Quick, get me some insulin.

I like nurses. I admire nurses. My sister is a nurse. So is one of my youngest and most intelligent friends. And because I do have such a high regard for nurses, I think they deserve better than this insipid jingle from Johnson & Johnson. First of all the lyrics are, "You're a nurse. You make a difference." I think a nurse knows he or she a nurse. And I'm pretty sure they know they make a difference. But they make a difference in many ways far removed from these cliched Hallmark scenes. I would have been happier to see a harried nurse, an exhausted caregiver, even an impatient nurse fed up to here with overwork and paperwork. If you've ever been in a hospital, you know that nurses aren't always smiling angels with Crest smiles and cheerful willingness. They can't be because their jobs are too hard. Sorry Johnson & Johnson. Your heart's in the right place, but I find your "You're a nurse" commercials sickingly sentimental and the jingle just plain annoying.

Johnson & Johnson 2007 commercial on nursing

"I was just passing by and saw your light on..."

Something I realized this week that affects most of my friends, but may not affect you. In fact, it didn't affect me when I lived in Boston: Most of us live isolated lives. Almost every couple I know—who doesn't have children, those creatures who force you into society— has a pleasant, easy lifestyle, but without a coterie of friends. Each duet lives in a nice home to which they seldom invite people. They are content to stay in watching television, reading or doing some solitary project. My partner and I, except for the rare party, never have visitors. My closest friends never have visitors—never! My friends who live alone, do just that: live alone. When I call, I'm never told that they're entertaining company. Are we becoming a nation of recluses? Has e-mail made it too easy to avoid human contact? Is work enough socializing for most of us? Are we all limiting ourselves to just a few "safe" contacts and not extending ourselves socially? And, if so, is that a problem? I must admit I envy some of the characters on TV sitcoms with their constant streams of amusing visitors. But I don't know anyone with an open-kitchen-door policy. Do you?

You should stop saying, "You should."

I hate sentences that start with "You should." They usual proceed some unwanted advice that one has no intention of following. The most common one I've received throughout life is, "You should learn to drive." This despite the fact that I have never wanted to drive and am content to not have a car with its many, many expenses. Other popular admonitions are, "You should learn Spanish." I haven't even learned French which I would like to speak. "You should get a better cell phone." I haven't even mastered my simple pay-as-you-go model. While I find these unwelcome suggestions annoying, I also find them curious. I have no interest whatever in encouraging people to live any differently than they do. If they're lousy drivers, I don't ride with them. If they're alcoholics, they'll reform or they won't. I couldn't care less how people dress, what hairstyle they prefer, or anything about them that doesn't affect me. And if there were some behavior I disapproved of, I wouldn't give them a "you should" suggestion, I would either accept it or not. And if I couldn't accept it, I would drop them. Of course if someone asked me for advice I would, in most cases, be happy to comply. But any advice I gave would not begin with, "You should."

"Did I tell you about my uncle's lawmower accident?"

One of my New Year's resolutions is doing what I wish more people would do for me, which is not burden them with information that can only make them feel helplessly worse. I hate it when someone tells me their aunt has cancer and, golly, she's only 38. I don't know your aunt, but suddenly the spectre of cancer has invaded my day. Or when someone informs me that they were robbed and they have no idea who the criminal was. This leaves me impotently angry, or utterly paranoid about the thieves that surround us—a feeling that may last for days. Recently I was tempted to tell a friend about something depressing that I saw. I questioned my motives. What good could this information do other than to make him as despondent as I? I didn't tell him and realized that I too often convey information that has no cheering value whatever. This does no apply to relevant information between friends, shared problems, and needed advice. Nor does it concern news stories that are fascinating in their macabre aspects. No, this involves those haunting horror stories which affect persons you don't know who are related in some way to persons you do. "I just learned that my favorite cousin went into the hospital for a flu shot and got that flesh-eating disease." Of course, being human, I'm bound to slip up, but I give all my friends permission to call me on it when I do.

It doesn't add up.

This Castrol Motor Oil spot, which runs frequently, is one of those commercials that seem logical until you think about it. When the passenger says, "They sting more than usual." the driver says,"Yeah, you'll get used to it." How can you get used to something that is different than usual? "When the driver says, " I think a dime went up my nose, the driver says, "Yeah, that happens." With thousands of coins flying at him, didn't the passenger guess that might happen, and wouldn't he know if a dime went up his nose?" I believe there should be logic even in absurdities and have no problem with a car spewing coins from the dashboard. But this is one of those spots where the writer didn't make an effort to come up with a more clever (and logical) line and the client wasn't smart enough to notice—and I'm sure most people who see it won't either.

Castrol GTX High Mileage "Cash Car" Commercial

"Carrie" meets "The Red Shoes".

It's hard to say how one feels about The Black Swan. Can one really enjoy a film that is nothing but unrelieved misery, especially when it isn't clear what's real and what's imagined? And how easy is it to root for a heroine who suffers from anorexia, paranoia, kleptomania, frigidity, sexual confusion, and whatever the medical name is for people who like to defile their own bodies? The star, Natalie Portman, was very good as the tormented Nina, though I never felt I was seeing first-class dancing as one did in the most famous ballet film, The Red Shoes. Still it's nice to know that someone even creates a ballet film during this culturally arid decade. Plus there were two other reasons to like this film: the always-worth watching Barbara Hershey as Nina's mother and Winona Ryder as the bitter prima ballerina who preceded Nina. Both actresses suffered what I assumed are imaginary Carrie-like attacks from a delusional Nina as did her rival at the ballet Lily (Mila Kunis) who was or was not a caring friend. Other scenes seemed to pay homage to the Roman Polanski film Repulsion. Interestingly, like a comparable character in The Red Shoes, the male lead Vincent Cassel was not attractive and not the least bit sexy so I can understand Nina's reluctance to put out. So while it was worth seeing, it didn't leave me with any special insights or empathies. The most complimentary thing I can say about this film is that it made me want to see a really good production of Swan Lake.

Monkeys, bananas and 3-D movies.

I long ago accepted the fact that many people are stupid and are not even concerned about their stupidity. For the most part, I can overlook the mistakes, errors, misquotes, malapropisms, anachronisms and just plain faulty thinking. But there are three misspeaks which always irritate me because they are all inexcusable. One is the use of the term monkey when one is obviously talking about apes. Chimpanzees are not monkeys, they are great apes. So as far back as the movie Monkey Business this has been a popular and annoying error. To this day newscasters use monkey puns any time there is a story about great apes. Commercial advertisers don't seem to know the difference nor do the writers of sitcoms. The worst thing is it's not that difficult: an organ grinders has a monkey; Tarzan had a great ape. Another universal error that pushes my buttons is when people refuse to pronounce plantains correctly. The word is plan-tins, like mountains and fountains. Not only do most people say plan-tanes, but they correct me when I pronounce it correctly. Boy does that make a cranky person crankier. And finally let it be known that since the first 3-D movies of the 50s: Man in the Dark, Charge at Feather River, The House of Wax, the glasses were single-toned Polarized lenses. At the same time 3-D comic books, magazines and bubble-gum cards were viewed with cheaper glasses using two different colored cellophane lenses. Never, ever, ever, ever did one view a movie in a theater with bi-colored glasses. Yet, that is what is suggested in countless ads and photos depicting the 50s like the staged absurdity above. You know what's great about having a blog? You can bitch about anything that you like. Or, to be more accurate, don't like.

