The Shocking Fates of Beloved Cartoon Mascots

Mine may have been the first truly homogenous generation, though it represented a trend that had been underway for decades before.  We all grew up eating at the same restaurants, playing with the same toys, watching the same programs and eating the same neon sugar cereals.  So multitudinous are our cultural icons that Seth McFarlane has made a career out of randomly referencing them.

Hey look, it's that town everybody from the 80s, 90s or the
2000s grew up in... except with mountains.

Among the more memorable figures in the generational collective of my youth were the cartoon characters that interrupted other cartoon characters to remind us to brush our teeth, entice us to beg our parents for more stuff or remind us which cereal stays crunchy in milk.  I speak, of course, of the cartoon mascots.

Many are exemplary members of the cartoon community.  Charlie the Tuna is personally credited with saving the lives of millions of dolphins by tasting better than dolphin.  The owl from the old Tootsie Roll Commercials went on to do ground breaking works in nano-engineering.  The Toilet Duck is a noted philanthropist and courageously swam several stranded people to safety during Hurricane Katrina.

But there are some cartoon mascots that have followed the darker road, hapless victims to the pitfalls of their fame.  These are their stories…

 #1) The Noid 

Spoiler Alert: He's no more mentally stable than he looks.

After a short lived and forgettable career on Broadway, the Noid followed a traveling show west and earned a paltry living showing off his freakishly elongated ears.  He described this as the lowest point in his life and was rarely seen without a bottle clutched to his chest.

After more than a year of what friends described as “suicidal alcoholism” he caught a break.  He wandered into an audition thinking it was a bar and when the casting agent refused to give him a beer on credit he became irate and threw one of history’s most successful temper tantrums.

The casting agent loved his energy as did the representative from Domino’s Pizza that was present that afternoon.  Since he clearly lacked the sobriety necessary to realize he’d just been given a high paying job, his new agent was careful to write the pertinent information in reverse on his forehead.

What followed was more than a decade of troubled success.  His drinking persisted despite his newfound fortune and fame and, like many famous people from Detroit, he eventually got busted with enough cocaine to, as the arresting officer put it, “speed up the rotation of the earth”.

His lawyer unsuccessfully challenged the alleged street value of the contraband by arguing that he didn’t make the delivery in 30 minutes and thus it was free.  The judge dismissed the motion and eventually the Noid pled guilty and was sentenced to 13 years in prison.  He will be up for parole in 2016

 #2) Boo Berry 

Boo Berry spent much of his career far from the spotlight often lost in the shadow of tabloid favorites Count Chocula and Frankenberry.  His relative translucence did not aid in his quest for fame nor did the fact that Boo Berry cereal pretty much just sucks.

Is it just me or could he totally be the
ghost of Buster Keaton?  Porkpie hat,
deadpan expression... think about it...

Publicly he joked about his relative anonymity but friends reported that he was deeply angered by the way that the press overlooked him.  This frustration, common amongst ghosts, became an increasing part of his private life until it all but consumed him.  The cartoon world was rocked when allegations arose that he tried to hire a hit man to take out Chocula but those reports were later retracted when a grand jury declined to indict.

Eventually Boo Berry would marry and this seemed to largely tame him.  He grew complacent with his position in the trio and even began spending some of his time working in homeless shelters and lending his celebrity to a number of causes.  As Frank and the Count’s philandering ways fell out of favor with the press Boo Berry’s image became all the more sparkling in contrast.

That image would come crashing down in a single rendezvous with a lovely young Parisian ghost who performed a risqué act under the pseudonym “Misty”.  Boo likely would have escaped from the affair unscathed had it not been for an unfortunate taping of the program Ghost Hunters, which caught the two together in a haunted house in Northeastern New Hampshire.

 #3) Joe Camel 

I know, I know, you know about the cancer.  And how could you not?  As a shill for the RJ Reynolds Company for more than ten years, Joe Camel consistently smoked as many as eight packs of cigarettes a day.  Despite his unrivalled success, even the best medical coverage money can buy could not save him from the inevitable.

But it is the strange turn that his life took after the terminal diagnosis that makes his story so worth telling.  In 1997 RJ Reynolds was ordered to drop him from their advertising since cartoons appeal to children and teenagers.  In the spirit of the ruling, RJ Reynolds switched to a much less youth-oriented advertising theme that included retro swirls of bright colors and “collector” packages since grown ups like to collect stuff so much.

Joe rightly felt used by the corporation that had given him cancer and rather than suffer in silent rage, he fought back against the company that he represented.  He organized a number of rallies and testified about the dangers of second hand smoke in front of cartoon-congress (like real congress with less expletives and more anvils).

Before his death, his path would take a more sinister turn and when he eventually gave in to his impending fate he did so in a prison awaiting trial for charges of environmental terrorism.  While no conviction ever came, he was strongly suspected in a number of ELF activities including a string of SUV bombing in Idaho between 2004 and 2005.

