tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post4472513086965849420..comments2024-03-17T05:03:46.056-07:00Comments on xkcd sucks: Andy Rooney SucksCarlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01074589998141327538noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-89860891646148172692010-03-28T02:40:10.599-07:002010-03-28T02:40:10.599-07:00First he complains that a 38% fat reduction isn...First he complains that a 38% fat reduction isn't enough to make the milk reduced. Then he whines about the grammar of "skim milk." Then he grouches that his FATFREE half-and-half isn't actually half-and-half. No shit? And it does have something to do with something as good as milk? Look at the first two ingredients, "nonfat milk, milk." And do you know why they call it "whole milk?" Because they want to make it clear that it's not any other kind of milk, the same reason you called it "3.2 percent."<br /><br />Dammit, Rooney.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-81369466999288294562008-07-27T19:52:00.000-07:002008-07-27T19:52:00.000-07:00While I don't think your theory-of-andy-rooney-as-...While I don't think your theory-of-andy-rooney-as-intentional-satire is correct, it is something I am going to have to think about. If I imagine him as trying to be as cranky as possible, it might be entertaining. Maybe if I imagine John McCain's face superimposed over Mr. Rooney.<BR/><BR/>I do think 60 minutes does very good journalism otherwise (at least compared to other things on television) so I won't complain too much but, yeah, you do wonder if the people who introduce him are going "god, gotta do the andy rooney shit again, when is he going to just die already."<BR/><BR/>Today's segment was very similar to the milk one - he was complaining about funny chemicals in his food that he didn't recognize. "Why does this jello say 'lemon flavor' when it's really chemical flavor? Why, there's no lemon in it at all!" THANKS ANDY. YOU'RE STUPID. Why can he not accept that some chemicals are very important for food and just because they have long names doesn't make them Shady.Carlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01074589998141327538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-26169902653342697782008-07-27T16:06:00.000-07:002008-07-27T16:06:00.000-07:00Part of me wants to believe that segment was a sub...Part of me wants to believe that segment was a subtle performance art piece satirizing people who are nostalgic for a time that never really existed. And maybe that, along with what remains of his legacy and journalistic credibility, is why segments like that are still on the air. It also stands to mention that an old man ranting about how things were different in his day, yes they were, fills up a good three minutes or so of air time? But honestly, what's the point of that? If they wanted to go for it, 60 minutes could have done some actual journalism and scrapped together a piece on the reasons why there are so many brands and types of milk at the supermarket, why packaging is so flashy, why preservatives are key ingredients, and why typical dairy farms have given way to postindustrial factory farms. But instead of an expose of how capitalism and mass-production has influenced the foods that we think of as simple and untouched, they present an old man's ramblings as an editorial piece. Just look at the anchor introducing it and her self-indulgent smile of "isn't he just adorable? We let him do that because it makes him feel special." This is the kind of thing you see in small town newspapers next to an article on the success of the church car wash, not national news.<BR/>P.S. - Carl, I enjoy the blog. And pardon my verbosity, I just hate this sort of bullshit filler that is done precisely because it's easier than doing research and actually trying to educate the populace. But I like the site, as I do your normal dealins'.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com