.jpg)
Not since "New Coke" has the junk food empire got it so wrong. The pretzel M&M's taste, and look, on the inside, like sawdust candy. Some comrades, and I had the misfortune of consuming this crap.
One is left with the dry taste of powdered wood chips, industrial glue, unconvincing flavorings, and a minor headache after eating this swell stuff.
The mafia vending machine company stuffed our junk food dispenser with tons of this roach motel fodder. That along with various brands of embalmed cookies.
Alright this mutation won't kill ya, probably, but it sure ain't the refreshing sugar rush you were looking for.
It's projected to be among the 10 'worst' Halloween candies for 2010. (...not counting the traditional apples embedded with razor sharp metal bits, candied meats, and Canadian pennies.)
These maniacs must have made billions of metric tons of this awful stuff, and intend to unload the lot on an unsuspecting public.
Beware you out in the world,..it's coming. Be afraid, be very afraid.
(Even their cute official spokes-digitoons have doubts about this evil marriage of unlikely ingredients.)
...I blame Obama.
4 comments:
"I blame Obama..."
Well, it's only fair. After all, you blame him for most other things.
You recently made an unfavourable comparison between Obama and Roosevelt. Unfortunately, Obama's hands are tied in a way that Roosevelt's were not. The US economy in the 1930s was big, but it was still largely self sufficient and had a strong production base. Huge chunks of US industry and real estate were not owned by foreign investors and governments. And Roosevelt didn't have to work with an existing welfare budget. We need radical action to get us out of the present mire, but the sort of radical measures available to Roosevelt are not available to Obama.
Some seriously sane economists have recently been floating the ancient idea of a wealth tax. A tax of 10% on the seriously wealthy (I don't mean middle class diners with an aversion to beans and frankfurters - I mean the tiny minority who own 90% of property) would fix the deficits of state and banks instantly.
The idea of a one-time tax on the wealthy is, of course, too radical - which is another way of say that everybody would be in favour of it except the tiny minority whose greed and rapacity have dug the pit in which we all now find ourselves.
A wealth tax smacks of Socialism and Communism and all those other Looney Left ideas such as welfare, healthcare, free education etc etc, which (as we know) are guaranteed to ruin the economy and poison the spirit of Democracy. Whereas the state in which we find ourselves presently does neither of these things...eh...
But who would support such an extreme idea? Well, maybe it would appeal to the radical Xtians...If you talk of 'tithe' instead of '10%'...You can imagine the slogan: 'Pay your tithe to Jesus and save Mankind!"
I'll write to Sarah Palin about it...
Sion is absolutely correct. Hit the really wealthy with a 10% wealth tax while calling it a tithe for Jesus. When I've gone to church, I have heard Unitarian ministers occasionally refer to Jesus, and he sounds more conservative and more reactionary than we Unitarians like in a religious leader, but if he can induce Sarah Palin to support funding for important social programs, then let's go for it.
I speak as a Christian.
You know, if those of the seriously wealthy who claim to be Christians were listening to the One they claim to worship and to the other New Testament writers, they would already be giving 10% and more to just exactly those needs. There would be no need to offend their "conservative" sensibilities by having government deal with those needs. They'd already be taken care of. So are they? Not by a long shot. Do they show any signs of beginning to do so? Not before pigs fly!
So, where do they come off refusing to let government do what they are supposed to be doing? If they won't, someone has to.
ed
Well, you might be interested in this place that claims to be the ultimate Bad Candy website:
href=http://www.bad-candy.com/
Post a Comment