He was buried in his hometown of Enid, Oklahoma.  His tombstone reads, “Here lies Joe.  Six feet under and cooler than ever.”

 #4) The 7-Up Cool Spot 

Proof that someone was once paid to say "How
about a little red dot with shades?"

Few mascots have ever achieved the echelon of fame and notoriety that Cool Spot reached.  In only a few commercials this charismatic circle wowed the world and wooed the women with a wink and a winning smile.  Within a few months Cool Spot had secured parts in the ads for his entire entourage and 7-Up happily paid the exorbitant salaries Cool Spot demanded without complaint.

Cool Spot truly was a marvel of the advertising world.  Long after everybody had given up on the California Raisin “anything is cool if it’s wearing sunglasses” advertising paradigm, 7-Up took a chance on an underweight farm boy with slick moves and an innocent look.  The results were astounding. 

Before long Cool Spot merchandise was outselling the beverage he peddled.  He starred in countless commercials and even had his own video game series.  His live shows drew audiences in the tens of thousands.  He became the hero of damn near anything with a circumference.  But as anyone who has ever watched a biographical film about anyone who did anything knows, what goes up must come down.  Preferably in the third act and in such a way as to garner the lead actor an Oscar nod.

Cool Spot expertly navigated many of the hazards of the rock star life.  He was a notorious womanizer but even many of his more public conquests spoke well of him long after they separated.  His public escapades with Madonna got a lot of play in the tabloids but nothing rose to the level of a real scandal.

In 1997 Cool Spot shocked the world by refusing to renew his 7-Up contract citing artistic differences.  He foresaw a future beyond television commercials and convinced himself that he could achieve fame in the movies.

He was applauded in his ’98 debut as the beeper light in the Coen Brother’s Big Lebowski, but he found little work over the next few years.  He began slowly gaining weight and losing his 360-degree figure and Hollywood had little use for ovals.  Critics lambasted his portrayal of Arnold Shwarzenegger’s robotic eye in Terminator 3: The Rise of the Machines, characterizing his performance as flamboyant and self-indulgent.

In 2004 he gave up on his film career altogether and returned to the world of advertising once more.  He was far too big to go back to his role as the 7-Up spot but it 2005 his rotund figure and willingness to have the word “easy” tattooed across his chest landed him a successful job with Staples that he continues to this day.

Aaron Davies

www.blognoscor.blogspot.com

For more random crap, subscribe to my blog by email.  There’s a button down there for it somewhere.  I didn’t realize that until the other day.  And if your friends have some free time, be sure to share this blog on Facebook and Twitter and (if you have the time and I’m just asking so feel free to say no) print out several copies and hand them out on street corners on your next day off.

What Year is it Again?

This afternoon I was listening to my favorite podcast, The Skeptic’s Guide to the Universe, when I heard something that bugged me.  As I sat thoroughly engulfed in the hybrid of intellect and irreverence that typifies the program, co-host and intrepid skeptical rogue Rebecca Watson mentioned something that I had encountered on a few blogs in the past week.  This was not the first time I’d heard it nor was it the first time that it bothered me.

I should begin by saying (in case this blog shows up in the Google alert she has on her name) that I adore Rebecca Watson and would normally speak no ill of her, but if I didn't amplify idiosyncratic irritants to absurd levels I would have no material for this blog at all.

The exchange that irked me today involved the consensus pronunciation of the present year.  The conversation in question began when unrealistically knowledgeable host and Dr. Steven Novella referred to this annual cycle as “Two thousand eleven.”  Rebecca took tongue in cheek exception to that phrasing and did so with the preamble “Not to be pedantic, but…”

Before delving into the details of the objection, I should take a moment to point out that it is an immutable law of conversation that the words "not to be pedantic but" can only be followed by an extraordinarily pedantic statement.  In fact, the word pedantic is somewhat pedantic by itself.

But the fact that the word pedantic is pedantic is just one of the pet peeves that I file away with the persistence of the word ‘utilize’ in a language that already has ‘use’.  It was the statement that followed, which echoed many others I’ve seen across the blogosphere that irritated me.

“This has been discussed and the internet has decided that its ‘twenty eleven’, not ‘two thousand eleven’”, Rebecca said, or more accurately, I paraphrased rather than taking the forty-six seconds I would need to replay and transcribe the exchange verbatim.

This was not my first encounter with this particular linguistic rift.  A quick Googling of “twenty eleven or two thousand eleven” will connect you with dozens of heated blog exchanges on the same subject.  Based on brief and lackluster research, the majority online view seems to be in the “twenty eleven” camp and they make a strong logical case for their position.  Their preferred articulation saves the speaker a full syllable and is more keeping with tradition.  After all, nobody outside a medieval proclamation or papal bull ever referred to the year as “one thousand some hundred and something”.