Why don't we like certain people?

I happen to like Flo on the Progressive commercials. There's just something about her that appeals to me. But I've had at least three friends express surprise at my feelings, commenting on how much they dislike her. But why? She seems to be completely inoffensive to me. Is the answer that there is no why other than that we just dislike certain people for reasons of which we're not even sure? Perhaps someone in our life looked like Flo, talked like her, was as cheerfully ditzy. I happen to dislike lots of people who are very popular: Will Farrell, Steve Carell, and Steve Martin to name just three comics. I could argue that I don't think they're funny, but so many people would disagree. And I can't argue with success, as much as I'd like to. Besides there are lots of very untalented performers who I do like. (No. I am not going to give their names.) Oddly enough, I can't think of a single female celebrity I strongly dislike. I wonder what that means. Then, of course, there are people I detest and loathe and despise and abhor and revile for dozens of perfectly legitimate reasons: but let's leave Sarah out of this.

Shame on Bayer.

I just saw a commercial I found so offensive I had to comment on it even though I cannot find the video on YouTube. In the commercial for Bayer Aspirin, a passenger on a plane gets up with a grimace and asks the flight attendant if she has anything for pain. She offers him Bayer aspirin (actually a whole box) to which he responds, "I'm not having a heart attack." While an aspirin regimen (any aspirin) has proven effective in preventing heart attack, this commercial practically suggests that it will cure an attack in progress. I think this is a deceptive and incredibly dangerous commercial. Of course Bayer has been cited before for over-promising messages. But then what do you expect from the latest incarnation of the company that manufactured the gas used during the holocaust?

A dangerous species.

There are some men who are so lacking in any kind of humanity you wonder how they even have wives and families. They are usually humorless, rigid, inwardly pissed off about something from their past. They are always narcissists and egomaniacs. Vanity is another significant trait—often to the point that even they don't see how absurdly preening they are. Such men often, but not always, drink too much. When such creatures achieve status it usually isn't because of any special brainpower, but often due to saurian tenacity and cronyism: They are very good at finding the rocks under which similarly slimy lizards lie. Here are two such specimens. Note the partially opened mouths and the way the younger gopper looks to the older one for clues on when to attack.

Temples of Worship

There are two things I have never understood and I suspect they're somehow related: sports and religion. I can't imagine how anyone with a logical mind can believe there is a supreme being hiding behind a cloud somewhere who actually gives a damn what you do, and is keeping a tally to decide whether you can go to heaven or hell. In the same way I cannot comprehend why so many people give a damn about the outcome of a game played with a ball by indifferent-to-them multi-millionaires who aren't even from their community. Making it even more incomprehensible is that the fan has to pay excessively high ticket prices to experience this repetitive adoration and often has to be incredibly hot or cold to sit through the thrill. Of course the God fans also have to pay admission to their promised heavenly arena in the form of donations, tithes, suppression of endless pleasures and the burden of relentless guilt. Both situations require keeping score And while the sports rooters are often mysteriously depressed because their strangers lost; the religious always feel that their team is the best no matter what. The way I see life is this: The world was here for billions for years before I was born. I recall none of it, and wasn't the least bit offended that I was left out. One of these days I will die and experience—or rather, not experience—the same kind of oblivion on the other end endlessly. This is fine with me. I don't really mind being an insignificant and temporal being as long as I can have some fun while I'm here. The way I see sports is this: I couldn't possibly care less what a bunch of complete strangers does with a selection of various shaped balls. There is no way I could ever think of their victories and successes as somehow achieved by, and in any way related to, me. And I think giving a profit-making organization a large amount of money so that I can sit foolishly by and admire the prowess of someone playing a game is totally absurd. But as a learned friend once said, "It really doesn't matter what you think." He was, of course, absolutely right and this weekend, despite my scorn, millions will flock to a variety of churches, temples and mosques with beatific expressions on their faces. And other millions will attend games or sit for hours in front of the television and in many cases gleefully shout with intense pride, "We won. We won."

This spot leaves me cold...and confused.

Would somebody please explain this commercial to me. The man in the blue car tosses a snowball at the man in the silver car as silver car is leaving for work. It appears that the man in the silver car starts the snowball rolling before driving down the mountain. The snowball keeps missing him and eventually engulfs and removes the parked blue car to give silver car a space. Whose blue car is it? Not the man at the top of the mountain who hadn't left yet. A.I don't get it. B. If I did, I doubt I would find it funny. C. Why does the snowball take out the blue car? And how would the snowballer know that there is nobody in it? This seems to me to be a muddle, murderous mess. If I'm missing something, please let me know.

P.S. I don't know why it says this was posted at 6:44 am. It was posted at 9:40.

Infiniti Mischievous Snowball

By gum, I hate this commercial.

Normally I like the Flo commercials for Progressive. This one, however, is completely annoying. First of all because it uses long-outdated cliches about old people: They're grumpy, wear sweater vests, scowl, and spout colorful, outdated lingo. Even more vexing is that the cornball cliches he uses would have been related to a complete generation ahead of him. I'm not even sure that "flibberty flab" ever was an expression. I think the creative team has watched too many movies from the 30s. If this man is, say, 70, he would have lived through Vietnam, the arrival of rock and roll, and a hundred other contemporary events, and not spent his life whittlin' down by the crick. I'm not even sure his father would have said "dagnab it."

Revised Language - Flo Tries to Decipher Customer's Mumbo Jumbo

Click.

I'm about to give up on CNN. Every time I watch their news coverage, I am stunned by the misspeaks, grammatical errors and just plain gaps in logic. Following the very sad news of Elizabeth Edward's death were these two comments by CNN staffers. In mentioning a colleague's admiration for Edwards, one commentator said, "He spoke of her effusely." The second misspeak—moments later— would have been comical if it had not been related to such a admirable woman. This CNN reporter told us that, "Ms. Edwards had given up treatment when the cancer spread to her bones at the recommendation of her doctor."

A terrible new trend.

