MySpace


Humble B. Wonderful



Last Updated: 9/6/2009

Send Message
Instant Message
Email to a Friend
Subscribe
February 7, 2007 - Wednesday 

Category: News and Politics

A bunch of lame schools are requiring young girls to be vaccinated with a potentially live-saving vaccine that will protect them from cervical cancer for all time. You've probaby read about it in the news. There are also some heroic values-based groups trying to block the requirement because it would somehow promote sexual practices for some reason. It's likely because the threat of cervical cancer is only thing that teens think about before having sex, and if you take that away, they're going to go fuck-crazy.

Well, guess what, I'm against the vaccine. I hate that thing. Here's why:

 

It's one fewer, you horrible people, you! One FEWER. "Less" is used for blob-like intangible concepts. "Fewer" is used for countable objects, like pencils and video games. Here's a practical example to illustrate the difference for your half-rotten brains and cervixes:

Less money. Fewer dollars.

See? Simple. Get it right, because until you do, I will actively work to bring about your downfall. I hope you all turn in to horrific skeleton pirates like in that movie.

Previous Post: Porn Reviews | Back to Blog List | Next Post: Paul Bunyan
Listing 1-50 of 140
123
of
3
john paul

 
awesome. so that's how words work!
 
Posted by john paul on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 4:13 AM
[Reply to this


 
right on, wonderful humble girl, i feel way fewer stupid now.
 
Posted by on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 4:16 AM
[Reply to this
Daniel Steven Tuck

 
So my risks of cervical cancer are practically nil and I can go fuck-crazy if I so desire?
 
Posted by Daniel Steven Tuck on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 4:16 AM
[Reply to this
Humble B. Wonderful

 
No. Oddly enough, the vaccine is proven to make cervical cancer twice as likely in men.
 
Posted by Humble B. Wonderful on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 4:22 AM
[Reply to this
Chuckin McNiggets
Chris Briden

 
Hey Lady, would you mind telling the class where a MAN'S CERVIX is? Lemme give you a hint...It's in the Land Of Freakin' Make-Believe cuz we don't got'em!!!!!! You "REALLY" made my day !

Chris[Chuckin' McNiggets]
 
Posted by Chuckin McNiggets on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 4:22 PM
[Reply to this
Daniel Steven Tuck

 
I am concerned about my Cervix, are you familiar what the rates are for cervical cancer in men?
 
Posted by Daniel Steven Tuck on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 4:24 AM
[Reply to this
Humble B. Wonderful

 
They've doubled.
 
Posted by Humble B. Wonderful on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 7:07 AM
[Reply to this
Chuckin McNiggets
Chris Briden

 
What do you mean they've doubled?!?!?! Zero times Two Is STILL Zero!!! Men don't have cervixes and not ALL dumbs are blonde! I think I love you, girl!

Chris[Chuckin' McNiggets]
 
Posted by Chuckin McNiggets on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 4:32 PM
[Reply to this
Humble B. Wonderful

 
Way to ruin everything.
 
Posted by Humble B. Wonderful on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 6:44 PM
[Reply to this
Daniel Steven Tuck

 
That guy wrote alot and used mucho scientific medical jargon. My infantile penis is throbbing with worry or is it veneral disease? I dunno.
 
Posted by Daniel Steven Tuck on February 11, 2007 - Sunday - 11:42 PM
[Reply to this
Garibaldi

 
If I misuse this term, will you think fewer of me?
 
Posted by Garibaldi on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 4:16 AM
[Reply to this
Humble B. Wonderful

 
Almost quite definitely.
 
Posted by Humble B. Wonderful on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 4:20 AM
[Reply to this
YERMOM

 
That is what is so special about YOU! You would rather a fewer more would die for grammer! (hope I used that right)
 
Posted by YERMOM on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 4:17 AM
[Reply to this
Humble B. Wonderful

 
You didn't.
 
Posted by Humble B. Wonderful on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 4:20 AM
[Reply to this
YERMOM

 
thats why I make my money with pictures, the fewer words that come out of my mouth the better.

I will leave the word-craft to the master.
 
Posted by YERMOM on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 1:19 PM
[Reply to this
Sean

 
Guinea pigs... Wow.
 
Posted by Sean on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 4:23 AM
[Reply to this
that boy.
David Thibodeau

 
Right on dear,
Im in the medical field and all the pharmaceutical companies are after our dollars, not the cure.

To many words I dare not say....

