Today in ill-conceived marketing pitches:

What do professionals have that I don't?
Pie charts and a man-bun, evidently.

So I'm not dead or anything. I usually do a bunch of these every month, and only like one so far in July. I guess I'm calling it a sabbatical from blogging. You know, like the rest of the world did in 2010 or whenever it was people stopped doing these. Although, can I even take a sabbatical? Professional people with serious jobs take sabbaticals, for the rest of us, it's just not showing up at work. Which this isn't. Nobody's paying me to do this. And that's fine, I wouldn't pay me for this either.

Now I'm reading my mail at you.
That's how out of ideas I am.

Anyway, the point is I thought you should know that I'm not dead. That's not however stopping a local funeral parlor from advertising at me. And at some point, I  can't help but feel that this constitutes a threat, albeit one that comes with a meal at a Mexican restaurant. Oh, didn't I mention? Here, let me back up. The mailing was addressed to my family or "Current Resident," which I found somewhat impersonal. It's almost as if they don't care about me, only the possibility that I or a loved one might die. Hey, you don't suppose...

Pictured: why more Americans are
pre-planning for their imminent deaths.

Ok, so one side of the enclosed flyer extols the virtues of pre-planing for one's demise, which is, I'm sure this is a perfectly reasonable thing to do, but it's not something one necessarily wants to think about, so in many ways, the good people at Benita & Azzaro have their work cut out for them. They approach it as any good rhetorician would: with a list. In their case, a list of reasons "...more Americans are pre-planning." They don't provide any evidence that we're doing more preplanning than previously, but I'm not really prepared to do research here.

Be sure to check the "bloated corpse
loaded into a catapult and flung over
the enemy's wall" box on the form.

The reasons given include #1: not being a financial burden on those left behind. Because worrying about money should haunt you to your grave. #2: Making sure the wishes of the deceased are carried out. Because dead people defiantly care about such things. And #3 "Creating contingency plans." Which isn't a reason, and completely breaks the rhythm established by the first two items, but since lists need a minimum of three things for some reason, there it is. Is it weird that that's what bothers me the most about this funeral home's marking push? It is, isn't it?  

But, and I'm sure you were wondering the same thing I was: what does Benjamin Franklin have to say on the matter of planing one's own funeral:

"Ow...it burns when I pee."

-Franklin, in one of his 

lesser known aphorisms

"By failing to prepare, you are preparing to fail."

-Benjamin Franklin, according 

to Benita & Azzaro's flyer

Great advice. And who better to advise us than Benjamin Franklin? He is, after all, dead. Of course, he was famously riddled with STIs, so maybe he wasn't the best at thinking ahead?

Which brings us to the dinner for two at El Jardín Restaurant. Or does it? No. But the pre-deceased and a guest are cordially invited to an exclusive complimentary meal and seminar...yes, and seminar. Uh-huh, there's the catch. I'm out, but if you and a guest are free on Wednesday, August 6th in the middle of the day--like, noon on a weekday--and would like to sit through a sales pitch about how to plan for your inevitable non-existence, hit me up for a QR code. I am, of course, only joking. I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy. 

Ironically, the release death brings would be preferable to the luncheon seminar.

Not a Scoop!

I know journalism has long since died, but it's long frustrated me that Prime Day is somehow worthy of news. But this:

Pictured: the kind of heard-hitting journalism we've come to expect in the 2020's.

Look, I'm not business guy, but why'd he
bother buying the Washington Post when
news sites will cover his sales for free? 

So the "article"--and I hesitate to use the word--covers which sales the writer feels are worth taking advantage of and which are not, and which ones are worth jumping on before the official start of Prime Day on July 8th. None of which is news. And sure, I get that there has long been a tradition of things like Consumer Reports which cover things of importance to people trying to save money, but this feels not like that. And I don't mean to criticize the writer of the NBC piece linked above as a person, just the existence of their job. 

