I have one goal in life, and it's to be half as happy about anything as this woman is about carrying frozen desserts fifteen feet to place in front of customers too damn lazy and entitled to just pick it up themselves despite the booth being managed by exactly one person.
Seriously, I can't be the only person who wants to slap that stupid grin off that stupid face. Get over yourself, lady. You're a grown woman serving flavored ice at a swimming pool. There's no way you thought that this is what you were going to be doing ten years ago, when you were a Medieval Art Major at State University.
Know how sometimes you can just read the thumbnail and accurately predict what the majority of comments will focus on? That never works better than with with videos listing banned toys.
Every single time I check out one of these videos listing toys that were briefly popular in the 1960s and 70s but were finally banned because they maimed or murdered children, I know I can scroll down through the comments and read an endless barrage of "I had one of these and turned out fine," "Stupid kids ruined this for everyone," and "woke helicopter parents raise soft kids today" rants. One Boomer after another waxing poetic about how he used to throw Lawn Jarts, have BB-gun wars with neighbors, set off M-80s to add a little adventure to his Green Army Men battles and- of course- drink out of the garden hose because that's what Every Single Person Above the Age of 60 Remembers Better Than Anything Else.
And of course they did all this with No Parental Supervision Whatsoever- hell, most of them grew up with out parents at all. They walked miles to school every day and were never accosted, molested, or otherwise bothered by passing strangers because they didn't exist. They rode bikes without helmets because helmets are Totally Woke and crashed all the time and as previously mentioned, they turned out Just Fine.* And I strongly suspect that they lament the days before seatbelts ruined the traveling experience and turned the Later, Lesser Generations into Pathetic Crystal Snowflakes who Demand Participation Trophies.
If these posters were honest, they'd admit that they don't really miss those stupid dangerous toys (some of which I actually possessed at some point- I especially remember my Creepy Thing Maker and burning my fingers on the hot wax from time to time.) They just miss being young- so much so that they fail to notice- or are unwilling to concede- that kids today are far better off living in a society that doesn't pitch dangerous "fun" activities to parents. Seatbelts, bike helmets, and toys that don't send spikes into our heads or missiles into our mouth don't diminish childhood. The cartoons are infinitely better too- people my age grew up with characters who seemed more interested in inflicting pain on each other- Tom and Jerry, Bugs and Daffy, Sylvester and Tweety, Road Runner and Coyote- than having fun. Today's kids have Bluey, Paw Patrol, Big City Greens, Spidey and Friends, Pupstruction, etc. etc. etc.- each of which tell good stories with healthy, positive messages (which these Boomers, I'm sure, consider both Woke and Gay.)
*did they really grow up "just fine?" I mean, they are constantly ranting about kids today growing up encased in bubble-wrap and pumping their chests about how much Tougher today's older people are because they were "allowed" to grow up feral and basically raise themselves. I don't think there's anything particularly healthy about people my age complaining that kids aren't getting hurt as much today as they did Back in the Good Old Days.
It's downright frightening to think that, considering an Uber One subscription costs $10 a month, there are people out there who actually use Uber and Uber Eats so often that it may actually pay for itself. Personally- and being someone who actually lives within his means- I find Uber Eats to be the most shocking opportunity to burn money since someone decided to invent Bottled Water.
But there's something even scarier about Uber One (yes, even scarier than the concept of paying $120 per year for small discounts on cold meals already marked up to the stratosphere.) And that is the $5 per month "student option." Because if anyone needs a cold hamburger and fries delivered to their front door for $25 more than I do, it's a student, right?
And I'm not even going to get into the comments under this video. Enough Scary for one day.
I went through this - well, I can only describe it as an "Ordeal"- three times in an attempt to understand the point of it all, and I just get more confused with each viewing:
At first, I thought that this woman is just doing what so many women in fabric softener/detergent/air freshener commercials do: Celebrating the absolute joy that comes with using a product that results in soft clothes and (especially) a fresh scent. I think it's been a theme of detergent ads since the 1950s that it's possible to fall madly in love with clean, soft clothes to the point where it's the highlight of any suburban prince or princess's day to jam one's nose into the laundry.
This theory seemed to be confirmed by Dad's "your mother really loves Downy" remark to Son. Both members of the house are taking this in stride; while they are watching tv or whatever mom is dancing about the house singing her own version of Total Eclipse of the Heart and having her own idea of a wild time. Whatever floats her boat and at least she's not complaining about doing laundry.
But then she throws dad's shorts into his face and tells him "honey, please do your own laundry..." um, say what? If that's their kid, these people have been together for quite some time. What is this guy doing with his shorts that convinced her to suddenly announce that she's no longer going to be doing the laundry we have to presume she's been doing for a decade or more? What else is she not going to be doing? Also, the indications were that she enjoyed doing laundry. What happened? Do I even want to know?
And how is Dad going to react to this? Certainly by this stage in the relationship, the family has settled into a routine and everyone knows what chores they are responsible for. Now mom has changed that up- again, WHY exactly? And what does "rinse it out" even mean? Is this an alternative to actually washing Dad's shorts? If so, where is he supposed to "rinse them out?"
Excuse me for saying so, but Dad should just toss the shorts back to his wife and reply "um, no. There's no 'my shorts,' 'your shorts' and 'the kids' shorts.' There's just OUR SHORTS- and OUR CLOTHES. When any item of clothing is in the hamper, just put it along with the rest of the clothes in the washing machine, please. And when it comes out of the dryer, feel free to do a little dance if that's what flips your skirt- but please don't throw clothes into my face and make demands in front of our kid again. I told our son that you love Downy, not that you're a lunatic I stay with because this is California and I don't want to lose half my income in a divorce settlement. You could at least reciprocate by not emasculating me in front of him."
Fact is, the "controversy" over an entirely AI-produced ad is of zero interest to me. I couldn't care less if the people peddling this awful gambling app loophole are actual sad examples of American Idiots or AI-generated ones.
The point is still the same: Kalshi is just gambling wearing regulation-proof clothing. "Futures Markets" have a certain level of legitimacy because they've been around forever (although, as I posted the last time I looked at Kalshi, the bucket shops they originated in were banned in New York more than a hundred years ago.) But whatever you call it, this is just making everything you can imagine an opportunity to lose your money to a life-destroying addiction. That's what we should be talking about here. Not AI. Don't give a damn about the AI.
Don't give a damn about Disney's role in this, either. The Mouse wrecked Star Wars, no real surprise it's in the process of helping to wreck the rest of society now.
"Whatever's under this sheet, we can be sure of one thing: It's not a part covered by Car Shield, so no matter how much the owner paid, this is not a covered repair."
"Ok, let's take a look at it anyway. We have to wrap this up so we can get our paychecks before Car Shield has to deal with another Class Action Lawsuit."
(quick peek)
"Oh my god! It's our CAREERS!"
"Um, you didn't know they were dead already? What the hell do you think we're doing in commercials for a scam car warranty company? You think Ernie Hudson and Danika Patrick are A-listers too?"
"I don't know. Are we done now? I have to return a call from my agent, something about an audition with the Medicare Coverage Helpline."
First, there's the quaint notion of a $149-per-month lease deal. Remember when those were a thing? The only time in my life I ever leased a car, from 2006 to 2009, I paid $350 a month. And that was for a 2-door Civic Coupe. Sure, there was virtually nothing to pay on it when I took ownership at the end of the lease, but still.
Second, there's the idea that all of these people are instantly smitten with the idea of leasing a freaking KIA for multiple years. I'll admit that the only way I'd ever drive a KIA is through a lease deal, because these things are nothing but headaches and they depreciate in value faster than- well, faster than an ice cream cone melts in the sun.
Third, this ad works a lot better if it ends with all of these zombies just following that truck off a damn cliff. I can't think of any more accurate way to describe the feeling of actually being stuck making payments on a (still, at $149 a month and $2 k down) overpriced piece of junk like a KIA Soul. Better than spending three years regularly being reminded that you are going to pay $7400 to drive around in a pile of crap you will just give back in 36 months because even you aren't dumb enough to hand over another $10k for a car with a Kelly Blue Book Value of maybe half that at the end of the term. Unless you really are an April (and every other month of the year) Fool.