-David A.
 
Posted by that boy. on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 4:25 AM
[Reply to this
Sarcastro

 
I see this as a product. Buy it if you want to... don't if you don't. They're in BUSINESS... what do you think they're supposed to do? NOT make a profit?

This kind of thinking, David leaves me speechless. Someone provides a cure to some kinds of cancer and you're complaining about it?
 
Posted by Sarcastro on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 2:34 PM
[Reply to this
that boy.
David Thibodeau

 
Dear "speechless person",
Its not a proven cure....
You have to be in the Medical field in order to seee it in the way that I do.
-David
 
Posted by that boy. on February 8, 2007 - Thursday - 6:18 PM
[Reply to this
Vincent Truman
Vincent Truman

 
To little to late.
 
Posted by Vincent Truman on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 4:51 AM
[Reply to this
Humble B. Wonderful

 
Oh, so that's how you do it.
 
Posted by Humble B. Wonderful on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 7:19 AM
[Reply to this
Ryan Aaron
Ryan Aaron

 
Less sex. More fellatio.
 
Posted by Ryan Aaron on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 4:29 AM
[Reply to this
Humble B. Wonderful

 
Sure, if you want tonsil cancer.
 
Posted by Humble B. Wonderful on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 7:20 AM
[Reply to this
Lydia

 
I went fuck-crazy when they took away my blanket. As if I needed any fewer.
 
Posted by Lydia on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 4:30 AM
[Reply to this
Cletus Federline-Spears

 
Strange that instead of a shot, they developed the vaccine to be applied through intercourse.
 
Posted by Cletus Federline-Spears on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 4:30 AM
[Reply to this
that boy.
David Thibodeau

 
Future reference- "shot" is an "injection"

thanks

-David A.
 
Posted by that boy. on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 4:36 AM
[Reply to this
William
William Ferguson

 
"Vaccine Recalled Because Of Grammatical Error."

Your problem is you ascribe things like "logic", "reason" and "rational thinking" to government sponsored vaccination programs.

Shame on you! Deduct six kudos.
 
Posted by William on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 4:31 AM
[Reply to this
Humble B. Wonderful

 
I'll deduct YOUR kudos!
 
Posted by Humble B. Wonderful on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 7:24 AM
[Reply to this
William
William Ferguson

 
They were obligatory anyway.
 
Posted by William on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 7:39 AM
[Reply to this
Humble B. Wonderful

 
Not I, but Lucille can handle that quite ably.




Lucille is my gun. It doesn't really work without the visual.
 
Posted by Humble B. Wonderful on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 7:09 AM
[Reply to this
that boy.
David Thibodeau

 
Right on!

-David A.
 
Posted by that boy. on February 8, 2007 - Thursday - 6:19 PM
[Reply to this
Highcastle

 
cervical cancer wins! yay!
 
Posted by Highcastle on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 4:45 AM
[Reply to this
Bill

 
BAsed on the ad, the vaccine would not cure all types of cervical cancer and that women should continue preventitive checkups. So why bother with a shot that doesn't work on all of them. Keep going to the doc and fix it if you get it. In the mean time, go crazy, you know they already are.
 
Posted by Bill on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 4:53 AM
[Reply to this
Humble B. Wonderful

 
That's implied.
 
Posted by Humble B. Wonderful on February 8, 2007 - Thursday - 7:11 AM
[Reply to this
Allen, former Emperor of MySpace

 
From a grammar standpoint, you are correct, and the people in this video sound like young, stupid girls. But there are two other aspects for which the language used is appropriate: The legal standpoint and the marketing standpoint. From the legal standpoint, the characters in this video can't use the term "one fewer" because it is, as my ex-wife used to say when she was an English-as-a-second-language student (ESL), countable. Legally, they have to use the "blob-like" term because each character is not actually one fewer person with cervical cancer if she gets the vaccine--she has decreased her chances of cancer by 70%, which is, in ESL parlance, not countable. Also, from a marketing perspective, the target audience is young, stupid girls, who apparently have to rely on a catch phrase or jingle to make protect themselves from health risks. This ad reflects a trend where the marketing department just takes what the legal department says and incorporates the legal language into whatever the message is.
 
Posted by Allen, former Emperor of MySpace on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 4:55 AM
[Reply to this
YERMOM

 
You are making the mistake that only young girls are stupid. when it comes to marketing they think you are all stupid.