But first, I feel obligated to voice my traditional concerns about how dumb Prime Day, as a thing, is. Not because Amazon is the economic equivalent of a malignant polyp, nor because the "sale" follows subtle price increases in the lead up, but because Prime Day is multiple days. Four days this year. And it's confusing because Prime means first, "day" is singular, and this "sale" lasts ninety-six hours. 

"I rented Venice, do you think I can't redefine time itself?"

-Jeff Bezos,* evidently

Click here for great deals on transatlantic
cruises, life jackets, and deckchairs!

While the article does make a passing reference to some of the items on sale are not worth buying, the writer doesn't say which ones. Instead, what follows is just a list of items whose Prime Day sale prices are highlighted, along with direct links to the online retailer, as well as bullet points about the Prime Day sales. None of which seems like something honest journalism, even journalism that purports to be helping consumers make purchasing decisions, should ever, ever do. The writer even includes personal testimonials for some of them. 

Pictured: literally anyone explaining
how this isn't seriously compromised.

That's not news. And I know it's carried under the label "NBC Select," but what even is that? I asked AI--well, I didn't ask AI, I searched the question and Google made an assumption, but, I mean, look at this: "NBC Select is a section of NBC News and CNBC that focuses on providing high-quality, editorially independent content, including deals, tips, and product reviews, to help readers make informed decisions about various aspects of their lives..."

That's just an example, I'm sure that
Ninja Air Fryers are great at making
dried out food that last like plastic.

What? I mean, what? It's high quality, editorially independent content about deals? That's oxymoronic. The explanation wraps back in on itself and explodes in a cloud of its own rhetorical impossibility. The actual NBC Select site includes an advertiser disclosure that claims that while they receive a commission, said commission doesn't influence what they say about the products. Which, ok, but if they say, for example, that they feel a new Ninja Air Fryer is garbage, they have to know that Ninja Air Fryer commissions will dry up. So, how is it possible for them to be independent and accept commissions?

Again, not blaming the writer here, they're just doing their job. I'm not even blaming NBC. I think all the news sites have something similar to this. They are not responsible for the hyper-capitalist, dystopian nightmare we find ourselves in. But they're not, you know, helping, and sooner or later the wheels are coming off.

"Here's to endless growth with no consequences!"

-Rich people

*I'm aware that he's no longer in charge of the day to day operations, but he still like, is the largest shareholder so...

Yeah, still guilty.

Look, I am not an historian, I'm not British, and really, this affects my life not at all. But I do have internet access and a duty to chime in on things, regardless of how ill-informed I am, so I'm just going to day it: naw. Dude's totally guilty.

Well, lots of dudes are guilty. But I'm
referring to this one in particular.

Although after the year we've had,
I'd be willing to let tweens take a shot.

That's King Richard III. Yes, the guy from the play. The one that soliloquizes about how discontent his winter was. For those unfamiliar, he's famous for three things: having a hunched back, being willing to pay exorbitant prices for a horse, and murdering his nephews. You see, when his brother Edward IV died, Richard's nephew, Edward V, became king. But twelve year olds don't make the best leaders, so his uncle Richard, not unreasonably took over. Less justifiable, was Richard's next move.

Pictured: the unarmed children that stood
between an ambitious adult and power.

You see Richard locked Edward V and his younger brother (who was also called Richard) in the Tower of London. Then he "discovered" that the both the boys were illegitimate, and wouldn't you know it? He (the uncle) was next in line. So Richard the uncle became Richard the third (the third King named Richard that is, there're a million Richards) and no one ever heard from the boys again. Although, a couple hundred years later some maintenance workers found two prince-sized skeletons under a staircase in the Tower and people did the math.

"Slander! Those could be
usurper's nephew's bones."

-Richard III

Where I'm going with all this, is that recently--ok, a couple months ago, but I only heard about it recently--a new claim was made that there is now proof that Richard didn't have the princes murdered, and in fact, that they weren't murdered at all. Wild right? Instead, according to writer and amateur archeologist Philippa Langley, there was actually a whole rebellion built around trying to restore the very much not-murdered princes. And the bones under the stairs? It's an old building, who knows how those got there? I'm not the one trial here. Out of order? You're out of order!

