ugh, is anybody buying these conventions??? what a waste of money, tv time and starch. really, all they are are (double "ares?") bazillion dollar, glorified pep rallies where there's no political discourse and so many back pats and high fives that dr. james andrews is on call for when all the sexagenarians throw out their shoulders. what's the point? this is america at its worst; gaudy displays of vacuous platitudes and rhetoric - political shock and awe. who is it for? the undecideds? the unregistereds? if the undecideds decide or the unregistereds register based on these conventions then we don't want them voting anyway. in fact, they should be rounded up, stripped of their clothing and forced to wear barrels with suspenders. the only entertaining thing about these pep rallies is when the liberal weenies trot up their rednecks, scary church people and military types while the conservative fuddy duddies parade their women, minorities and homosexuals. here's an idea: the democrats are already knee deep in their convention so what's done is done but what if the republicans matched whatever amount the democrats spent for their pep rally and put it towards a non-religious charity. wouldn't that be an easy win for the the grand old party? or, would it be seen as an empty and desperate gesture? well, for what it's worth, that'd be enough to get this blogger's vote.
i'm really not a fan of improvisational comedy. nay! i can't stand improvisational comedy. i remember when "whose line is it anyway?" was the bee's knees and i tried watching it and thought it was the lamest thing i'd ever seen. i don't like comedy con caveat. sure, it's good and funny if you factor in the improvisation and the on-the-spotness of it all but i want it to be good and funny because it's good and funny. it's the same reason why you wouldn't watch the nfl or nba played in knee deep water or the wnba, for that matter (which is literally the nba played in knee deep water; LITERALLY). really, improv is a watered down version (pun INTENDED) of a better product. i'm sorry, but watching a bunch of dudes running around like chickens with their heads cut off saying "yes, and..." a comedy show does not make. it's a wonderful exercise for thinking on your feet and working your brain, in general, but i wouldn't pay to watch vonteego cummings do jumping jacks or derrick loville doing squats (10 "ba dum blog good knowledge points" for anyone who can identify these woebeforgotten, marginal bay area athletes of yore).
can you cook??? we have all been asked this question. and, the answer is "yes;" it's always "yes." do you cook? maybe not, but you could if you wanted to. but i don't want to. i did not go to college for four-and-a-half-years to stand in the kitchen and babysit a piece of meat or colander oodles of noodles. people act like cooking is some delicate art form that requires something other than patience, the ability to read a recipe and differentiate betwixt a tsp. and a tbsp. i just don't get it. i'd much rather get fast food, eat at a restaurant or throw something in the microwave so i can spend my time watching tv, playing internet scrabble, downloading porno movies and/or blogging; not to mention all the wasted energy and time of cleaning up your mess after you cook. heck, aside from my mom or grandma, i don't even like when people cook for me. truth be told, i hate it. i just can't deal with the anxiety of having to say "i like it" or sucking it all down even when i don't so i won't hurt their feelings. heck, i don't even like liking it because i can't stand complimenting someone on their ability to stand in the kitchen and read directions. or, maybe i'm just bitter because no one ever offers to cook for me, i have no one to cook for, nor do i know how to use the oven or break an egg :(
either because i'm half gay or perpetually trying to relive my youth, i love all things disney; whether it be disney movies, disneyland or "hannah montana." however, the one thing that has always stuck in my craw is the classic, oscar nominated "beauty and the beast" (yes, i know disney didn't create it but this is a blog, not a college thesis). here's the story in a nutshell: jerk prince gets transformed into a beast for being a jerk, holds old man captive for knocking on his castle door, imprisons old man's hot daughter in exchange for old man's freedom, hot chick inexplicably falls in love with the beast, the spell is broken and they live happily ever after. let's put this scenario into modern times: billy ray cyrus' motorbike breaks down in front of my apartment, billy ray knocks on my door looking for help, i imprison billy ray, miley cyrus shows up at my door looking for billy ray, i imprison miley in exchange for billy ray, miley falls in love with my jerky ways and we live happily ever after. WRONG!!! see how ridiculous it sounds when i put it this way??? the only difference betwixt these stories is that i don't look like a beast but only live in an apartment and blog as opposed to living in a castle and being a prince. so, beast/castle/prince trumps me/apartment/blogger. as it happens, "beauty and the beast" is not a tale of redemption or appreciating someone's inner beauty but is a mere tale of "stockholm syndrome" and proof that the prospect to change a guy (from beast to stud), money (castle) and status (prince) is enough to make a girl fall in love no matter how much of a jerk you are... even if you imprison her creepy, washed up, country singin,' one-hit wonder, expoitive father. ba dum BLOG!!!
editor's note: blogger acknowledges blogs have been sparse but blogger has actually been busy at his corporate gig and philosophically finds it difficult to blog on his own time and not company time.
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment