Uberfluff

With today's Daily Fluff focusing on Sesame Street, it seems like a light kiddie theme is appropriate for the blog today.  So it is with a great big scoop of "Hmmmm," that I present the world's first Hello Kitty-themed hospital.  (In Taiwan, of course.  Thanks to K for the link.):

Because nothing says, 'Don't worry about the fact that your newborn is in the NICU,' like a cartoon cat with a giant head and no visible emotion.

Despite years of therapy, John was never able to explain the source of his fetish for dressing kittens in tiny dresses.

What's really amazing is that the catheter bags are shaped like little Hello Kitty heads too.

Honestly, I don't know what to say about the swine flu.  If it turns out to be nothing, then everyone will trust the media a little less (if possible), and we'll never know whether it wasn't a real threat to begin with or whether all of the panic helped curbed its spread.  If I dismiss it and it turns out to be serious, then I'll be the jackass who made light of a pandemic.  So instead, I'll focus on the semantics.

It seems that some people have issues with the "swine" designation.  Israel has taken to calling it "Mexican Flu" which has Mexico somewhat upset--and I'll agree with Mexico that the sudden switch seems a little harsh.   Generally speaking, people don't take it well when you substitute them in for pigs--as anyone who has ever thought it would be funny to oink at a police officer can tell you.  In addition, it seems like the US government, allegedly for reasons of clarity, has decided to call it H1N1 flu.  From a marketing standpoint, I think this is a terrible decision.  "H1N1" lacks the catchiness of "swine flu" and sounds more like a new software download than a potentially deadly illness.  I know that some people seem to be confused by the word "swine" and think you catch it from pigs or by eating pork or something.  But we can't name things based on how stupid the American public can manage to be when it puts its mind to it.  I know that the people at Smithfield Farms might not be thrilled with the swine designation, but if you want me to pay attention, you need to name your pandemic viruses like a Ford, not like a Lexus.

Today's Daily Fluff about Madonna reminded me that Madonna's much heralded adoption of a 3-year-old girl from Malawi ended up being denied by the Malawi courts.  Apparently, the girl's extended family wants to care for her and has been fighting the adoption despite the pressure put on them to give in and the promises that the girl would go off and become a doctor or lawyer, then return to Malawi to take care of them all.

Yeah, I'm sure.

Why the hell does Madonna keep trying to adopt Malawi children who have living parents/relatives to care for them?  It's not as though there aren't plenty of orphans around the world who don't.  The whole thing is incredibly weird and creepy, and sinks my opinion of Madonna even farther (if such a thing is possible).  I don't have any issue at all with adoption in general.  Unlike other people, I don't think Angelina Jolie is weird and crazy--well, at least not for reasons related to her many adopted children.  Madonna, however, gives the impression that every time she feels lonely or needs an image boost, she jets off to an impoverished region of Africa to pick out a new baby.

So yes, I'm glad that she got turned down.  I'm going to make the assumption that Madonna doesn't get a lot of people saying, "no" to her.  (This explains the horrible leotard phase she went through.)  Moreover, there probably aren't many things that happen that she can't buy her way out of.  This is one situation where I don't even feel bad about my Madonna schadenfreude.

Last night, on the Celebrity Apprentice (yes, I watch because evidently I'm a masochist), the teams had to put together some kind of product launch/presentation for a new video phone.  Since watching a catty "model" (whose main career accomplishment is the ability to open a suitcase on TV) attempt to manage a group of B-listers isn't exactly mentally taxing, I then had plenty of time to reflect on my issues with video phones.  Which mostly boils down to one thing:

People who make video phones do not understand women.

The last thing that I need in my life is to worry about how I look when I'm on the phone.  I like taking work calls in ratty pajamas.  I don't want to have to brush my hair before calling a colleague to ask about a deadline.  I don't need my mom to see the piles of dishes and laundry that tend to accumulate in my house.  And I don't want my boss to know that I'm playing solitaire while I listen to him repeat himself for the 25th time about something or other.  In other words--I don't want a video phone.  I have skype and a webcam--if I really need someone to be able to see my face, they can.  On my terms.  And don't even try to suggest that you'll have the option of turning off video for any of these calls.  Technically speaking, you might, but you know that everyone would be asking why you turned off the video, and it would turn into this big deal.  I mean, look at all the drama inherent in de-friending someone on Facebook.  And I can't even imagine the pressure of trying to date in a world of video phones.  It would probably turn me into a twitchy mess, sleeping with a tube of mascara clutched in my fist.