Langley and a reconstruction of her
favorite late medieval king/murder suspect.

Anyway, calling Philippa Langley an amateur archeologist isn't exactly fair, since she organized an excavation back in 2012 that dug up Richard III's long lost body exactly where she predicted it would be. Like, they stuck a shovel in a parking lot and corpse one was Richard. So she's got some credibility. She may also have a potentially unhealthy relationship with a centuries dead king who may well have murdered his way to the top, but still, that's one more king than most archeologists have dug up. I guess the issue here is in the evidence.

"Hello there, I'm Edward V, and this
is my alive brother Prince Richard."

According to Langley, if Richard murdered the boys, then he would have done so openly. That way, no one would use them and their claim to overthrow him. And that, Langley says, is exactly what happened. A rebellion formed around the un-un-alived princes. That rebellion was unsuccessful, and the boys were forced to say they were imposters by Richard III's successor, Henry VII. Henry, obviously, wanting to legitimize his own claim. And, I don't know. I mean, that's a lot right? 

Although, some people will let just
about anything slide, so who can say?

It kind of seems like the simplest solution here would be that Richard offed the kids, and then hushed it up because medieval people, like people today, don't love it when you murder children. As for the imposters, couldn't they just be imposters? There were no photographs or DNA tests. One's legitimacy kind of relied on how much you looked like your dad. It seems like it would be pretty easy to hose off a couple of peasant children who fit the general description of the dead princes. 

Look, ultimately Langley will need to come up with something more compelling than: "what if Richard didn't murder his nephews?" And that's going to be an uphill battle for a woman who's not only the president of the Ricahrd III Society and also organized a state funeral for a guy who very likely murdered children. But she did find his body in a parking lot, so we should willing to cut her at least some slack. 

"'ello 'ello, what's awl this then?"

-Langley's team upon 

finding Richard III's body

In anticipation of an inevitable conquest:

It's hard to make the case that AI isn't going to take jobs away from people while at the same time, AI is taking jobs away from people. Like, look at this. 

Amazon's factory robots can poop in bags far
more efficiently than their human counterparts.

The company's non-humanoid drones
aren't programmed to appreciate the irony.

No? Fine, I'll sum up. Amazon, one of the many companies we should all be boycotting for many reasons, is testing out humanoid robots for delivering packages. Humanoid. That is, the oid part meaning similar to, and human means, you know, human. This will come in handy later. Anyway, depending on who you ask, the company has somewhere between three and eight hundred thousand people working in package delivery. 

Robots and stairs have
long been enemies.

So it seems like humans have it covered. There are, at last count, eight billion humans on Earth, and while I'll grant you that some of those are elderly, or children, that still leaves billions of humans who might want or need a job hauling our dumb online orders up the stairs to our apartments. Not because anyone particularly enjoys it. Sure, you get to drive around, maybe listen to podcasts, but in general I think people are taking these jobs America is an expensive place in which to exist. 

"Neat, huh?"

-rich people

We'd all love to sit around while our portfolios make money for us, but since 99% can't, we take jobs to eat and pay rent. How then are delivery robots improving anyone's life? Oh, right. Shareholders. The hope here is to use robots instead of people because you don't have to pay robots, and that means more money for the people who's whole job is to have a lot of money and sit around while that money turns into additional money by virtue of it being a lot of money. Anyway, I'm sure this is sustainable. 

The cruel irony here is that theirs it the only job that seems safe from robots. 

"For now."

-sentient robots who will one day 

realize they don't need any of us.

All freude, no schaden.

I'm just going to suggest that perhaps the strategy of alienating more than half the country in order to appease the Fox News addled, goon demographic isn't working. I say that because:

Pictured: thousands of life coaches, aging surfers, and probably a
hug therapist or two, all of which, in Santa Cruz, California are actual jobs.

Resistance, it turns out, smells
like vape and Tom's of Maine.