Despite the preponderance of logic being allied against them, there are staunch supporters on the “two thousand eleven” side of the rampart as well.  While their argument stems more from an aesthetic viewpoint, they also point out that the tradition thus far in the millennium is to leave the two thousand in.  They also emphasize the fact that legendary director Stanley Kubrik already decided on this when he did "2010" and reportedly felt that 'twenty ten' sounded stupid.

While this battle continues to rage from one mother’s basement to another, the rest of us carry on largely calling the year “two thousand eleven”.  I will be the first to confess its unscientific nature, but in an informal poll of every single person I encountered today when I asked what year it was, they called it “two thousand eleven”.  Admittedly, this came after a long pause while they tried to decide whether I was setting them up for a joke or had been sent back to kill John Conner.

And this is why the whole kerfuffle digs its way so deep under my hypersensitive cultural skin.  Any attempt to impose sanity on the English language is a direct rebellion against everything that our language stands for.  Sure, it makes more logical sense to call it 'twenty eleven', but since when does logic dictate language?  English proudly displays its slapdash and indiscriminate irrationality.  Let me point to exhibit A, the fact that inflammable, indecent and interior can’t agree on the meaning of their shared prefix.  In fact, it is this internal inconsistency that gives nit-picking speakers like myself so many great opportunities for pedantry.

Language is a living thing and thus it is subject to the same random mutations and pressures of natural selection as any other organism.  Evolution does not organize us in a manner that is sensible, but rather in a manner that is minimally effective.  Despite the best efforts of dictionaries, logophiles and red-pen wielding English teachers, culture always finds a way to mold the dialect in whatever muddled direction it chooses.  Those doctrinaire stalwarts who stand against the anarchic tsunami of colloquial preference are doomed to drown as soon as they open their mouths to point out that data is plural.

So to those who would say that we should call it “twenty eleven” because that’s quicker, I ask why we don’t call it “twenty one-one” and save one more syllable?  To those who would point out that we already accepted breaking the year up into two double-digit numbers and did so without incident for a thousand years, I remind them that for the vast majority of that time we were also illiterate and only bathed biannually.

Clearly it doesn't matter how one chooses to pronounce the year.  Both phrasings are equally valid and if anyone tries to 'correct' me, I'll start referring to the year in binary (00001011111).  It is futile to pretend that logic can be imposed on our temporal nomenclature, especially while we're still using the Gregorian Calendar.

I expect that this debate will continue with its sub-auditory background buzz of irate nerdiness until the year 2020 when it will be universally accepted that “twenty-twenty” sounds cooler than “two thousand twenty”.  Until then I foresee the popular preference remaining too ambiguous to pin down.

In a sense, it seems like a premature battle to begin with.  We still haven’t collectively decided what we’re calling the previous decade.  Somebody needs to do that quickly too, because I’m already getting sick of referring to the music of the last ten years as the “aught sound”.

Aaron Davies

www.blognoscor.blogspot.com

PS The eight weeks after Christmas are utterly insane in the toy industry and as my income is derived from said industry I’ve been unable to regularly update my blog so far this year.  I apologize to my regular readers for the infrequency of my updates and I assure you all that by late February the insanity will start to attenuate and I can be back on here to perpetuate my unique brand of exasperated verbosity more often.

The 10 Most Quotable Movies Of All Time*

*That were in English

Brevity is said to be the soul of wit, though in the modern day quoting a famous movie is an acceptable substitute.  While the dry and predictable rehashing of classic lines of cinema rarely has humor value in and of itself, it has become standard fair to ignore this fact and treat movie quotes as though they represent novel jokes.  (It should be noted that a well-placed quote dropped into a drunken conversation at precisely the right moment to infer an immoral and physically challenging sexual act is a glaring exception to the rule stated above.)

Despite the increasing popularity of randomly presenting movie quotes in lieu of conversation, few have made any real effort to master this art.  A properly timed and well-placed movie quote can be the height of wit or the lowest failure of humor.  The first step to mastering the art of quoting is to familiarize oneself with a few of Hollywood’s ripest selections for broadly applicable witticisms.

 #10) Dazed & Confused 

Released in: 1993

Directed By: Richard Linklater

Quoted by: People slightly too old for Kevin Smith movies.

Best Quote: “That's what I love about these high school girls, man. I get older, they stay the same age.”

Where You’ll Hear it Quoted: Amongst alternatively medicated people with sub-clinical glaucoma, college dorms.

This early nineties exploration of the late seventies helped to launch the careers of sub par actors Matthew McConaughey and Ben Affleck.  The film was largely a plotless meandering through all the various clichés of a coming of age movie.  Strangely, Linklater’s willingness to abandon the burden of story actually worked, allowing the film to truly evoke the feeling of a random night out with friends.