Recently when I was in White Plains my friends were distressed because, while they had signed up with Verizon for cable, they were not getting any actual service. In fact, instead of coming to their home and installing the new system, they sent them a box of cables, intimidating control boxes and other devices along with a complex set of instructions. Not being installers, they could not figure it out and were unable to reach any human beings to assist them. It seemed insane to me that a company would expert average citizens to install their own system. As I watched them agonize over the complex equipment, I was somewhat grateful that I had Comcast, though I cannot say anything in praise of this greedy company. My smugness was short-lived. When I got home to Miami, I found a box with two new control units, wires, cables, new remotes and batteries. Despite being a luddite, I managed to assemble the new equipment for both TVs. Once this is done one has to call a central number for them to activate the new equipment (don't think any American city). When I did I was surprised to discover that while the attractive new remote was a whiz at changing channels, I still was required to use the old remote to turn the TV on and off, at least that's what Chuck in New Delhi told me. We consumers are suckers. TV could be free, but we pay a high price for low-brow entertainment. Soon we'll all be be paying for radio. And worst of all, these monopolies, which are raking in millions, have finally figured out how to save even more: by having us do our own installations. I hate to think of how many technologically challenged Comcast consumers are pulling out their hair tonight.

Bah humbug to a cherished legend.

It occurred to me while I was on vacation and heard "Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer" for the 105th time that the song doesn't make any sense at all. First of all Rudolph, "had a very shiny nose." And you might even say, "it glows." But that's hardly enough candle power to guide a sleigh through a foggy night. Plus Santa has a zillion flashlights and batteries in his sleigh, why depend on one shiny nose? Besides, why wasn't he prepared? Hadn't this ever happened before? Putting all of that aside, keep in mind, "All of the other reindeers used to laugh at Rudy and call him names." Talk about creeps. This is the kind of animal help Santa hires: jeering reindeer bullies? And I'm supposed to think that when Santa asked this effeminate (look at the pictures) reindeer to guide his sleigh, all these other antlered thugs were suddenly shouting out— in glee yet—, "Rudolph the red-nosed reindeer, you'll go down in history." I doubt very much that it ever happened like that. Frankly I think Robert L. May made the whole thing up and songwriter Johnny Marks and Gene Autry were part of the conspiracy.

Jumping the gecko.

I like most of the Geico commercials, though I can't understand why they have so many different campaigns running concurrently. But I must admit this new commercial "mistaken identity" leaves me cold as an amphibian. For starters, it's just not funny—on many levels. Am I supposed to think this woman, this human being, dated a gecko ( Toledo, 2003) and is offended because he didn't call? The images this summons are not only romantically impossible but really creepy. Even if this commercial weren't weird, this actress seems to be overplaying the part. There is no way to save this concept,but a little subtlety might have helped. Finally, I know I said no more cranky criticisms till after vacation, but I couldn't ignore this spot.

Mistaken Identity - GEICO Commercial with the Gecko

Two weeks of winter.

Don't expect to see any posts on this blog for at least two weeks. Being a luddite, I haven't a clue how to add to this blog while I'm away. And since the object of a winter vacation is to get away from all the worldly issues that annoy me, I wouldn't want to post anyway. While most people seem to want to vacation in famous cities or tropical islands and dine in the best restaurants, I have a different goal. I want to be where the weather is rainy and cold, the streets icy slick, and the best of all possible meals is a breakfast of French Toast and coffee at a popular local diner. If there's a blizzard all the better. While the itinerary includes Washington, D.C. and New York City, most of the time will be spent in White Plains, New York; Charlottesville, Virginia, the closest city to Monticello (though they have no transportation to this famous home); and Raleigh, North Carolina, just because I like exploring new cities. I don't imagine many people read this blog anyway, but for those do (for which I'm grateful) look for more cranky comments near the end of the month.

Innocents abroad?

Amanda Knox is having a new trial. If you are among those who believe she's guilty, you must also believe that an attractive young American student (shown here) with a handsome young Italian boyfriend and a wonderfully supportive family chose to murder her flatmate in Perugia, Italy, when said flatmate refused to engage in an orgy with a local loser. Yes, that seems like a good reason to toss your entire life away. The fact that the flamboyant and highly imaginative prosecutor has himself been accused of trying to railroad other persons shown to be innocent into prison adds to the absurdity. My belief, shared by many, is that Amanda Knox is innocent and that the true and sole murderer is Rudy Hermann Guede (shown here) who is now in prison. Interestingly despite his confession, he received a lighter sentence than Amanda and her boyfriend. Today I posted several comments on the Internet expressing my belief in this girl's innocence. While many agree, I was surprised at the vitriolic responses of those who didn't. What was most shocking to me was not that they believe she is guilty, but they seemed so desperately to want her to be guilty and truly gleeful that she may spend her life in prison.

The global invoice process. What the hell is that?

I don't really get this commercial for Xerox, showing how it can be of benefit to Marriott. While it's amusing enough to see these young men falling all over themselves to accommodate each other, I don't see the logic. The commercial ends by saying that "Marriott Hotels and Resorts knows that it's better to automate their global invoice process so that can focus on serving their customers." Except these are not customers but—I would guess from their uniforms—Marriott employees. And since they look like bellboys why are they in an office setting? In addition I don't know whether these two guys are supposed to be gay or if the material leads to that conclusion. This is probably something that business people easily understand, but only addles cranky critics like me.

2010 Xerox Ad: Marriott Hotels Resorts, QDoxs

Glynis

I feed three outdoor cats (not counting the undependable Gorky): Rotten Luck Willie, Herman, and Glynis. Naturally I would love to find homes for these cats, but, as you know, placing cats is nearly impossible since everyone seems to know of a deserving stray. Besides two of them are not really placeable. Willie, an orange male, is antisocial. He is frightened by the slightest noise and will only allow me to pet him and never for very long. Herman is kind of messy looking, a bit agressive and prone to suddenly scratch or bite anyone showing him any kindness. But Glynis—ah, Glynis!—is a magnificent variegated grey, white and black female with incredibly artistic markings. She is long, lean, spayed and no older than three. Besides being uniquely beautiful she is also docile, loving and completely non-aggressive. Why am I telling you this? Because, while I expect to keep caring for Rotten Luck Willie and Herman, I know somebody out there might have a home for Glynis or know of someone who would welcome this affectionate work of art into their home.

Growing up sane.

