Honda has a new SUV out on the market (calling it new may be a matter of perspective, I just recently noticed it). You can check it out here. This is how I assume the meeting went at Honda headquarters when they brainstormed on this idea (the names have been changed to generic American names to protect the imaginary):
Bob, V.P. of Design: There are so many SUV?s on the market already, including our own CR-V ? we need to come up with one that is distinctive and will set us apart in the market, any ideas?
Fred, Head Designer: I know, let?s make a small, boxy and impractical one. It will have all the fuel consumption problems without the benefits of good storage capacity or even good looks. That?ll set us apart.
Bob: I like the way you?re thinking, but didn?t Pontiac already do that with their Aztec?
Fred: Sort of, but we?ll make it even smaller!
Bob: By God, Fred, that?s exactly what the public wants, let?s do it!
*********
I recently read about a scary phenomenon that is occurring in Japan these days: online suicide pacts. That country has to be the most neurotic in the world. Their suicide rate per capita is twice that of the United States and now there is this new fad. Apparently something like 18 deaths have occurred in Japan from young people meeting online at websites that are designed to introduce people to each other for the specific purpose of entering into a suicide pact. It is theorized that people in Japan have trouble with interpersonal relationships and cannot share personal feelings with each other, so they turn to the faceless relationships the web offers for release. This, in connection with the country?s mental health difficulty has combined into this new fad. It is really disturbing, but fascinating. You can read more about it here.
*******
Speaking of oriental people, I was sent this link a couple of days ago. It leads to some outstanding (read: unintentionally humorous) music by a woman called Wing. There are only short clips of her music online, but if you need to take a break and have a good hearty laugh, I highly recommend checking Wing out.
*****
Maybe it?s just me, but the whole web language thing is a little annoying. For example, I can?t stand when people use LOL in an e-mail or an instant message. If you are out of the loop, that stands for ?laughing out loud?. There is a guy I know that seems to be a relatively intelligent person, but he puts LOL in virtually every message, so I can?t stop imagining the guy laughing hysterically like a brainless moron all day in front of his computer. I know that it is supposed to be an indication that someone is just kidding, in case that can?t be inferred from the text alone, but instead I picture lobotomy patients writing e-mails.
***
So, Hillary Clinton ?wrote? another book (there is a reason I put the word wrote in quotes, check out Gregg Easterbrooke?s article here for a full explanation - a little more than halfway through the column - he rants about other things in the article as well). Is there really any reason to buy this book other than to read about Clinton?s sexual exploits from Hillary?s perspective? Honestly, does anyone give a shit about this woman?s take on the rest of Clinton?s presidency? Of course not. The publisher is even marketing the book like a tell-all from Hillary about what her relationship was like with Clinton and how his sexual exploits were revealed to her. This is sensationalism at its worst (best?). Is this really what we want from our public officials? Not to mention the fact that Hillary is making out like a bandit on this deal. So Clinton gets to blow on his intern?s dress, lie under oath about it, not really get in trouble for it, then his wife gets elected to the Senate and writes a book about it (while in office), and they get millions of dollars for it? Damn, I love this country.
*
Speaking of powerful women everyone hates, Martha Stewart was indicted recently (check out one of my past articles here for why I can?t stand Stewart). Now her defense is that the information she hid from the authorities didn?t show any wrongdoing on her part. That doesn?t make any sense, whatsoever. She gets investigated, changes information on her telephone logs before she gives it to the FBI (or whoever), they find out, but she says that the changed information didn?t prove anything anyway. Then why change it (that?s the obvious question, I know)? Furthermore, it doesn?t matter what the information was, she lied to the investigators and that is called Obstruction of Justice. Is there anyone on the planet that thinks this woman is not crooked? Please e-mail me your argument in her favor.