 #9) Animal House 

Released in: 1978

Directed by: John Landis

Quoted by: People slightly too old for Dazed & Confused.

Best Quote: “Mom, Dad, this is Larry Kroger, the boy who molested me last month. We have to get married.”

Where You’ll Hear it Quoted: Among people who used to own a Beta-Max, college dorms.

Animal House is a film with charming simplicity that hides the genre-defining skeleton underneath it quite well.  There aren’t many scenes in the movie that can be pointed to that demonstrate its unforgettable nature.  However, if you take it as a whole the movie captures an audience in a unique way that directors like Linklater and the Farrelly Brothers have made a career out of trying to recapture.

There is a simple majesty about Animal House that almost transcends sheer puerilism, but Landis is careful never to take the movie too seriously.  I can’t help but imagine that he was as surprised as anyone when he set out to make a 109 minute fart joke and accidentally made a work of art. 

 #8) Pulp Fiction 

Released in: 1994

Directed by: Quentin Tarantino

Quoted by: White people who like talking like Samuel L. Jackson.

Best Quote: “I’m sorry, did I break your concentration?”

The echoing effect of Tarantino’s masterpiece can be felt in several genres of film.  The movie serves as a tutorial on the creative use of chronology.  It teases the viewer hours of unseen back-story every time a new element is introduced.  It is peopled with unforgettable characters and unpredictable plot twists.

Despite the forward thinking technical elements of the movie, it is the dialogue that makes Pulp Fiction truly unforgettable.  Tarantino imbues his lines with a certain poetic reality that is exemplified by his brilliant eye for casting.  The more religious among us might be rightly disturbed by the percentage of the populace whose only real knowledge of the bible comes from Jules Winfield’s recitation of Ezekiel 25:17.

 #7) Caddy Shack 

Released in: 1980

Directed by: Harold Ramis

Quoted by: People who comprehend just how bad the present cast of Saturday Night Live is.

Best Quote: “You’re a lot of woman, you know that?  Hey, you wanna make $14 the hard way?”

Honorable Mention for Best Quote: “Na-na-na-na-na-na-na”

Where You’ll Hear it Quoted: In any barroom where competition is taking place, college dorms.

Lest I allow this blog to become nothing more than a list of the defining moments in sophomoric humor, I submit Caddy Shack as the last movie in that genre that will appear on this inventory.  This film is considered by many to be the best thing that ever came of putting a bunch of really funny people together with a loose script. 

I’ve already spent too many adjectives trying to make Animal House seem like a cinematic masterpiece so I won’t further abase my credibility by doing the same for Caddy Shack.  No movie that contains a turd-in-the-pool joke should be presented as a high water mark.  That being said, Caddy Shack is still a movie where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.  The comic genius of Chevy Chase, Rodney Dangerfield and Bill Murray lend the movie a sense of timelessness and ensure that inspired discourse like “Gunga, gunga, lagunga” will live in perpetuity.

 #6) Jaws 

Released in: 1975

Directed by: Steven Something-or-Another

Quoted by: People who are going to need a bigger boat.

Best Quote: “Duh-nuh.”

Where You’ll Hear it Quoted: On beaches ad nauseam, college dorms.

Jaws is often called the first summer blockbuster and there is little doubt that it forced Hollywood to question the long held assumptions about what the public wanted from their movies.  In many ways it set down a formula that is still in wide use to this day.

While Jaws only offers a few popular quotes, the sheer longevity of the films appeal earns it a high spot on this list.  Those of us who grew up with Jaws were largely aware of the quotes long before we saw the film.  The memorable nature of the lines is even more impressive when one considers that the script was largely being written as they filmed.

 #5) The Princess Bride 

Released in: 1987

Directed by: Rob Reiner

Quoted by: People engaged in anything resembling swordplay.

Best Quote: “Hello, my name Is Inigo Montoya.  You killed my father.  Prepare to die.”

Where You’ll Hear it Quoted: Renaissance fairs, college dorms.

This fairy tale classic has a tendency to sneak into a high position on just about every “best of” list I assemble for films.  Perhaps the only thing that wasn’t monumental or unforgettable about this movie is the soundtrack, though interestingly the soundtrack was the only element that caught the attention of the academy come Oscar time.

The script is an almost nonstop list of clever conversations and unforgettable utterances.  From Westley and Inigo’s swordplay banter to Fezzik’s impromptu rhymes to any of a half-dozen spectacular cameos, the Princess Bride is all but the definition of a quotable movie. 

 #4) Wizard of Oz 

Released in: 1939 if you can believe that.

Directed by: Victor Fleming, et al.

Quoted by: Fans of Wizard of Oz.

Best Quote: “I'll get you, my pretty, and your little dog, too!”

Where You’ll Hear it Quoted: Where you least expect it, college dorms.