When I was a child in Roxbury, Massachusetts, there was a very strong dividing line between Catholics and Protestants. Catholics were the kids who crossed themselves when they went by a church or cemetery and ate meat on Friday. Protestants were the kids who had a variety of denominations and had no idea what the differences were and still don't. Back then, you were very much aware of the distinction. But with time, that line disappeared. Today, who cares? Especially me. As an atheist, I think all religion is silly magical thinking. Also back then we did not have a strong sense of who was a Democrat or who was Republican. Most people clung to one or other badge, though I doubt they could explain the difference. (My mother, for instance, voted for Republicans, a party who would have nothing but contempt for someone as dependent on the government as she.) Your political affiliation was pretty much what you parents told you. And I'm sure many donkeys thought they were elephants and vice versa. But unlike the religious divide, political differences have become very important. I find it nearly impossible to be friends with Republicans, whom I regard with great suspicion. I confess I have even dropped long-time friends or acquaintances who spout the party line for the GOP. Despite being an atheist, I do believe in lots of Christian ideals (though most Christians don't seem to). I absolutely believe I am my brother's keeper. So when I see fifth column creeps like Boehner and Cantor trying to screw the middle-class in favor of the super rich, and accusing those who need extended unemployent benefits as being indolent, I'm real pleased that I didn't grow up to be—yuck— a Republican.

Maybe I'll just have bacon.

I'm late getting to my comment about these commercials since they have been running for ages now. I can't imagine the creative session that led to this weird concept. "You see, we have a bunch of people dressed as planets and the spokesman is the sun. Cause it's like if you didn't have your Jimmy Dean sausages you aren't ready to face the day. Sun. Day. Get it? The planets? Well, they really don't have anything to do with the sausage." Call my crazy, but if you show me sizzling sausages being served with fried eggs that's usually enough to whet my appetite. Chubby people dressed in colored orbs just doesn't say breakfast to me. But as I said these commercial have been running for a while, so maybe they are effective. If so, why?

Jimmy Dean Spaced Out TV Commercial

Splashdown or crashdown?

I find this G.E. commercial very strange. It seems to be promoting some kind of stepped altitude navigation system which replaces an equally unknown system in which a plane had to land in stages. Apparently with the new G.E. True Course Flight System, landing is smoother and simpler. But the ending of the commercial seems to suggest without the system one can expect a crash landing. that is if you can go by the way the diver flops down in the water. It seems to me that G.E. could have found a less frightening way to promote their new system. But even if this spot isn't as morbid as I think, what is the point of it? Are we supposed to fly only on planes that have this system? And how would we know? Or is it universal? Next time I think I'll just turn off the sound and pretend it's a promotion for Acapulco.

GE Aviation Cliff Diver Commercial

Making a clean sweep.

It occurred to me today that I have strange spending habits, and maybe you do, too. I will immediately replace something costly that gives me pleasure or needs replacement: a tv, a stereo, a roof. Yet I will put up with something old and inexpensive because it seems so insignificant. I'm talking about a broom, a $5 broom. Having cats, I have to clean the litter boxes every day. Being cats, they have no concern for how much litter they kick onto the garage floor. So, in addition to scooping, there is daily sweeping. For years I have been using the same broom, the same balding, down-to-the-nub straw broom. It wasn't that I had any affection for this broom. I mean it wasn't given to me by a special friend. It was just a lousy broom. So why didn't I replace it? I don't know. But I finally bought a new broom the other day, and the daily sweeping has become significantly easier—so easy, in fact, that I feel really stupid for waiting so long. Think about it. Is there something in your house that you just deal with month after month that could be replaced as easily as, say, a new broom?

A salute to two great women.

In the previous post I said that Eleanor Roosevelt was #1 on my list of great women. Here is one of the major reasons. In 1939, world-famous American contralto Marian Anderson was scheduled to sing at Washington's Constitution Hall. The event was cancelled by the halls owners: the Daughters of the American Revolution, whose policy was to not let an African American perform on the stage. Outraged by this, Mrs. Roosevelt resigned her membership to the society and, the next day, commented on social injustice in her newspaper column, "My Day" bringing national attention to the issue of civil rights. Ms. Anderson did not sing at Constitution Hall. Instead on Easter Sunday, 1939, she sang at the base of the Lincoln Memorial for an mall audience of more than 75,000 people. The concert, which was broadcast, reached an audience of millions. That's the kind of inspiring and united event we desperately need today.

Thank you, Internet

One of the things I most remember from childhood was a tv commercial. But over the years—all right, decades—when I mentioned this commercial to friends, they always gave me a look. The look they gave me meant they thought I was lying or, at best, delusional, as no such commercial was possible. Even I had to admit that what I told them seemed unlikely. But I was sure that I recalled it correctly. Fortunately the Internet has proven I was correct: Widowed First Lady, Eleanor Roosevelt (#1 on my greatest women list) was, in fact, a spokesperson on a commercial for Good Luck margarine. The commercial was the brainchild of the most famous of Mad Men, David Ogilvy. He apparently convinced Mrs. Roosevelt that it was good for the country to promote the more healthful virtues of margarine over butter and that the $35,000 payment could be a charitable gift. (She gave it to the United Nations.) He later said he was ashamed of conning this great lady. But in a long lifetime of incredible achievements by Eleanor Roosevelt, this remains a mere 30-second curiosity.

Eleanor Roosevelt Margarine Commercial

Never a surprise answer.

I can understand why liberals like Chris Matthews and Ed Shultz would want to be fair and have a dissenting panelist. What I don't understand is why any show would solicit Ron Christie's opinon on anything. One can easily guess his answer on any subject. He is never reasoned, never fair, never hesitant. He vociferously spouts the party line with every appearance, even when his position is completely and ludicrously untenable. He is like the mailroom boss in How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying who sings, "Whatever the company thinks, I think so, too." No Republican has ever made a mistake. Sharron Angle and Sarah Palin are eminently qualified for any political role. There was no problem with Michelle Bachmann questioning the loyalty of Democrats in Congress. Bush was a swell president. The Iraq War was a wise decision. What is the point of having someone like this write a column when anyone giving two sides of any political question could write it for him—just "play it the company way" no matter what?

Added note: To show what an apologist this creep is, he defended Rush Limbaugh for referring to a black lawmaker as Ms. Daisy's chauffer, denying that such a remark had any racial connotations. In the same Hardball show, he suggested, as many Fox commentators have that President Obama had said Republicans would have to ride in the back of the bus, when Obama clearly said the back of the car, meaning that Republicans, having driven us in a ditch, should not be in the driver's seat. This was a despicable deception by Christie in which even summoned the name of Rosa Parks to further his false argument.

Actor dead in tragic mistake.

My headline is the same as one I read this morning. Seeing it, I assumed that the actor would be someone most Americans would know, otherwise why would it be newsworthy? But like so many Comcast teasers, it was irrelevent, at least to me. It seems that a Filipino actor named Kirk Abella doing a scene with a plastic gun was shot (in the back) by a watchman who (for no good reason) thought he was a real criminal. Of course, a death like this is tragic, but Comcast's headline wanted to suggest that it was a death we would mourn in some way: an actor whose name we knew. Though I subscribe to Comcast and am happy enough with their service, I must admit I find the company less than consumer friendly, especially in cases like this because you have to watch some boring commercial to get to a video which is often far less interesting than the teaser suggests.

