Sphere: Related Content
Ah, but I only gave it a brief mention yesterday as I had completely forgotten that we're wrapping up The Year of the Inane. No, that's not a new Chinese Zodiac creature (The Inane - Similar to a macaw, but with more distinct features around its nether regions). Silly. Pointless. Unsubstantial. Shall I use it in a sentence? "This blog can be inane." Yes, I thought that might clear things up. Now to clear up what the heck I'm talking about, as how else would one cap off The Year of the Inane but with hundreds of thousands of dollars being shelled out to an unmarried, teenage couple, both of whom have not finished high school and who just had a child out of wedlock. (This story really is ridiculous, but I'll admit to playing it up a bit with the whole "out of wedlock" terminology there. I am not a fan of that phrase. First of all, it sounds a bit too much like "headlock", which you could end up with should you not choose wisely. But really, where/when else is it ever used? I've never said, "I'm going to see my two friends get joined in wedlock." Or "They've been in wedlock for about five years now." No, the word we use is married. Unless, apparently, you're knocked up. That's when you can your oven full of a bun are more than just "not married', you're "out of wedlock". As if you don't have enough problems as it is, being an expectant single mother and all, now you have to worry about the semantics of vocabulary to boot!)
But why, you ask? Why, oh, why is someone or something or some magazine shelling out hundreds of thousands of dollars to unmarried, under-educated, premarital fornicators? (Oh, my mistake. Unmarried, under-educated, premarital fornicators in love. There. Is that better for all of you optimists? Oh, wait, optimists don't read this blog. Cynics and realists do. Well, at least eight of 'em do. Carry on!) Because this isn't your average, ordinary, run-of-the-mill teenage girl that got preggo. This preggo is the daughter of the hot, hot governor of Alaska who was once trying to become the hot, hot Vice-President of the US as the running mate of old, old John McCain. I, of course, am speaking of hot, hot Sarah Palin and her daughter, Bristol, who would be one half of the fornicating duo of Bristol and Levi. Levi being Levi Johnston, the son of Sherry Johnston, the official OxyContin dealer for the state of Alaska.
Word on the street (that is, if "street" = "Internet"), is that a certain celebrity news magazine (whose name I won't reveal just yet, but I will throw a teaser out there and say that the name of the magazine rhymes with "Sheeple". Chew on that for a while!) is shelling out (brace yourself) $300,000 for the baby photos of little Tripp Easton Mitchell Johnston. (So in addition to Bristol and Levi, they now have Tripp and if you take the first initial from each name, you have BLT. I don't know what it means, but I'm sure it's provocative. And if it's not, well, at least I got to screw around with Photoshop for a while before I figured that out.) And I think that I can speak for all eight of you reading this right now when I say, "WTF?!"
According to The Scoop over there at MSNBC.com, "...bidding for the baby photos began at $100,000.
People Sheeple won out in the end, but In Touch was the only other weekly to make serious bids." (I only had one question after reading that. What the heck is "In Touch"? Sounds like a weekly circular for pedophiles.) They added that "...most estimates hover around the $300,000 range (none of the magazines would confirm the exact figure in the end, which is standard)." OK, so it's "standard" for the magazines to not confirm how large the ridiculous sum of money is that they are paying for pictures of a baby that probably looks like most other babies, because why now? Do the magazines think it will "look bad" if the public finds out that they're bidding, of all things, bidding on someone's baby pictures? It might. But if that's the case, I doubt that it would look as bad once the baby pictures appear on the cover of the magazine! (I can't be the only one seeing the irony in a magazine whose theme is providing every possible personal detail about anyone that they think the public might be interested in, yet they have "standards" and won't say how much they're paying for something.
Why so much? According to "an editor" (I guess they don't reveal names either), "The bidding started well before the baby was born, but once Levi’s mom was arrested — well, then you had a story.” HOW??? Just because the "Hillbilly Heroin" dealer got busted, the magazines assume that the public is once again interested in something that we weren't all that interested in to begin with? I don't see how the one connects with the other one and I certainly don't see how it connects to the tune of $300K.
And just to make the story really inane, they threw in this: "No word on whether the money will go to charity, as sometimes happens in a celeb baby deal." :::: sigh :::: I'll give you the word on that one. No. No, the money will NOT go to charity. Why not? Well, first of all, Bristol and Levi are eighteen. Eighteen year olds who just became parents (one of whom dropped out of high school to take a job on the North Slope oil fields as an apprentice electrician) do not donate $300K to charity. But the even bigger reason? THEY'RE NOT CELEBRITIES!! They're the daughter and possible future son-in-law of the governor of Alaska. That's all! So why it would be expected, "as sometimes happens in a celeb baby deal" that it would happen in this instance is beyond me. It's like saying, "No word on whether or not the new kitchen sponge that was purchased actually talks, as sometimes happens in a cartoon called 'Spongebob Squarepants.' " It doesn't talk because the sponge isn't Spongebob! It's just a sponge!
You know, this really isn't doing much for everything that we're supposed to tell kids not to do with their lives. They're not supposed to drop out of high school. They're not supposed to have sex. They're not supposed to get pregnant. They're not supposed to have a baby without being married. They're not supposed to have a mother who deals drugs. And the list goes on. But in this case, you have all of those things and what are the consequences? You get $300k and a bunch of pictures of your kid in People freaking Magazine when you're eighteen, for cryin' out loud! So what have we really learned?! Do not pass 'GO'. (In this case, you can't pass 'GO'. Where are you going to go without a high school diploma whilst you're raising a child? Not far!) But DO collect $300,000!
Ugh. Even for $300 grand, it still wouldn't be worth it to me to play host to an alien being for nine months before forcibly expelling it out of my uterus in a process akin to that of shoving a pot roast through my nostril. Not even close to worth it.