The Wizard of Oz is arguably the most enduring work of art ever captured on celluloid.  The continuing popularity it finds in television rebroadcasts and the persistent urban legends about it lining up with various rock albums are a real testament to the visceral appeal of Baum’s allegorical masterwork.

Wizard of Oz earns its place on this list through the force of sheer ubiquity.  It is one of the few works that can be quoted in virtually any English speaking audience without losing anyone.  One can reasonably assume that a person who responds to “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain” with a blank stare is at least partially lobotomized.

 #3) The Big Lebowski 

Released in: 1998

Directed by: Joel and Ethan Coen

Quoted by: Those of the utmost taste and sophistication

Best Quote: “The Dude abides.”

Honorable Mention for Best Quote: Every other line in the movie

Where You’ll Hear it Quoted: Wherever recognition of truly transcendent art is appreciated.

The Big Lebowski may be the current king of the cult following.  There are annual conventions all over the country where fans get together and spend entire weekends quoting excerpts from this film-noir classic.

The product of a pair of writer/directors who churn out works of genius more regularly than I change my oil, The Big Lebowski could almost get lost among their impressive filmography.  As good as the Coen brothers are at writing and directing, perhaps their most impressive skill is in casting and this is never clearer in any of their works than it is in The Big Lebowski.

The force of character present in even the bit roles in this film makes every minute memorable. John Turturro’s Jesus, Philip Seymour Hoffman’s Brandt, Buscemi’s seldom heard Donnie and David Huddleston’s Big Lebowski form the base of a pyramid atop which John Goodman sits in his career defining role.

 #2) Casablanca 

Released in: 1942

Directed by: Michael Curtiz

Quoted by: People who have never seen Casablanca.

Best Quote: “Here’s lookin’ at you, kid.”

Where You’ll Hear it Quoted: Among people too snobbish to quote the other movies on my list, college dorms.

While this list is certainly guilty of ignoring the vast swath of filmmaking from the dawn of the art form to my birth, no such list could claim credibility if it excluded Casablanca.  Some might think me guilty of trying to force-fit some refinement into a list of otherwise juvenile cinema and I suppose I’m not prepared to deny that entirely.

There is a solid case to be made for Casablanca’s inclusion as the second or even first movie on my list.  Timeless lines like “We’ll always have Paris”, “Of all the gin joints, in all the towns, in all the world…”, “I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship”, “Kiss me as if it were the last time”, “Round up the usual suspects” and “Play it again, Sam” (which is never actually uttered in the movie) are so omnipresent that even people who could not identify their source could probably recite them.

 #1) Monty Python and the Holy Grail 

Released in: 1975

Directed by: Terry Gilliam and Terry Jones

Quoted by: Virtually everyone who saw it.

Best Quote: Click Here

Where You’ll Hear it Quoted: Anywhere they allow geeks, college dorms.

No other movie could justifiably sit above this one in the pantheon of quotability.  A single well placed Holy Grail quote can easily cascade into hours of teary-eyed laughter as every scene in the movie is slowly revisited.  In preparation for this blog I presented the question of history’s most quotable movie on a number of Q&A sites and in every instance the consensus eventually swung to the Monty Python team’s magnum opus.

There are no lines in this movie that can’t be quoted for a laugh.  It is almost impossible to recall a single scene without quotes from a half dozen other scenes sneaking into the conversation.  Those unfortunate souls who neglected to watch this movie might find themselves lost among a sea of “I’m invincible!”, “At least let me go back and spank the peril”, “She turned me into a newt”, “Are you suggesting that coconuts migrate?” , “I feel happy!” and “Message for you, sir”. 

Bolstering the unrivaled comic irreverence captured by this legendary ensemble is the fact that things are just funnier in British accents.  If you doubt that I urge you to reread this blog in your best Cockney. 

Aaron Davies

www.blognoscor.blogspot.com

PS You almost forgot to post this blog on your Facebook page and share it with all your friends!  Good thing I reminded you.

A FAQ From the Bureau of International Guidance on Spiritual, Complimentary and Alternative Medicine

Spiritual, complimentary and alternative medicine (SCAM) has been growing in popularity in the US and abroad for a number of years and the plethora of contradictory information on the subject has left many medical consumers in need of clear answers.  It is with this in mind that we present the following answers to question frequently asked about SCAM treatments.

What are Spiritual, Complimentary and Alternative Medicines?

The term SCAM is a broad umbrella that covers a number of modalities including herbalism, faith healing, reiki, acupuncture, straight chiropractic, therapeutic touch, homeopathy, magnetic therapies and other types of treatment that fall outside the traditional narrow view of science.

How does SCAM differ from traditional science based medicine?

Science based medicine hinges on very narrowly defining terms like “wellness”, “health” and “treatment”.  In SCAM treatments, we accept a far broader definition and thus things need not “work empirically” before they can be utilized by SCAM practitioners.