Note: Days later the Comcast teaser headline was Halle Berry's Bizarre Makeover. This come-on was supposed to make you think that Ms. Berry had had some plastic surgery that was less than successful. The story was merely about the her face-changing makeup in a new film. In other words, another non-story.

"We would kill for your business."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think when you shoot a poison dart into somebody's neck it kills them. With that in mind, I find this a very weird commercial for DirectTV, who seems to specialize in creepy ads. I assume it's supposed to be highly amusing that a goofy young projectionist is murdered so that one can steal the canned film for Russell Crowe's Robin Hood. Surprising that DirectTV thinks that murder and theft is the best way to convince consumers to use their service. Even more disturbing is that they chose, as the film worthy of theft, Robin Hood, which is a crashing, unwatchable bore. In fact, this Ridley Scott epic is such is a shaky-camera waste of time that it makes Kevin Costner's attempt look almost as good as Errol Flynn's version, which nobody has topped. I wonder what DirectTV will use for their next commercial theme: ethnic cleansing or lupus?

DIRECTV CINEMA - "Blow Dart"

Toilet humor?

The morality of this commercial mystifies me. Not because the guy is shown as a jerk, so turned on by an attractive female plumber that he's willing to destroy his own plumbing system (lots of commercials show men as idiots); but because he's obviously living with an attractive woman we assume to be his wife. So what was his game plan: a quickie over the sink and hope that wifie didn't hear him groan? Or his he so sexually starved it's worth it to just look at a hot plumber working, even at $80.00 an hour? Either way, it's really dumb. But even worse, I don't believe for a minute that the john wouldn't have clogged up from all that crap. After all a Kohler toilet doesn't come with a complete plumbing system. Okay, so you think it's a funny commercial. I think it's a concept that should have been flushed.

Unrelated subject, sorta: In my last job I worked for a pain-in-the-ass account executive who encouraged the creative team to, "flush out an idea." I wanted to tell her that the correct usage is to "flesh out an idea", that it to say put some meat on the bones. But I didn't because it gave me a great deal of delight to see this arrogant woman repeat this mistake again and again and again.

Hot Female Plumber Funny 01

No, you're not!

I admit it. I'm much too picky about logic. I should just let things go. After all, it's just a commercial. Let it go. No, I can't. If this National customer can have her pick of any car on the lot and she chooses a luxurious car, she is not, as she says in the commercial, "getting an upgrade." She could only get an upgrade if she had already chosen something to be upgraded from. She is simply getting a nice car. Sheeesh!

National Car Rental - Robin

"Chock full o'nuts, please."

As I mentioned before, I do not watch Wheel or Fortune (too much clapping), but I do usually catch the final puzzle. What amuses me is that the announcer (or maybe Sajak himself ) always comments that for every correct guess Maxwell House coffee will donate $2,500 to Feed America. Since Maxwell House has been a leading brand for decades (Does anyone remember the 50s program, Mama?) this seems like a piddling sum to me. It's rather like me donating a dime. It's especially cheap when it's only donated for correctly guessing the puzzle, which doesn't happen with any frequency. I happen to think Maxwell House is far from "good to the last drop" and this cheapness doesn't improve my opinion of them.

Newspeak is here.

Tonight, November 1, I am more than ever aware that we are all living in a Mediacracy. The media, significantly the broadcast media, tell us what to think, what is happening, who we are, what we want, and in what direction we should walk. Not much different than the giant screens in 1984. The election is not over, but every major network is telling us the Republicans will have victory, Democrats defeat. It is no less real at the moment than when Orwell wrote, "We are winning the war in Eurasia." We are told that the country is angry, though my friends, even the unemployed are not angry, just worried. But the media insists it's anger and the media decides the mood of the country. The media has elevated a cipher like Sarah Palin to possible presidential status when they could have ignored this political starlet. Why? Because she's a photogenic Mrs. Malaprop and it's much easier and less costly than doing research, and far more profitable than seeing the ill-educated turn away from all those boring facts they would hear from knowledgeable candidates. The media has given far too much air time to Sharron Angle who will give them none. Why? Because their entertainment-addicted audience would rather watch the ravings of an Alice Ghostly lookalike than having to exercise their minds with semi-complex political views. If, after this election, nutcases like Rand Paul, Sharron Angle and Michelle Bachmann have been voted into office, then it will be because the media helped promote, predict and usher them into those positions. We are told that Americans are disappointed with Obama. If they are it is because the media has been endlessly telling us that Americans are disappointed with Obama, disappointed with Obama, disappointed with Obama. This without significantly reporting all the positive changes he has made. Why? Let us not forget that the alphabetical media we trust are no less multi-billion dollar Republican-leaning companies than BP or Sony. We are not living in an age of reason, but in a dumbing of America era of entertainment when even something as important and life-changing as political news coverage is not much different than The Great Race, The Biggest Loser and American Idol.

A moment on tape.

Recently I bought a roll of black duct tape at Big Lots. I like the low prices at Big Lots. What I don't like is that almost everything they sell seems to come from China. After the recent problems with dog food and drywall, I don't buy anything from China that I will ingest or touch that often. Sounds xenophobic, but I don't trust their manufacturing processes. Anyway, even though tape seemed safe enough, I still wondered whether it was vinyl or some other material and had any dangerous chemicals to create the finish or the glue. When I opened the packaged, I noticed in small type that the tape was made in New Jersey. I immediately felt better about my purchase. I wish we all could see more products that said "Made in New Jersey", or some other state, or simply "Made in the USA." It seems to me when I was a child the only product made in China was the Chinese Finger Torture.

Rip. Rip. Rip.

One of my greatest annoyances every month is tearing all the inserts out of the AARP Magazine. Sounds easy, doesn't it But it isn't. Because they have so many of them hidden between the pages and by the time you're done the magazine weighs half as much. I don't know why I even bother because I don't read the publication. Too depressing. One doesn't like to imagine the day when one needs an Acorn Stairlift or "Help, I've fallen and I can't get up" Life Alert. Still this issue (not the cover shown here)was more fun than most because it featured an article by Jamie Lee Curtis (52), Betty White (88) and Kristen Bell, (30). I admit it, I never heard of Kristen Bell, but the article was entertaining, although I wish I weren't one of the people who remembers Betty in Life with Elizabeth, a 50s sitcom. What I do like about the magazine is the last page which brings you up to date on the age of famous people. In case you're interested Daryl Hannah and Julianne Moore are 50; Stanley Livingston (Chip on My Three Sons) is 60, as is still-sexy Ed Harris. The last two "famous" people are not on my list of worthy celebs: the disreputable Dionne Warwick is 70; and the despicable G. Gordon Liddy is 80.

