and the grammy goes to...nobody gives a shit

to my surprise this morning while reading the ny times, the grammys took place yesterday. now i talk a lot of shit about the oscars, but at least they have some credibility. the grammys, well they rank somewhere behind the academy, golden globes, independent spirit awards, top ten lists from notable critics, tonys, emmys...well, you get the idea.

ah, but you say, what evidence do you have to substantiate your view? and i say, the winner of the pop performance by a duo or group with a vocal, my humps by the black eyed peas.

ironically, despite being one of the ten worst songs ever forced upon human ears (hopefully dogs with their higher listening frequencies are spared), a cogent argument could be made that it is only the third worst song fergie has been involved with (fergielicious and london bridge were inexplicably shut out).

My hump, my hump, my hump, my hump,
My hump, my hump, my hump, my hump, my hump, my hump.
My lovely lady lumps (lumps)
My lovely lady lumps (lumps)
My lovely lady lumps (lumps)
In the back and in the front (lumps)
My lovin' got you

without context, i might confuse this for the work of a retard with a serious stutter. but hey, i guess that's why i'm not a judge.

finally, some housekeeping. is this not the worst fucking name for an award ever concocted. i lose interest in hearing the winner before the announcer gets through the title. should any award really include two prepositional phrases? would the grammy nominating board be unsure if they could nominate a duo if the award were renamed best vocal performance by a pop group (maybe since the nominees were obviously chosen by those with sparse brain activity)?

perhaps, the people who named the award also chose the winner of it.