Personally, I blame the Jetsons.  I think the vid-phone people watched it as kids and thought, "Well, I can't make a machine that cooks dinner, but I can definitely invent a phone/television."  And they always try to sell it to us with the idea that we can share these touching moments--like our child's first steps--with distant loved ones via the phone.  I don't know about you, but very few of my phone calls have to do with major life milestones.  And anyway, I have something called a camera, which handles those very well, and with much less dialing and, "hold on--you're breaking up," involved.  The vast majority of my phone calls involve discussion of whether we should get pizza or Mexican for dinner, and frankly, I don't need to bring video images into that conversation.

So, in case you missed on Drudge and none of your friends are shamming at work today and sending You Tube links to everyone on their distribution list, this is the latest popular video of human folly and embarrassment--the woman who missed her flight at the Hong Kong airport.  It's a pretty prime tantrum.  (Apparently, they had just closed her flight, so the video begins when she makes a run at the closed jetway door.)

Sure, it's always entertaining to see an adult have a full-scale meltdown, but what I find most curoius about the video is that despite her wailing and throwing herself around, she is never swarmed by airport security.  Last time I took a flight somewhere, the security people were ready to send me to the gulag for improperly ziploc-bagging my teeny-tiny bath products.  But apparently, in Hong Kong (which, let's not forget, is now under the control of China--the repressive one that has been known to jail people for belonging to the Falun Gong), it's possible to throw yourself on the floor and cry, and all you get is one guy telling you to calm down.  And it makes me weirdly sad that you're more free to act like a crazy hysterical lady in Hong Kong than here in the U.S.  (Insert your own tired joke about terrorists winning here.)

Generally, I avoid anything remotely political here--not because I don't have political opinions, but because when you start putting them in your blog, you tend to attract commentors who write run-on sentences and long screeds without paragraph breaks railing against some evil or other and invoking tons of off-the-wall conspiracies.  (Seriously.  I once knew a guy who had some ridiculous theory involving George Soros and the heroin trade.  Sure hope he's not reading.)  I am, however, going to post about the riots and protests in mainland China because last I checked, I didn't notice the Chinese government pitching in and helping out around here anyway, so the hell with them.

Anyway, I was just reading that there was a riot in China yesterday and angry dragon dancers (and sympathetic crowds) clashed with police.  Apparently, the dancers were upset that the dragon dance was forbidden in certain areas this year for "security reasons."  I don't speak totalitarian, so I'm not sure what that's code for, but apparently people were not happy about this, and the dragon dancers went and dragon danced in the forbidden areas as a protest.

Now I should point out that I love dragon dances.  My cousin had one at her wedding, and it was highly cool.  (I should point out that we have some Asian heritage, so this wasn't some annoying let's-build-a-rainbow-coalition-of-ethnic-traditions wedding.  Alas, she also had a slide show of her life, which was considerably less cool.)  So I'm inclined to be biased to the dancers anyway, regardless of the political issues.  And it's terrible that people were hurt in the clash betweeen the dancers and the police.  With all that said, I think it would be great if more protestors could embrace the dragon dance thing.  Living near DC, it's almost commonplace to find your day disrupted by some group with handpainted signs and megaphones protesting this thing or that.  It ties up traffic something awful and drowns out your mp3 player (even when you turn the volume all the way up to "permanent damage").  How much better would it be if all of these protestors did dragon dances instead?  They could still chant slogans and stuff, but it would be like a Chinese New Year parade every time you ran into a protest.  And that would put me in such a better mood about being inconvenienced.  Instead of grumbling about the noise and delay, I'd applaud and then consider getting kung pao chicken for dinner.

Just something to think about.

OK, I've just about had enough of Somali pirates. First, why can't military ships just blow them out of the water and turn them into fish food (there is great reef life there)? I mean a Russian frigate versus a zodiac? Somalia has not had a functioning govt since 1991, so it's not as if we're violating foreign waters or nationals. It's just the opposite. Interfering with commerce = fish food.  That's what the French did to Greenpeace, and they didn't even have a rocket launcher!

MOGADISHU, Somalia - Russian and British forces repelled a pirate attack on a cargo ship in the first action by a Russian warship sent to fight hijackings off Somalia, the two nations said Wednesday.
Russian Navy spokesman Capt. Igor Dygalo said the Russian missile frigate Neustrashimy and the British frigate Cumberland each sent up a helicopter and foiled pirates trying to take over the Danish vessel.
"The pirates tried to hit the ship with automatic weapons fire and made several attempts to seize it," Dygalo said on state-run Vesti-24 television.