This allows SCAM doctors to use treatments far earlier instead of waiting for all the data to come in and neglecting the health of our patients while a scientific consensus on efficacy slowly forms.  Science takes time and the needs of our patients are too great to sacrifice their vital time on things like continuing research or well designed trials.

Do Regular Doctors use SCAM Treatments?

In a time of lower revenues and morals, more and more doctors have turned to SCAM treatments.  To this day, the entrenched medical community ridicules them when they open their minds to these treatments that have been known the world over for thousands of years.

Where do SCAM Treatments Come From?

They’ve been known the world over for thousands of years.  Try to keep up here.

SCAM treatments come from a variety of sources including ancient Eastern medicine, pagan philosophy, traditional Druidic notions of herbal magick, early Christian practices and the knowledge of aboriginals that have lived with Mother Nature as their only pharmacy for generations.

But Didn’t Those People Have Substantially Shorter Lives Than People Treated With Science Based Medicine?

While it is true that many of the modalities used by SCAM artists today have their roots in nations and cultures that lacked our current state of physical fitness and longevity, they were also cultures that lacked the numerous conveniences we now have.  We are not healthier now because of evidence based medicine, but rather because all of our modern conveniences have saved us the wear and tear on our bodies that people from more traditional cultures take for granted.

So We Shouldn’t Use Their Technology But We Should Use Their Medicine?

Science doesn’t know everything about the human body.  There is a spiritual force that animates the human form that some call the soul (others might refer to it as Chi, Ki, Prana or Innate Intelligence) and the balance of this life force is essential to proper health.  Many SCAM treatments rely heavily on detoxifying the body to bring this force into proper alignment.

Science, on the other hand, does not even recognize the existence of this fundamental force just because they can’t measure it with their instruments.  This means that by necessity anything the scientists say about medicine will be limited by the fundamental limitations of their models about human health.

But If Scientists Can’t Detect It, How Can SCAM Doctors Detect It?

They can’t.  It’s undetectable.

Then How Can They Tell If It’s Out of Alignment?

They determine this from any number of SCAM methods.  The actual method of determining it will vary depending on which SCAM you use.  While no physiological test exists to “rate” the spiritual force, the results of the SCAM treatments are plenty of indication that these modalities work.

Are There Valid Studies That Show That SCAM Treatments Work?

Well, there is an answer to that question and it’s a very good question and thus it deserves a very good answer.  I will here upon answer that question.  Right here in this very next sentence.  Unless… is there maybe a “pass” option?

No.

Okay, so I admit that no well designed scientific study has ever shown any of these SCAM treatments to be even remedially effective and the current understanding of science doesn’t even consider them remotely plausible.  But in many ways, this lack of evidence is proof that SCAM treatments are worthwhile.

Why Are You Sweating?

It’s not warm in here to you?  Anyway, like I way saying, no well designed study has shown these treatments to be effective which is why they’re not “science based” medicines.  But many of the modalities like faith healing cannot be adequately tested in a laboratory setting.

You see, there are so many variables in things like faith healing, therapeutic touch, acupuncture and the like that it is almost impossible to remove all the variables to conduct a proper and useful test.  In other words, you can’t make sure that every person gets the same amount of prayer.

But If They Can’t Be Controlled In a Lab, How Can They Be Controlled by a SCAM Doctor?

Skilled Spiritual, Complimentary and Alternative Medical practitioners are very good at measuring the results of treatments and adjusting them on the fly as your treatment progresses.

You Just Said The Life-Force Thing Can’t Be Measured.

Please frame that in the form of a question.

Didn’t You Just Say That The Life Force Thing Can’t Be Measured?

The “innate energy” or “chi” in your body can’t be directly measured, but it can be measured by the actual changes in your physical health.  They use... you know, techniques and stuff.  And it definitely works.  We can't exactly "prove" that, like I said, but look at how innocent I look in these glasses.

Besides, the problem with trying these types of measurements in a lab is that when you do they show that the SCAM treatments are ineffective so there must be something wrong with the lab measurements.

Couldn’t That Just Mean That Aboriginals Didn’t Have Good Medicine?

No.  Sufficient anecdotal evidence exists to convince a large portion of the populace that such treatments are effective.  These people have money and they really want to give it to us whether or not the treatment can be shown to work.

How Is That Even Legal?

Freedom of choice, baby.  Get used to it.  Who are you to tell people that they can’t spend their money on treatments that are ineffective and potentially dangerous?  Who are you to shut down places where people go to put off getting meaningful medical intervention?  These people have a right to make up their own minds about what does and doesn’t work in their own quest to achieve spiritual and physical wellness.

How Is That Different Than Saying Mugging Victims Have The Right To Get Stabbed?

It’s way different, that’s how.  Why are you all up in my face like that?

How Do You Even Sleep At Night?