Note: This week I tried to see the Marilyn Monroe cover on Vanity Fair and the new Curtis/White/Bell cover from the new AARP Magazine. Neither was shown on the internet, at least not yet. I wonder why.

The two-second reaction.

I happen to like Progressive commercials, despite all the naysayers. Flo to me is fun and cute and funny and, damnit, I like her. But I particularly admire this commercial because it's a perfect example of how the right casting makes a spot. And in this case the magic happens within seconds as the hapless beau rolls his eyes toward the domineering (we assume) fiancee. Love this guy's expression. My compliments to whomever (whoever?) cast him.

Xbox 360 ad Progressive shoulder bag slash purse

Names

I think it's time to call UPS.

This is the kind of commercial I don't understand at all. First of all it's not all that clever. Second it doesn't do much to promote FedEx since that sell moment is given away right up front. So basically it's a comic bit in which this goofball boss has a mnemonic device to remember all the employees names. Of course, he must be really stupid if he can't recall five names. But putting that aside, I am always bemused by commercials that seem to want to make someone the fool, the goat, the butt of a joke, the patsy. In this case Dan, who our boss remembers with the mnemonic "Dan Fool." As in all mean-spirited commercials, his fellow employees do not rush to his defense but merely remind him its only a mnemonic device that has given him such a dopey label. I am sure many readers will think I make too much of a simple commercial, but the airwaves are rife with ads from advertisers who seem to prefer to debase their customers rather than credit them with any kind of intelligence or compassion. Frankly I think FedEx, who have done some excellent commercials in the past, have some damn fools on their creative team.

"Gotta dance!"

I am stunned at the number of my friends who are avid fans of Dancing with the Stars, a show which doesn't feature that many real stars, dancing that isn't all that professional, and endless commercials. But these same friends would never think of watching America's Ballroom Challenge on PBS, which features some of the world's finest dancing teams. If you're a fan of superior dancing, you will love watching this commercial-free Columbus, Ohio, competition which features 24 couples who are incredibly graceful, imaginative and energetic. The dancing far exceeds that of Dancing with the Stars as do the costumes and routines. The judging is far tougher than the popular TV show because these judges have to choose from the best of the best, which cannot be that easy. In fact, you're likely to disagree when you see a couple who knocked you out come in at seventh place. Right now PBS is showing the 2008 competition hosted by Jasmine Guy, so try to catch it on one of the station's repeat showings. Not only is the dancing great, but you will never see more beautiful gams on TV. Plus, a spectacular mambo won't be followed by a commercial for improving your colon health.

"Twilight descends. Everything ends. Til Tomorow."

I just heard on the news that Tom Bosley died today of lung cancer at age 83. This is interesting to me for several reasons. First, I was sure that he died years ago from the same illness. I almost recall not being surprised at the time because of the following story. When I was desperately trying to quite smoking, I tried everything. I even went through The American Cancer Society program twice. At that time there was a video starring Tom Bosley telling smokers how he had finally quit. It was inspiring. But years later, on a television talk show, I saw him smoking. I realized then that he hadn't really beaten the habit. I'm glad I did. So, I am saddened to learn that—to me—he has died again. Though never one of my favorite actors, I did see him in his greatest role in 1959 when I was seventeen. Back then he was the much-celebrated star of the Pulitzer Prize-winning musical Fiorello! The show was great and Bosley absolutely made the role his own. The title above comes from some of the show's brilliant lyrics by Sheldon Harnick.

The pleasures of being petty.

I can't tell you how much I enjoy this commercial or any commercial with Fred Thompson. It warms my heart to see this Republican windbag having to earn a living by pitching all kinds of products and services. One could only marvel at the arrogance of this second-rate actor believing he could be president and then running a campaign where he totally fell apart and showed how dumb he really is. In this spot he's selling reverse mortgages. But whatever commercial he's doing, trust me, this guy is a used-car salesman.

Fred Thompson American Advisors Group (AAG) Commercial for Reverse Mortgage

People Search MyLife Welcome Video

Get MyLife out of my life.

A while back I started getting this annoying spam from MyLife.com. I opened it by mistake. I say by mistake because now I get at least one unwelcome e-mail a week. The suggestion is always that someone is dying to get in touch with me. And, I suppose, if I sign up with MyLife, that touching reunion will become possible (at a price). Of course one wonders how stupid the searcher must be not to look me up on Zaba or some other site, or check out the phone book of the city I have lived in for the 15 years. I notice on their new commercial MyLife suggests that if I type in my name, they will notify me as to who wants so desperately to get in touch with me. I didn't do it, but I doubt that they would let me know. Because when I foolishly opened the e-mail, they only told me that a 68-year-old woman in New Hampshire wanted to reach me. I have written to them to take me off their mailing list, but they haven't done it. In the meantime that woman in New Hampshire, whom I may or may not want to meet again, will just have to get along without me.

Tipping my hat.

While it's fun to have a blog where I can rant and rave and say what I want, I don't for a minute think that mine is all that special. I happen to have strong opinions about advertising because I was in the business for 40 years and let me tell you it probaby has more overpaid, undertalented jerks than any other business, except maybe the film industry. But if you enjoy reading my rants, there are blogs you'll find even more entertaining with far more careful spelling and grammar. Two of them are My Cats at Democrats by a friend with very clear and amusing political positions and wonderful writing style. You can trust this blogger's political information completely while mine is often poorly and lazily researched and thus sometimes suspicious. The other is The Rude Pundit. This political blog is hilariously funny and incredibly vulgar. I know it's brilliant because normally I find vulgarity offensive, but not on this guy's blog which lambastes the Republicans with every available curse and expletive plus the most in inventive invective you'll ever read. Check these blogs out. But don't stop reading me.

Note: I caught myself doing what I despise in others. I wrote that the Rude Pundit is "hilariously funny." Wrong. He is to me, but that's for you to decide. I'll try not to make that mistake again. I was, however, correct in saying he's incredibly vulgar.

http://mycatsaredemocrats.blogspot.com/

http://www.rudepundit.blogspot.com

Calm down. It's not that exciting.

I admit it. I like Wheel of Fortune. Mostly because I'm good at guessing the answers. But I don't watch it because there's something about it I detest. It's the same thing I detest about Jon Stewart's The Daily Show, Bill Maher's show, and hundreds of other shows over the decades: the screaming fake applause. Since the advent of television, producers have always hired some hyper barker (usually a failed comedian or clown) to encourage the audience to act as if the appearance of the host of star was the second coming. It's obnoxious. And it doesn't end there. This same fluffer has his "applaud" signs to keep the energy high. The brilliant Bill Maher is particularly annoying because he tries to appear surprised at the screaming audience that has been told to scream. And on Wheel does every correct answer really require manic enthusiasm from the audience? Are we supposed to believe that all those contestants automatically applaud themselves with each correctly chosen letter? Do they do that at home after a particularly good meal? Jeopardy, which I do watch, seems to have just the right amount of audience recognition without the "This is the most exciting moment of my entire life" audience reaction of other shows. Thanks Alex.

