Cage, when things just started getting weird....
By the way, are we planning on replacing ALL of the forecasting groundhogs with robots? This year, there were no fewer than twenty-two different groundhogs throughout North America issuing predictions. Including ones named Dunkirk Dave and... ahem... Balzac Billy? Anyway, if ethical animal treatment is what you're after, it seems only fair to replace ALL of them, not just Phil. I'll warn you, however, if we do that, I can imagine a not-so-distant Orwellian future in which an army of robotic groundhogs become self-aware and try to take over the planet.
I suppose a robot wouldn't be that different from what they do now, it would just be a robot pretending to tell the weather rather than a real groundhog. The one who really holds the power will be whoever programs the robot with the desired "prediction." But it just won't feel right. Having a robot in charge of Groundhog Day is like having Jeff Zucker in charge of NBC. Sure, they serve their purpose, but it's the PROGRAMMING that matters.
I can't help but feel sorry for Phil. I was actually thrilled when he bit the guy who pulls him out of his "burrow" every year. That'll teach him. I mean, just put yourself in Phil's shoes. How would you feel to be ripped out of the bed in which you spend 364 days a year, shoved into a small box for an hour or so, then pulled out and waved in front of a crowd by a guy who, between the top hat, tiny glasses, and size 58 suit pants, looks disturbingly like a cross between John Goodman and Mr. Peanut. You'd be biting too!
I'll step off my soapbox for the time being. Let's just call this whole "Groundhog Day" thing to a close, shall we? Let Phil retire to live out the remainder of his days in peace. I'm not saying release him, because then every nut job and his uncle would be trying to find Phil in the wild. Just let him stay at his home at the library, and let Groundhog Day fade into one of those historical footnotes. The last thing we need is a robot predicting our weather... that's why God gave us Al Roker.
Let me say that again.
PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) has suggested replacing Punxsutawney Phil with a robot. Now, I love the folks at PETA, they stand for a good ideal, and cruelty to animals is never acceptable. But I disagree with them on this, for one key reason. It's not that I think poor old Phil should continue to be dragged from his burrow (or rather, the fake tree stump they pretend is his burrow) every Groundhog Day. Rather, I'm saying the whole practice of Groundhog Day should be retired.
I hear the collective gasp now. How could I possibly advocate ending Groundhog Day? Well, how much time do you have? Let me hit the main points. First of all, the most obvious complaint is the issue of relevance. It seems entirely appropriate for Phil to have "predicted" six more weeks of winter this year, or any other year for that matter. And do you know why we'll have six more weeks of winter? Because we actually have six more weeks of winter! No matter what, when Phil pops out of his fiberglass tree stump on February 2, there will still be a little over six weeks before the First Day of Spring. Way to go out on a limb, there, Philly-boy.
But, my sarcasm is directed unfairly at Phil, because really, he has nothing to do with it. I'm always just slightly irritated when they pull the rodent out of his hole, and then, after a brief "conversation" with Phil... they unfurl a piece of vellum from which they read Phil's prediction. So... I'm curious. Did Phil have a little typewriter down there with him, to prepare his words? Oh, I know, I bet it was an Underwood! Ahem.... Or, did Phil submit his prediction in advance, in which case, emerging from the hole on the 2nd has nothing to do with it - think of the scandal if the world learns the prediction is actually made on the - GASP - 1st of February! Talk about a bombshell - Tiger who?
Then again, of course the shadow-viewing couldn't actually take place when they say it does... because when they pull him out of his hole, it's usually around 6 or 7 AM, so the sun is barely up... the lighting when I see it on the news seems like you could never see a shadow, regardless, especially surrounded by all of those trees. So, does the shadow come from the lights erected by the various local news networks? If so, what if he see's that multi-shadow common when several lights are pointed at you from several different directions? If he sees 8 shadows, could we be in for another 48 weeks of winter (and the onset of a new ice age?)
It's kind of sad to think that the real answer is that a bunch of oddly-dressed Pennsylvania Dandies are just using Phil to not-so-cleverly disguise the mundane fact that they all know how to read the Farmer's Almanac.... (Coincidentally, the "Pennsylvania Dandies" were also the least-intimidating regiment in the Colonial Army. "Jebediah, is my tri-corn straight? Oh, fiddlesticks, I've been shot." Fun fact.) Honestly, this band of prolific purveyors of prognostication have come to look like something out of a Nicolas Cage movie... not the early, Leaving Las Vegas-era Cage. I'm talking post-Ghost Rider Cage, when things just started getting weird....
By the way, are we planning on replacing ALL of the forecasting groundhogs with robots? This year, there were no fewer than twenty-two different groundhogs throughout North America issuing predictions. Including ones named Dunkirk Dave and... ahem... Balzac Billy? Anyway, if ethical animal treatment is what you're after, it seems only fair to replace ALL of them, not just Phil. I'll warn you, however, if we do that, I can imagine a not-so-distant Orwellian future in which an army of robotic groundhogs become self-aware and try to take over the planet.
I suppose a robot wouldn't be that different from what they do now, it would just be a robot pretending to tell the weather rather than a real groundhog. The one who really holds the power will be whoever programs the robot with the desired "prediction." But it just won't feel right. Having a robot in charge of Groundhog Day is like having Jeff Zucker in charge of NBC. Sure, they serve their purpose, but it's the PROGRAMMING that matters.
I can't help but feel sorry for Phil. I was actually thrilled when he bit the guy who pulls him out of his "burrow" every year. That'll teach him. I mean, just put yourself in Phil's shoes. How would you feel to be ripped out of the bed in which you spend 364 days a year, shoved into a small box for an hour or so, then pulled out and waved in front of a crowd by a guy who, between the top hat, tiny glasses, and size 58 suit pants, looks disturbingly like a cross between John Goodman and Mr. Peanut. You'd be biting too!
I'll step off my soapbox for the time being. Let's just call this whole "Groundhog Day" thing to a close, shall we? Let Phil retire to live out the remainder of his days in peace. I'm not saying release him, because then every nut job and his uncle would be trying to find Phil in the wild. Just let him stay at his home at the library, and let Groundhog Day fade into one of those historical footnotes. The last thing we need is a robot predicting our weather... that's why God gave us Al Roker.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
