Crunchberries are NOT REAL??? What NEXT?

Like him or not, Glenn Beck often delivers accurate expression to many of my semi-formed opinions. Today's features included one compelling headline. Here is an excerpt from the content:
(Ya gotta love it!)

"On May 21, a judge of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California dismissed a complaint filed by a woman who said she had purchased "Cap'n Crunch with Crunch Berries" because she believed it contained real fruit. The plaintiff, Janine Sugawara, alleged that she had only recently learned to her dismay that said "berries" were in fact simply brightly-colored cereal balls, and that although the product did contain some strawberry fruit concentrate, it was not otherwise redeemed by fruit. She sued, on behalf of herself and all similarly situated consumers, some of whom may believe that there are fields somewhere in our land thronged by crunchberry bushes.

According to the complaint, Sugawara and other consumers were misled not only by the use of the word "berries" in the name, but also by the front of the box, which features the product's namesake, Cap'n Crunch, aggressively "thrusting a spoonful of 'Crunchberries' at the prospective buyer." Plaintiff claimed that this message was reinforced by other marketing representing the product as a "combination of Crunch biscuits and colorful red, purple, teal and green berries." Yet in actuality, the product contained "no berries of any kind." Plaintiff brought claims for fraud, breach of warranty, and our notorious and ever-popular California Unfair Competition Law and Consumer Legal Remedies Act.

Under the UCL, courts have held that a plaintiff must show that a representation was "likely to deceive a reasonable consumer." [As a disclaimer, I should tell you that my firm represents defendants in UCL cases (among others).] Actual fraud claims, and warranty claims, are harder to prove, so if Sugawara didn't win on the UCL claims, she would probably not win anything at all. And she did not."

These stories are all over the Internet, mags and TV. Just thought I'd feature one.

I do frequently refer to a Glenn Beck quote. First, allow me to offer up a preliminary setting:

Let's say you are mid-visit with GOD, (AKA your doctor,) when you realize that all the education and $$$ in the world will not produce common sense, in fact, it often appears that higher education, by nature, can oft times evict logical thinking, because there's only so much available residential space in the cranium.

So, if you are taking charge of your life like I HOPE you are, and your physician renders findings that sound like random hierarchical hoopla (because we all know there has to be a definitive diagnosis, in order for ins. to cooperate,) and when his/her conclusive proclamation vividly evidences a reality that while you shared a poignant description of your symptoms, your doctor was absorbed in limbo over whether or not to delay his tee time, (this is a long sentence, read on...)...you will not just take it, regardless of the vulnerability produced by changing into a little open-backed gown and climbing up onto your personal 6 or so feet of the paper roll, while feigning interest in a dog-eared last year's issue of People, under florescent lighting fixtures, one tube on it's way out.

Denying any anticipated repercussions, you must boldly go where few men dare...Stand up for yourself, your ability to apply logical thinking to your symptoms' analysis. And when Doc poo-poos your opinion's viability, you quote Glenn:

"I may not be a surgeon, but I AM a thinker..."

The above quote works equally well for all differences of opinion, where the untrained one evidently understands and identifies the solution far better than the one trained to. And so, eliminating "MD," simply substitute the professional title that applies (feel free to add your own;)

"I may not be a (vocation here,) but I AM a thinker...

I do not endorse use of this quote with law enforcement representatives and the judicial system, when in any type of bondage or captivity, and when addressing your in-laws (and there may be more prohibitive issues not surfacing to memory at this time.)

Thought for the day: When you encounter one of those (I hate my job, my life, and you) personalities, offer to them these words: "Do we need a hug?" in that higher-pitched baby voice you use with your dog when you believe no others are listening.