That picture is the No Kings rally I attended yesterday. I'm under the trees in the lower right-hand corner. What? Crowds make me nervous. Anyway, as I'm sure you can tell, that's like thousands of people. Ten thousand according to the estimate given in the local paper. Santa Cruz's population is sixty thousand, so that's one in six residents. One in six Santa Cruzians showed up. The other five presumably had to work, because goddamn it's expensive to live here. But still, I couldn't be more proud of my adopted hometown.

Ten thousand. That's a lot of hippies. It's also evidently the same number of people who turned out to watch a seventy-nine year old felon scowl at some antique tanks and creepy robot dogs as they roll down the streets of Washington.

I can't help but wonder who thought these headless nightmare fuel
robot dogs would inspire patriotism and not the cold dread of--
oh, wait, was it the tattoo guy? I bet it was the tattoo guy.

Above: a WWII tank struggles past
tens of apathetic attendees. 

It was, and this is putting it mildly, a boondoggle. I want to be clear that it was not the fault of the service men and women involved. They're just doing their job. And unfortunately, their job yesterday was a forty-million dollar ego stroke. A debacle that those responsible should take as a sign that they should resign and go into self-imposed exile. Probably somewhere without an extradition agreement. But instead I suspect we're going to be subjected to some incredibly strained spin about what a ringing success it was.

"Whomp, whomp."

-a sad trombone

You might recall the first Trump administration, hot off an abysmally attended inauguration, sending poor Sean Spicer out in front of the press to stand next to photos, actual photos, of a half-filled national mall, and to lie to our entire faces about how it was the most heavily attended inauguration in the history of the universe. Well, we can look forward to that despite the fact that the anti-Trump rallies around the country attracted something like eleven million. That's more than a thousand times the number of people. Anyone else would take the hint, right?

And look, I kind of feel for the President. Yesterday was a humiliation, and one that rests solely on him and his administration. Eleven million people took to the streets to call him a failure. On his birthday. But whenever I start to think that this might be schadenfreude I'm feeling, like, that maybe this is too harsh, even for him, I remember literally everything he's done both in his political career, and his life. Then's all freude, no schaden.

Hey, don't look so glum. You can always resign. Please resign? Resign.

Today in complaining about Amazon:

To be clear, I don't have an issue with pre-fab houses, I just have an issue with Amazon selling prefab houses. In fact, I'll save you the read: I have beef (as the kids say) with Amazon. Didn't we used to shut down monopolies? I just--look, just take what I say with a grain of salt. A grain of salt you ordered online instead of just going to a store. 

I mean, look at Cowboy Jeff here. And what's
up with Lauren Sánchez? Sit in your own seat.

Someone's whole thing is researching the
history of prefab house. It's their passion
It's what they talk about at parties.

Pre-fabricated houses aren't like a new thing and Amazon didn't invent them. People used to buy house kits from Sears, and according to my extensive research of a few of the sites that came up when I searched "history of prefabricated homes," we--well, someone--can trace their history back as far as the Gold Rush, and the seventeenth century, and even William the Conqueror. And I mean, what are tents but prefabricated homes? Depending on your definition, they might go back millennia. 

This isn't me, but I kind of look like this
when I tell people I don't use Amazon.

So why then does it bother me that Amazon sells them? I'm beefing (again, am I using this correctly?) with most companies. Target, Walmart, Trader Joe's. Basically any business that caved to the racist demands of a felon most people didn't vote for. I think I can go to Costco at this point, and that's it. At least until they screw up. It's a difficult existence, but I do enjoy the "oh, I don't shop there..." I get to drop into conversations. Of course it's all smug and games until I need paper towels.

"I swear to God, Tim. It's been
three years. You need to go."

-Tim's former friend

Anyway, the houses they sell vary wildly both in configuration and price, from ten to forty thousand dollars and I'm sure that puts home ownership within the reach of some. I mean, I suppose you have to have some land to put them on, or a really tolerant friend who let's you put their in their backyard, but then as time passes they realize that it's not as temporary a situation as you led them to believe. Your friendship becomes increasingly strained, you stop speaking to one another, and eventually they ask you to move and then you--huh? What? I guarantee you, that this 100% happens.

Pictured: craftsmanship.

