The music artists that think it's a good idea to have children providing background voices...
The people that make commercials for the likes of Target, Olive Garden and online colleges...
The people that determine what they consider to be a reasonable minimum wage...
Can you guess what they all have in common?
That's right, they're all on crack.
We'll start with the carpet (that's what she said...). It would be silly of me to criticize the fact that many of them are named after foods, spices of flavors. Names like 'cookies and cream', 'hazelnut', 'sugar cookie', 'vanilla', and 'chili powder' don't really bother me, given in most cases they actually resemble their respective colors. No, there are some others that may need to be reconsidered. Take 'breathe easy' for instance...a dark gray carpet with a hint of brown. Please tell me: what about that color would make you breathe easy? It would be better named 'cigarette smoke'...or 'smog'. Or how about the off-white/tan colored carpet 'barefoot'? Not all bare feet look like that. In fact, I'm going to go ahead and say that's downright racist. Then there's 'brown alpaca', an off-white shag with specks of black and tan. I'm still not sure where the brown factors in. Finally, my personal favorite, a carpet that I think is simply taupe, has been curiously named 'male'. Here we go again with the racist theme. Not only would I conclude that not all males are of that color, but I'd say that's not exactly commonly found. On a crackhead scale of 1 to Tyrone Biggums, I'd give them a 6. Not enough to be overly concerned about.
Next we'll tackle the music artists that think it's a good idea to put creepy kids' voices in any song of their choosing. I'll begin with my one exception: Pink Floyd - Another Brick In The Wall. Sure, call me biased because I'm a fan of their music and just fond of many types of rock in general, but Pink Floyd had a purpose behind their music. They had a message. That, and they weren't on crack, they were on acid. I'm talking strictly crack here, folks. Even Roger Waters and David Gilmour wouldn't touch that crap. I digress...my first example would be Mudvayne's 'Choices'. A little on the heavier side of rock, so clickers beware. During the breakdown sections before each chorus, there are children monotonously singing "Eenie Meenie Miney Moe". The band is creepy enough on their own, they don't need any help from the children of the corn making it sound even more grim. They are a band that has outstanding drum and bass, I just wish they would have stuck with their strong suits. Next, Stevie Wonder's "Isn't She Lovely?". He mixed in recordings of his baby girl crying in the background. Now, as sweet and adorable the idea may be, there's not much on this earth that could be quite as irritating than to have a classy song mixed with colic. There are plenty more to mention, but you get my drift. Crackhead scale: 7.
On to commercials. It's becoming clear now that instead of trying to create an amusing, comical, memorable commercial in order to sell a particular product, these companies have gone the route of shock value. "How absurd can we make this look so that people will remember our brand?" Well, the limit has evidently not been reached. Target feels the need to overpower the screen with...you guessed it...targets!! Circling, weaving, expanding across your television, just in case you forgot which store it was advertising. Olive Garden would rather punish it's viewers with worse acting and line delivery than a Billy Baldwin movie. Their commercials attack your brain cells, decimate IQ points, and unquestionably leave you wondering why you actually want to spend money at a place that could endorse their product with such terrible representation. My last sampling of horrendous promotion, I will leave you with this video of some online university. It has left me speechless, and not in a good way. Pathetic doesn't quite cover it. Crackhead scale: 9.5.
Finally, I will briefly examine minimum wage. Briefly, because I may be able to make a single blog entry on this one topic alone. $7.25/hr. Is that even justifiable? Even in a state with a reasonable average cost of living, this is not a realistic number. After the taxes are drained from the measly paycheck you'd receive, how can anyone expect you to financially keep your head above water? I understand "it's a tough economy" and whatever other assorted excuses you want to throw out there, but in order to have a better economy, it would help to have some better circulation of money so these people can spend it on things other than bills. Corporate greed is astronomical, and it's all the little people busting their tails to help their companies flourish that rarely see a dime of that profit. Then they expect these people to work at 110% when their rate of pay is accompanied by a slap in the face. Once again, there is plenty more to say, but for the government to establish a rate that low, it must be under the influence of something. Crackhead scale: 11...HUMMINA HUMMINA HUMMINA!!!
My advice...stay off drugs, kids.
D.
No comments:
Post a Comment