DirecTV Russian Guy Funny Commercial ("Opulence, I Has It")

Nyet! Nyet!

Am I supposed to be charmed by this commercial for DirecTV? And, if so, why? Here is an unattractive actor who seems like Russian Mafia in an opulent setting of incredible vulgarity being protected by bodyguards and indulged by attractive women who look like high-priced hookers. He's so undeservedly vain he has two busts of himself, both gold like most of the furniture including an intensely vulgar sofa. On the TV screen behind him is a woman running through the woods (probably being pursued by a serial killer). And, if that didn't make him unpleasant enough, his pet (other than the card-playing dogs) is a miniature giraffe which would have to be the product of some weird and sadistic cloning. One kiss from his Dr. Moreau pet and he pounds his knees like a drug- or steroid-crazed nutcase. I'm not quite sure how this demented commercial sells DirecTV services, but I have no doubt that many people think this is wonderfully entertaining since creeps are so chic these days.

What, no smart ass remark?

Why do I like this Dunkin' Donuts commercial so much? Because, unlike most commercials that show young people in cars, this is not snarky, not smart-ass, not one teen putting down another or trying to make him feel small. The first boy loses the map and rather than ridiculing him, the others cheerfully agree that they'll find their destination just fine without it. In short, they behave the way friends should behave but often don't, especially in commercials.

Bobby Edner Dunkin' Donuts 2010 Commercial

Did I really see that?

I can't find the Campbell's Healthy Request commercial on the internet. But it featured a variety of vignettes of people involved in activities that I assume would make them hungry for soup—Campbell's Healthy Request, of course. As weird as it seems, one of the vignettes had a couple playing table tennis (or, if you prefer, ping pong) with a baby in a carrier on the table. I can only hope that the couple were terrific players because I imagine a baby getting hit in the eye with a ping pong ball wouldn't cause a case of the giggles.

Note: After watching a different Campbell's Soup commercial tonight, I'm beginning to think the Campbell kids are major risk takers. First the baby on the ping pong table, now a commercial that ends with people on opposing fire escapes tossing each other cans of soup. I know. I know. It's a fantasy. But I can't help visualizing someone missing a catch and a person in the alley below getting conked on the head by a deadly can of Cream of Broccoli.

So, I got a little choked up. So what?

I admit it. I'm a sap for a sentimental commercial and this Subaru spot is one of the best. I like it not only because it makes its safety points so well ("Call me, but not while you're driving.") but because it reminds you that a grownup girl is still a child to a parent. I also like that the parent is not the usual cliched, clearly older, not sexy dad. This guy is very attractive and still old enough to be her dad.

Baby Driver

A #$%@#$@#$%$#@%$#@@@@@@ exciting new show.

The new HBO series Boardwalk Empire looks great and it's entertaining. It is also the vehicle that gives the talented and often underrated Steve Buscemi the role of his career. But it has one flaw. It's the same flaw that's wrong with almost every HBO series. They can swear, so they do. Now I don't object to swearing, but on HBO it almost becomes comical because it is often completely unnecessary and everyone swears in the same tone of voice. This was true of The Sopranos, Deadwood and even comedies like Entourage and Curb Your Enthusiasm. Men, even gangsters, have conversations that aren't sprinkled with f and s and cs and all the other combinations. On these shows it rings false: it is the voices of possibly middle-class scriptwriters who imagine what tough guys talk like or how they would talk if their mothers let them. I have read enough books on crime to know that there were Mafia higher-ups who didn't swear at all; others never in front of their families and especially their wives and children. None of that applies on HBO. It is fortunate that HBO wasn't interested in Mad Men, otherwise it wouldn't be as tightly written as it is because you'd need lots of airtime for unnecessary expletives. So while Boardwalk looks great and the plots are nicely woven, it still lacks any true sense of reality because frankly, there's just too much fucking swearing.

A quickie.

Despite being cranky a lot of the time, I am really not a pedant. I mostly get annoyed with people who have highly paid jobs and should know better than to misuse the language, mispronounce words, and be stupidly repetitive. A good example was the ABC News last night, 10-3. The anchor in referring to a government program said they were "given the green light to go ahead." I think "given the green light" or "given the go-ahead" would have been sufficient. I guess this same anchor would say about a foreclosure, "They were given two weeks notice to be out in 14 days."

Isn't that for me to decide?

There was a time when they made a movie and called it a comedy. You went to see it and decided for yourself whether or not it was funny. Not any more. I have Comcast and when I read their listing of the available entertainment they inform me that every comedy is hilarious. Not just funny, mind you, hilarious. Do you know how funny something has to be to be hilarious? And that's just to you. What you find hilarious, somebody else may find boring. And vice versa. Still Comcast tells us that "My Dead Family* is a hilarious comedy about a family of ghouls." Of course it stars six actors whom you have never seen before (or will see again) and there isn't really a laugh in the entire 84 painful minutes. But Comcast describes it, along with every other film on their roster, as "hilarious." Does this mean that you don't appreciate hilarity when you see it? Are you humor-challenged? So you don't watch the entire film, but instead turn to another offering that you are told is "moving," "heart-breaking," or "terrifying." Wouldn't Comcast and other media be better off just describing the plot and listing the actors and let us decide for ourselves?

*There is no film My Dead Family. I just made up that name. But I'm telling you if there were it would be hilarious.

About Face.

I am a member of FaceBook. But I still don't understand its popularity. With few exceptions I find very little interesting on this site? blog? whatever it is. Maybe, being a luddite, I'm not making full use of it. Because most of it is boring. I don't really care who had dinner when and with whom. I am not interested in other people's vacations. Once it's over, I'm not even interested in my own. It's sometimes fascinating to be reconnected to people from your past. On the other hand, there's usually a good reason they are past- and not present-day friends. All too often you find out something about someone you liked that immediately makes you put them in the dislike column. Not that I don't like my Facebook friends. I do. I just don't visit the site that much because it's mostly trivia or photos. I am sure very few of my friends ever visit this lonely site. Which is also fine. Most people are pretty self- or family-involved. Which is why I write a blog and why so many people are on Facebook.

Good news and bad news.