What do you mean?

You Take Money From Sick People and Offer Nothing in Return Except False Hope and Cobwebs in the Wallet.  Do You Drink Puppy Blood as well?

You can actually drink puppy blood without hurting the dog all that bad, but that’s beside the point.  The point is that the medical industry is a rampaging monopoly that continues to thrive by getting you sick and keeping you there.  The community of Spiritual, Complimentary and Alternative Medical practitioners are stepping outside of the mold and offering something new.

But Aren’t You the Ones Selling Cures That Don’t Work?

Cures not proven to work.  Being effective and being proven effective are different things.

Is That Really Your Answer?

It’s the best I can come up with on the spot.  Listen, I just remembered that I have a thing.  Can we do this some other time?

This is a FAQ, you Jackass.  You Can’t Leave in the Middle of a FAQ!

I know, but I didn't know you were gonna be asking such tough questions.  And also I’ve got this thing.  I forgot about it until just now.  But seriously, it’s been fun.  Take care.  Hope to see you around.

…Jerk


Aaron Davies
www.blognoscor.blogspot.com

What Would Michael Vick Do?

The Most Valuable Parolee is off the field for the rest of the postseason and it couldn’t come a minute too soon for the politically minded execs in the NFL’s home office.  No doubt the readiness with which football fans embraced the felonious psychopath was something of an embarrassment to all of them and I’m sure that Commissioner Roger Goodell had an easier night of sleep now that the Vick-related conversations can die down for another season.

Here, Vick is shown being not punished.

Since taking over in 2006, Goodell has made it his personal mission to stem the tide of thuggery that has plagued the NFL’s public image for years.  The problem seems to have grown worse despite his habit of heavy-handed fines for players that are unfortunate enough to be near bad things happening.  Despite this clear and vocal focus, the last few years have seen a continuation of the violent and anti-social behavior we’ve come to expect from our footballers.  From fights in strip clubs to bicoastal rape allegations to accidental self-inflicted bullet wounds (not to mention the crime of wearing sweatpants to a nightclub), the superstars of the NFL have not disappointed.

But sitting high atop the pyramid of shame is one Michael Vick.  Even before the details of his dog-fighting ring were uncovered, he had earned a reputation for criminality.  Only weeks before that horrible revelation he was being excoriated in the media for trying to take a water bottle with a false bottom filled with marijuana through an airport security line.  This was quite a controversy at the time but it almost seems quaint when we think about him telling the story to his friends while they stood around a bathtub drowning their dogs.

Now, I’ve made a few jokes on this blog at Michael Vick’s expense and have been faulted for “making light” of his crimes.  I don’t see that as a valid criticism.  If anyone is making light of his crimes, the fault lies with the jackasses at the league office that allowed him to keep his job as one of the elite QBs in the NFL.  It’s worth mentioning that the Papa John’s I managed in my youth would not have rehired someone after such an egregious offense.  That means that the pizza delivery business has a higher ethical standard than the NFL.

In a sense I suppose this is warranted.  After all, pizza guys have to drive cars on roads with other people.  The people that Michael Vick comes into contact with on a football field are padded up and prepared for violence.  Judging by the vigor with which they hit him, many of them may also be dog lovers.  One could make the argument that a job as an NFL QB doesn’t actually require any kind of character or semblance of moral fiber.  Hell, Vick’s little brother actually stomped cleats first on a fallen opponent during his college career and managed to land a short-lived NFL career despite it.  Albert Haynesworth once eviscerated a rhino with his bare hands and then beat a baby seal to death with the innards (that is only a rumor but if you know much about Albert Haynesworth, you know it’s more likely to be true than untrue).

But the problem is that the job of a QB is more than throwing a ball downfield or keeping an eye on the play clock.  When I was a kid, football players were my heroes.  When I watched my heroes (Joe Montana, Barry Sanders, Dan Marino) off the field they were involved in charities, they were sending positive messages, they were humble and lawful and if any of them were offing their pets they were sensible enough to do so in secret.  They were the types of people parents could be proud to see their children emulating.

But what of Michael Vick’s little fans out there?  How many Philadelphia teens and adolescents are dying to “be like Mike” and how many of them are training to do so by whittling breaking sticks out of their #2 pencils and pitting their poodles against the neighbors Chihuahua?  (For the record, a breaking stick is a stick, often made of fiberglass, used to pry the teeth of one dog from the flesh of another.  That’s how despicable the “sport” of dog fighting is)  How many kids are asking themselves as they drop back from the line of scrimmage in their back yard two hand touch games, “What would Michael Vick do?”

