jacob two two

i was surfing the internet this christmas eve afternoon (that doesn't make sense) and i ran my mouse over an advertisement and then all of a sudden like parent teasing there child while playing peek-a-boo the advertisement covered the whole site so that i could not read about the world of sports. there was two things wrong with this. first of all ,i've never taken any business courses and i've never been to advertising school, but if i was making an advertisement on a web site, i wouldn't have it so that it pisses the person who's at the site off. i would put the advertisement in a place where it wasn't in the way but still noticeable, either the banner or even on the side isn't a bad location. with that being said if someone is willing to pay me money i would put advertisements on my blog. secondly the particular advertisement was for the post office. why does the post office need to advertise? there's only one post office. i wonder if the consistent rise in stamp cost is paying for all there advertising? on the subject of advertising, there is a commercial which really bugs me. the coke commercial with the polar bears and the penguins, its really silly. penguins couldn't be farther away in there natural habitat from polar bears. they're about as far away from each other as china is to ottawa. do the people at cocacola really think that everyone is that stupid? i think that coke had a good thing going with just the polar bears, why did they have to throw in the penguins. coke don't change what works.

deion sanders

(if you can tell me why i titled this post dion sanders i will think highly of you) blogspot now has spell check, God bless google for taking over and giving it spell check.
i'm in toronto right now because i have a week and a half between my last class, which was this morning, and my first exam, which is on the thirteenth and my dad asked me if i wanted to go with him to toronto for a business trip, so i came. i was lying in bed in the delta toronto east hotel on the second floor room 221 and i couldn't sleep, so i figured since it cost $9.95 for 24 hours of internet i might as well use as much web time as i can, so i'm writing on my beloved blog.
the other day my mother and i were in the new food basics near my house. food basics is much like no frills living by the same penny pinching principles, in fact i'm pretty sure that no frills copied food basics. but food basics shouldn't be called food basics, that would be false advertisement. it should be called food-hygiene-drugs-clothes basics. they have a pharmacy in it. how does that work i wonder, do you have to pay five cents for a bag for your tylenol three? or is it less for the little pharmacy bags because you get less plastic? or is it more because the little pharmacy bags are not as popular? but more so, what i don't understand is how come they sell clothes -- since when is clothes a basic to food? you need to be healthy to enjoy food so i guess drugs and hygiene products can squeeze in the title if we are generous -- but clothes? that's borderline criminal. last i checked i didn't need to be wearing pants to sense the savory superness of kraft dinner and i didn't need to have a t-shirt on to appreciate the colourful excitement of fruit loops. clothes are not basic to food, which is why i don't understand how food basics gets away with selling clothes. feeling confused about the whole thing (because i am a man of common sense) i asked the store manager if he could justify the selling of clothes in food basics and he said that he was wondering the same thing. he told me that he had asked corporate why and they said that they would post an official explanation to how they justify the selling clothes while still keeping the store name food basics.