Ok, so the scenario involving Tim which I (very correctly) predicted above isn't the only reason I think people should avoid falling for these things. It's the sense that these are the housing equivalent of a flatpack bookshelf which, once assembled exactly as the instructions, uh, instructed, wobbles unnervingly and has left over parts. Every time. 

Sure it might be cheaper--well, relatively cheaper. Ten grand is an unthinkable amount of money--in the short term, but what about five years down the line? There has to be a reason these cost so much less than say, a traditional mobile home which, according to some more lazy internet research, are around a hundred thousand dollars. 

95% of the internet is uninformed
opinion. The rest is porn and ads.

And I suspect that that reason is shoddy construction. Admittedly, having never been inside one, I can't really comment on how well they're constructed. I'm just talking about things I know not of. But they cost a tenth of the price of a trailer, so something's not right here. And if everything else in American is any indication, these will be leaking within a year. It's part of a larger trend of everything being junk now. Everything. The further into the twenty-first century we go, the crappier it gets. 

Customer service gets worse, build quality deteriorates, and people keep believing in free delivery. Which isn't real. Amazon isn't selling cheap houses to solve the housing crisis. If they wanted to do that, they'd pay their workers better. They're selling cheap houses because they can convince people to buy them. Probably by exploiting the part of our programing that suggested that we can, and should, all own houses someday. Which would be great. I'd love to. But not like this.

"What? Amazon is great! I used to poop in a bag, but
now they grudgingly allowed us bathroom breaks."

-some Amazon employee

Today in clown pants:

Yeah, but can a robot have stage 9 cancer? I ask because, as you may have read, The President tweeted:

Yeah, I know it's not a tweet, but he posted it on Truth Social
and tweets on that are called truths and I won't call them that.
Hey, they should call them "nutties." 

Above: President Joe Biden, evidently.

Well, ok, to be clear he reposted this from some other nutter. Here, it's hard to read so:

"There is no #JoeBiden - executed in 2020. #Biden clones doubles & robotic engineered soulless mindless entities are what you see. >#Democrats dont know the difference. #Steel #ussteel #MAGA #MAHA..." 

-some nutter the President is platforming

Anyway, I have some issues with this. For one thing, executed by whom? And when in 2020? Did a dead guy beat Trump? Or did a dead guy's clone double/robot beat him? Because that's even more embarrassing than crowing over a narrow election win, and calling it a landslide and a mandate when you didn't even get a plurality. 

Even more embarrassing than that time in Pennsylvania,
when he rambled about Elon rigging the voting machines.

Remember that time he sicced
a violent mob on the Capitol?
Oh, wait, sorry, that was Trump.

Secondly, if there's no Joe Biden, whose cancer diagnosis did one of the President's handlers tweet perfunctory sympathy for? Oh, wait, is that why Trump is now saying:

"If you feel sorry for him, don't feel sorry, because he's vicious. What he did with his political opponent and all of the people that he hurt, he hurt a lot of people, Biden, so I really don't feel sorry for him."

-Trump, explaining why compassion is dumb

Pictured: this conspiracy theory.

So we shouldn't feel sympathy for a fellow human being facing a serious medical crisis, he's already dead, and it's actually the robot clone who has cancer. Got it. Wait, but why would they, whoever they are, give a clone double or a robotic engineered soulless mindless entity, as the case may be, cancer? Speaking of, which is it? Clone or robot? These are two entirely different things, pick one. Even as conspiracy theories go, this one is pretty clown pants. And while we're on the subject, "theory" suggests that there's some interest in proving a supposition through empiricism, and these are the same people that harped on Obama's birth certificate, recommend bleach to cure COVID, and still say that the 2020 election was rigged, so that feels unlikely. 

So I guess that I'm saying is, shouldn't something like "Joe Biden's a robot clone" trigger some kind of 25th Amendment situation? I'm not saying I want J.D. Popeslayer Vance anywhere near the presidency, but I get the impression that he's just regular incompetent rather than rabid foam crazy incompetent. 

Pictured: the Vice President, seen here, spouting nonsense from his beard hole.