ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

Rewarding Stupidity

Updated on October 21, 2010

Unless you simply don't watch television at all, you've likely seen the eTrade baby commercials.  One of the cutest was the "milkaholic Lindsay" one.  Following any type of news at all would've revealed to you that Lindsay Lohan, the crackhead quack of Hollywood, sued eTrade because they used HER name in a commercial that make negative implications toward her character.

I didn't know Lindsay Lohan was a milk-chugging, diaper-wearing, binkie-sucking infant girl.  Oh, now I see the resemblance.  Of course that commercial would've disparaged an infamous grown woman with a penchant for all things snortably illegal.  Puh-lease.

I guess all women named Lindsay can now sue eTrade, as well.  Oh they can't, because that commercial specifically mentioned Lindsay Lohan and make direct references toward her character personally.  (Please note the sarcasm.)

The fact that eTrade eventually settled out of court with the ignorant tramp completely amazed me.  The fact that any court in this country would've allowed her to file a lawsuit over something so ridiculously frivolous in the first place amazes me even more.  Had I been the judge receiving notice of the filing, I would've laughed it out of court and then issued a public statement letting people know that MY courtroom, at least, does not reward ignorance or stupidity.

But apparently one of the mainstream trends in America's judicial system these days IS to reward ignorance and stupidity.  Take the Lohan versus eTrade example.  I mean, c'mon, Lindsay...get over yourself.  I'm positive eTrade has way more class than to even peripherally allude to you in a commercial.  After all, you're a bad publicity magnet.  They'd probably lose 75% of their customer base just for being so utterly tasteless, even if it was in the most positive way possible.

Another example of America's bad habit of pampering the idiots among us is the lawsuit that was filed against McDonald's a few years ago by a woman who sued them because she spilled hot coffee on her lap and scorched her coochie.  I'm sorry, but if I was STUPID enough to spill a cup of hot java on my netherlands, the last thing I'd be doing would be filing a lawsuit to let the whole world know just how stupid I really am.

And why sue because the coffee was HOT?  I'd be more perturbed if it had been cold, since it is coffee, after all.

Tweedle Dumb the Coffee Coochie sued and WON her case against McDonald's.  They were punished for serving hot coffee and doubly punished because someone was DUMB enough to not keep a firm grasp on a hot beverage while driving a vehicle.  I'm surprised she didn't sue the maker of her automobile and claim they were somehow culpable in The Case of the Burned Coochie.

Some time later, a man sued McDonald's and won his case because he bit into a hot sandwich and burned his mouth.  I don't know ANYONE who just chomps down on something that is freshly cooked without at least testing the waters by nibbling first.  Other than that idiot, I guess.

Really, what is wrong with our country?  To financially reward someone because they are boldly and publicly proclaiming they are money-grubbing morons is flabbergasting.


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • GNelson profile image

      GNelson 7 years ago from Florida

      Sarasca, you made some good points, keep it up.

    • onegoodwoman profile image

      onegoodwoman 7 years ago from A small southern town

      oooh.....I like this.

      Welcome to Hub Pages. You are bound to find interesting topics and people here.