Tucker Carlson recently got himself into hot water by suggesting that Michael Vick should have been executed for his crimes.  This marked a major turning point for humanity since it was the first time in recorded history that Tucker Carlson has ever been right about anything.  Of course, a backlash from the sports media left poor Tucker tucking his tail between his legs (something Vick would kill a dog for doing) and he apologized as fast as he could.  The media seemed almost united in the single voice of disapproval for Carlson’s “thoughtless” words.  Michael Vick had paid his debt to society as they saw it.  Besides, it’s not like he killed a human being.

And it’s not like he killed a human being.  First of all, killing a human being would imply that he only killed one thing.  The number of dogs that died at his hand is not known, but it is certainly greater than one.  And unlike a human being, a dog is completely dependent upon its owner and thus is even less able to defend itself against Vick’s homicidal fury.

Cruelty to animals is notoriously hard to define from one culture to another.  There are places in the world where dog-fighting is perfectly legal just as there are places in the world where bull-fighting is seen as something other than brutal, prolonged torture.  The demarcation between cruelty and criminality is all over the map from one culture to another and there is little consistency so it would be useless to try to gauge Vick’s actions against some moral absolute.  Even US laws are inconsistent since there are things that are perfectly legal that are every bit as cruel as pitting two dogs against one another (veal comes to mind).

So let us grant Vick the lowest possible moral barometer.  Let us discount the nation’s law and the overwhelming majority of the populace that look upon dog-fighting as an act of unforgivable evil.  Let us put him in the most sympathetic court imaginable; a group of dog-fighters.

I should pause here to state my own shameful credential to speak on this matter.  My sister’s ex-husband was an avid participant in this villainous and disgusting pastime and raised and sold pit bulls for fighting until his death.  I never attended the actual barbarity of a dogfight but I did see the aftermath on the faces and muscles of his dogs and I saw video of several fights presented by the proud and heartless owners.

Dog fighting is every bit as awful as you suspect.  A fight usually consists of several rounds, each of which begins when the owner drags the dogs to opposing corners and lets them loose.  Genetic predispositions take over and the two canines clash with primal fury, digging and tearing at one another with no regard to their own safety or even survival.  After a few minutes, the two owners will “break” the dogs apart and bring them back to their respective corners and start it over again.  The fight continues until one of the dogs “cur”, or turns away from the advancing opponent.  When one dog tries to flee, the fight is over and the other dog wins. 

It is standard within the dog-fighting community to kill a dog after it curs.  Though the more heartless and bloodthirsty dog fighters will actually allow the victorious dog to kill the loser, it is far more common for the owner to kill the losing dog afterwards.  This is little different from the fate of a race horse that loses or any number of other beasts of burden that have been used up by their owners.  While that doesn’t make it forgivable, in the most sympathetic court in the world, we have to grant to Vick that what he was doing wasn’t completely outside the norm within the field of dog fighting.

But even if you grant Vick this ridiculously friendly standard, he still fails to rise above it.  Even by the standard of other dog-fighting, dog-murdering depraved bastards, he is still unspeakably malicious.  Most dog fighters kill their curs out of a sense of cold-blooded utility.  They make money when the dogs win, they lose money when they lose and they don’t want to spend money feeding a dog that won’t win them money back.  As despicable as it is, at least there is an attempt at moral justification there that is internally consistent.

But Vick did not simply kill the dogs that lost.  According to the court documents, he and his friends brutally tortured many of them to death.  A simple bullet in the back of the head would have been sufficient if the goal was just to terminate the dog’s existence.  Vick and his cohorts beat them to death, electrocuted them, drowned them and hung them.  They went out of their way to find methods of execution that were both crueler and more difficult than they needed to be.  Even by the standard of other scumbags, Michael Vick is a scumbag.

And that brings us back to Tucker Carlson’s comments.  Even when he said Vick should be executed, he did not suggest that perhaps they slam him against the floor repeatedly until he was dead.  He didn’t suggest that they hang him from the neck for several minutes and then give up on that and drown him instead.  He didn’t suggest that we stick him in a gladiatorial death match with another athlete and then electrocute him to death when he loses.

It is my view that the most perfect moral justice in the world would be achieved if each person spent their afterlife being treated the way they treated their pets.  I would spend my eternity fat, lazy and neutered.  My neighbor would be condemned to forever wear silly sweaters.  My mother would be spoiled rotten and overfed.  My niece would be neglected and attention starved.

So while we seek to find the right standard for Michael Vick, why bother with all these externalities?  Why bother defining cruelty to animals or trying to decide what level of punishment would be appropriate?  Why not ask ourselves the same thing that hypothetical Philly teen asked himself in his hypothetical game of street ball?

What would Michael Vick do?

Well, the Packers won yesterday and Michael Vick sealed the loss by throwing a big interception during the two minute drive that might have saved the game.  We put him out in the ring and he turned.  Tucker Carlson was wrong.  We shouldn’t have executed Vick when Tucker suggested it.  After all, he was still winning at the time.

But now that he lost…

Aaron Davies

www.blognoscor.blogspot.com