And marketing still comes up with what to say. Legal just hacks it to pieces to make sure that they cant be sued for hot coffee, ect...

Pharma companies have to be careful using what they call claims.

for example they cant say a drug will cure you.

and if they make a claim it must be accompanied by tons of disclaimers (see the small print that flashes on a screen durning a commerical, or at the bottom of an ad, lots of them will have the prescribing information on the back of the ad for the same reason)

But none of that really matters, because Humble said so.
 
Posted by YERMOM on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 1:31 PM
[Reply to this
Humble B. Wonderful

 
Yes, they could say "less cancer" and be perfectly correct and I wouldn't have any problems, but they put "one" (a number) in front of "less." The "one" automatically makes whatever they are talking about a countable thing. They have to change one word or the other. For instance, "Some less" would be acceptable. To address your marketing point, the TV is in a position of influence, and it is therefore their responsibility to act responsibly. Why not promote proper grammar while promoting cancer vaccines? There's no reason to not.
 
Posted by Humble B. Wonderful on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 7:19 AM
[Reply to this
Allen, former Emperor of MySpace

 
I don't think this is any less off point (or fewer?) than other responses here, but it bears mentioning that women who use good grammar are better in bed.
 
Posted by Allen, former Emperor of MySpace on February 8, 2007 - Thursday - 2:31 AM
[Reply to this
Humble B. Wonderful

 
Nah, we're terrible at dirty talk.
 
Posted by Humble B. Wonderful on February 8, 2007 - Thursday - 7:12 AM
[Reply to this
Sarcastro

 
I think they speak slowly so literally dumb fuckers can understand them, using small words easily digested. Less is easier to spell.
 
Posted by Sarcastro on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 2:28 PM
[Reply to this
Captain Avenger

 
I love Christian whackos, they come up with the most fabulous ideas!
Like my favorite: After you die, you'll live forever!
 
Posted by Captain Avenger on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 5:02 AM
[Reply to this
Rio/Jane
Jane Rio Walker

 
No one should be forced to be given a shot no matter what the grammar but not because it gives them license to fuck because they already have that. Perhaps if we were teaching proper usage of grammar in school, we would have fewer reasons to worry about giving girls shots for diseases they get from unprotected sex, but that's completely my theory.
 
Posted by Rio/Jane on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 5:14 AM
[Reply to this
Jay Agnos

 
This is your theory? "Perhaps if we were teaching proper usage of grammar in school, we would have fewer reasons to worry about giving girls shots for diseases they get from unprotected sex[.]" What about why trees fall in the woods, or why the sky is blue, or why birds suddenly appear? Your theory leaves me with all kinds of questions.
 
Posted by Jay Agnos on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 5:25 AM
[Reply to this
Humble B. Wonderful

 
Get used to disappointment. It's "completely" her theory. As in "complete." That's all you get. Besides disappointment, of course, but you should be used to that by now.
 
Posted by Humble B. Wonderful on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 7:06 AM
[Reply to this
Quantum Tango

 
Oneless could simply mean that an individual is without a one. Like the boyless one derrr, what they did not make clear however is “with out one what?” Better yet if you are oneless it could simply mean that you are twoful which means that you must have two cervices as a result of the vaccine which would explain the term used and the legal implications thus being protected against.
 
Posted by Quantum Tango on May 14, 2007 - Monday - 4:27 AM
[Reply to this
Jay Agnos

 
Unfortunately, I am.
 
Posted by Jay Agnos on February 8, 2007 - Thursday - 7:14 PM
[Reply to this


 
What's with the dancing and clapping?? I don't get it *sigh*
 
Posted by on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 6:07 AM
[Reply to this
Humble B. Wonderful

 
Black people like it.
 
Posted by Humble B. Wonderful on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 7:26 AM
[Reply to this
LickRosco

 
Hmmm, I thought they were saying, "One Les," as in Lesbian. I gotta admit, it got me rather hot...until I realized what's the use of one lesbian?

Like my Grandma used to say, "It takes two to tango, but three to run a train." I don't know exactly what grandma meant, but the woman used a walker at the age of 35.
 
Posted by LickRosco on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 6:09 AM
[Reply to this
Alexander

 
I love soccer!
 
Posted by Alexander on February 7, 2007 - Wednesday - 7:04 AM
[Reply to this
Previous Post: Porn Reviews | Back to Blog List | Next Post: Paul Bunyan
Listing 1-50 of 140
123
of
3