The good news is that I love this commercial. I've seen it dozens of time and never get bored with it. The bad news is when I decided to include it on this blog and comment on how much I like it, I couldn't remember which company created it. Apple? Sprint? Verizon? Who? I had to wait until I saw it once again. As you can see it was for AT&T Blackberry. Sometimes, maybe a commercial is too entertaining.

Her worst fear literally changed her life forever.

Broadcast news, which is annoying to begin with has several cliches which drive me mad. Actually they have dozens. I'll only mention three. 1: "A situation that changed her life forever." Everything we do changes our life forever. There is no need for this word. But newscasters attach to endless stories thinking it add some kind of drama. It doesn't. If a man loses both legs in a car accident it changes his life. There is little chance he will grow new legs and even with prosthetics, he still has a different life. Adding "forever" seems to suggest that there may have been a chance to go back to the way things were. Idiotic! Another favorite is, "A woman's worst fear." This is annoying because the fear can change from day to day, even on the same station. The "woman's worst fear" can be the death of a child, breast cancer, kidnapping, divorce, rape any number of things. "Stay tuned for a story about a Florida woman who was faced with a woman's worst fear." This was the teaser for a story about a woman who had been kidnapped and locked in the trunk of a car. (Yes, she survived.) But how many women, when asked, would say, "My worst fear is being kidnapped and locked in the trunk of a car"? Finally, I am stunned at the number of "educated" (an assumption, I admit) newscasters who have no idea what the difference is between "literally" and "figuratively." Of course, they almost never use "figuratively" but I have heard announcers say, "He literally ripped his head off" after someone had been soundly scolded. When they don't use the word with complete inaccuracy, they use it when it is not necessary,"They literally found the drowned man on the beach." Duh! Even highly regarded Bob Woodward, when speaking of his new book on BIll Maher's show, said, "They literally had the upper hand." What the hell does that mean? Why do I care? Because I'm cranky, of course. Also it depresses me to think that if news is that bad now, what will it be in

ten years.

My most hated word.

Last night in a Nissan commercial, which I cannot find on YouTube, they used the word about eight times. Dozens of commercials use it because copywriters are lazy and reach for the obvious,

especially in children's commercials where better words should be introduced to challenge young minds. Announcers use it endlessly, though it should be shunned by anyone over 16. Very few friends agree with me and many seem to think I'm a pain to so resent this word. Everybody uses it instead of trying to dig into their vocabulary to find a more suitable or descriptive word. Or, if they don't have a vocabulary, buy a thesaurus. My friend Peter, bless him, knows it annoys me and tries to avoid it. But to most people today, it's unavoidable. They are addicted to it. They have no replacement, no synonym. They don't even know what a pathetic cliche it has become. I never use the word, at least in the mindless context others do. I will only use it for its other meanings. Which is why it is not included in this post. You know what it is, and you will probably use it ten or twenty times today. But I hope not.

Boy, are we stupid.

In its infancy and early years television was free. It was supported by commercials and there weren't that many. Lots of popular shows had one sponsor: Goodyear Television Playhouse, Kraft Theater, GE Presents, Your Hit Parade (Lucky Strike), etc. In many cases there were three commercial breaks: at the beginning, the middle, and the end. All right, it was black and white and the picture wasn't great. But it was free and we assumed it would stay free. But as more and more stations appeared and color arrived, we had more choices and a much clearer picture. Which, of course, led to cable. Now the cable people suggested, if they didn't say it outright, that if we paid to watch television there would no commercials or at least far fewer. We fell for it. Now we see armies of commercials, sometimes as many as 12 in row. We even see commercials while we're watching the shows, with the sudden appearance of silent sales pitches at the bottom the screen. Purists, like me, have to watch shows with the presenter's logo on the screen throughout the show even during classic movies. Why should I have to look at AMC while I'm watching DOA? Even so-called premium stations deluge us with commercials for their so-called commercial-free presentations. And, of course, we pay dearly for the privilege of watching TV and paying broadcasters to bombard us with strings of loud, repetitive pitches, some entertaining, most not and none ever interesting the 18th time around. Now I realize that broadcasters have to pay for these shows and the technology. But how much profit do they reall need to make at our expense? I'm sure they would be sitting pretty with even half the commercial income and we'd be better off with half the shows. But, guess what? Very few of us ever complain about it. Like I said, boy, are we stupid!

Christ was a Democrat.

It always amazes me the number of evangelicals, Baptists, Congregationalists, Mormons, whatever, who vote Republican but call themselves Christians. A true Christian would have to be a Democrat. There's nothing complicated about it. Christ believed in providing aid, comfort, and shelter to the poor. He taught that the wealthy will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven (a billionaire Christian is an oxymoron.) He believed in charity, kindness, tolerance, spreading the wealth, being a Good Samaritan—in short everything that the Republicans, as a party, are fighting against. Many of these people who label themselves as Christians are Herods, Pilates and money-changers.They are the very people that Christ tried to convert from their selfish ways to a greater sense of humanity. Frankly, I think they have a nerve calling themselves Christians. As an atheist, I follow Christ's teachings far more than most Christians, as do millions of Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, true Christians, and those with no religious affiliation. Right now we are being deluged with delusional pseudoChristians like Angle, Paul, and—God help us—O'Donnell. If these people and others like them get in and we have a Republican leadership, we will not have a Congress that believes in truth, justice and the America way. We will have powerful Phillistines who only worship power and money and have nothing but contempt for those who don't have either. Which is why getting out the vote has never been more important to Democrats and—for that matter—anyone who believes in the Golden Rule.

Stupid product indorsement.

The commercial below is one of the older Ensure commercials, but it doesn't matter because they all have the same problem. Why did they name the product Ensure if they're going to pronounce it Insure? Does anybody at that agency even notice? Has anyone said, "Excuse me, but our product, of which we are very proud, is pronounced N-sure not In-sure."? It's just one of the many commercials in which nobody seems to be in charge of diction. It's amazing how many toothpaste ads talk about dennists and dennal care. Then, of course, there's my favorite bugaboo: commercials for innanet services. I once wrote to Ethan Allen because they had a national commercial in which they referred to their selection as wond-er-ous. The word is wondrous. And, wonder of wonders, they changed the commercial to make it correct. I hope it wasn't because of me, but because lots of people care about correctness.

Ensure TV Ad (2003)

Stupid or sour grapes.

I know what Chase Sapphire is trying to with this (and similar) commercials. Obviously using points that have no blackouts and restrictions, even at the last minute during Christmas, is impressive. So impressive that remarkable occurrences, like spending the holidays with Chevy Chase, are supposed to seem pale in comparison. It's a good idea, but I don't think it works. It makes the neighbors seem either stupid or so jealous they are unwilling to acknowledge the unique experience of their friends. Yes, I get the the point of the commercial is exaggeration; but, sorry, I like a certain amount of logic even with exaggerations.