Whenever I get a package of plain M&Ms, I make it my duty to continue the strength and robustness of the candy as a species. To this end, I hold M&M duels.

Taking two candies between my thumb and forefinger, I apply pressure, squeezing them together until one of them cracks and splinters. That is the “loser,” and I eat the inferior one immediately. The winner gets to go another round.

I have found that, in general, the brown and red M&Ms are tougher, and the newer blue ones are genetically inferior. I have hypothesized that the blue M&Ms as a race cannot survive long in the intense theatre of competition that is the modern candy and snack-food world.

Occasionally I will get a mutation, a candy that is misshapen, or pointier, or flatter than the rest. Almost invariably this proves to be a weakness, but on very rare occasions it gives the candy extra strength. In this way, the species continues to adapt to its environment.

When I reach the end of the pack, I am left with one M&M, the strongest of the herd. Since it would make no sense to eat this one as well, I pack it neatly in an envelope and send it to M&M Mars, A Division of Mars, Inc., Hackettstown, NJ 17840-1503 U.S.A., along with a 3x5 card reading, “Please use this M&M for breeding purposes.”

This week they wrote back to thank me, and sent me a coupon for a free 1/2 pound bag of plain M&Ms.; I consider this “grant money.” I have set aside the weekend for a grand tournament. From a field of hundreds, we will discover the True Champion.

There can be only one.

With all that effort, why is it that the M&M, as a species, has been inferior in every way to Smarties? I suppose it’s because Smarties aren’t available in the US; the M&Ms haven’t had a real predator to deal with for quite some time.

That was the headline on a BBC news article.

Gay wins 100m race? Damn you, “conservative media”. The fact that someone is gay or not is completely irrelevent!

It’s attention-grabbing headlines like this that breed intolerance. First this headline, next month some highschool running coach is shouting to his students, “Come on all you heteros! Run like there’s a penis up your bum!”. It’s the only logical end to it.

But why is it that a headline like THAT is appropriate? “Jew wins swimming”, “Black Guy wins rowing event” - none of those headlines are appropriate!

Putting a headline like THIS out into the world is just plain irresponsible.

Oh… the man’s name is “Tyson Gay”… well… carry on then

No, wait, I CAN blame them for trying.

Headline pretty much says it all: Students Strangled Brothers in Hopes of Holiday

Can’t say much for that boarding school - at least with a school shooting it usually seems to be someone who gradually builds up to such a point that they explode in a violent outburst. This case sounds just so cold and calculating.

I choose to believe that the three simply didn’t understand death - didn’t realize that they were taking away another person’s life, and that that was the end of them; thought it was simply like stepping on a few ants or something - they only considered their goal; and that this was the only way to achieve it.

The alternative (that they completely understood and respected what they were going to do) is just plain scary.

…that means that someone did something so stupid that they committed suicide?

Maybe that whole concept’s not such a bad idea after all…

…Because the whole rest of the internet has posted on ‘em already… lol

A ”pocket shot” is a ziplock bag, filled with one of five different alcohols (essentially). They retail for $2.00 in the US, and are a big shot’s worth (50 mL - that’s 1.7 oz).

I gotta say… if I wanted booze on the go, I’d probably just buy a flask. I mean, there’s a certain “neato” factor to these things… but I doubt I’d do a straight shot of whisky on a whim; and if I’m going to be using it as part of a mixed drink, then I’m already lugging around the mixer (the orange juice, the coke, what have you) - I may as well lug around a small bottle of the alcohol I want to use.

I’d bet money this product will never be available in Canada. I bet if you went to a few dollar stores though you’d be able to find a cheapo “water bottle” that was essentially a plastic bag with a water bottle spout on it; giving you a very similar “go anywhere” ability.

There’s so many single-serving-packaged products out there nowadays… it’s not surprising that there’s a new alcoholic one on the block.

New reality TV show… The biggest hype-inducing feature of this one is that it’s got kids in it - aged from 8 to 15 years old.

It’s being pushed as a “grand experiment”, showing how kids can rise to the challange, and perhaps build a better tomorrow.

Or some shit like that (there’s a trailer on the site’s homepage, that seems to give the gist of how they’re selling it).

I think that’s bull - this is a show to put kids in a shitty situation, and watch ‘em squirm (just like every other reality TV show…). It starts to seem aparent that that’s what it really is about halfway through the video promo on the homepage - it opens up with, “A new breed of pioneers; small people, with big ideas”, and then they end up talking about a series of arbitrary classes, teams of some sort, and different challenges - all run by the producers.

I guess the thing that is most causing this knee-jerk reaction of mine is the draconian contract the parents signed:

The 22-page agreement leaves little room for parents to argue that they did not know what their children might encounter. As is standard in such agreements, the parents and the children agreed not to hold the producers and CBS responsible if their children died or were injured, if they received inadequate medical care, or if their housing was unsafe and caused injury.

But while such agreements might be standard for adult participants in a reality show, it also takes on a different tone when the minor and the parent are being held solely responsible for any “emotional distress, illness, sexually transmitted diseases, H.I.V. and pregnancy” that might occur if the child “chooses to enter into an intimate relationship of any nature with another participant or any other person.”

I mean, some of that will be standard CYA (Cover Your Ass) boilerplate, but still… they should’ve guaranteed safe housing and proper medical care.

There’s a good story from the New York Times (which was the source of that quote) that goes over some parts of the show. For now, there are concerns about child labour laws being broken (The kids were paid $5000 for their 40 days of work (nope, sorry, the kids were paid $5000 - they were NOT paid for their work. If they were paid for their work, they would be employees. Instead they did work… and they were paid. The two are, according to their contracts, not related). Those 40 days of work apparently included being expected to work at any time, for any length of time, in conditions that their contracts said could be unsafe.

Way to go CBS…

Also, this page of their site: http://www.cbs.com/primetime/kid_nation/bios/mallory/ makes my eyes do funny things. It’s impossible to read.

NYT article: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/23/arts/television/23kids.html?ex=1345521600&en;=61b3b1f90c8e6e8a&ei;=5088&partner;=rssnyt&emc;=rss

Wikipedia actually has a good summary of some of the controversy (that’s remarkably short, especially for wikipedia)