Just what makes a good
rant, anyway?
I think you gotta find the thin line between humour and vulgarity, and walk it like a drunk taking a straight-line test. But, of course, it still can work from one extreme to the other...
Take Denis Leary for example...
So let me ask you this... Is it impossible to get a cup of coffee-flavoured coffee anymore, in this country? What happened with coffee, did I miss a fuckin' meeting with the coffee? You can get EVERY other flavour except COFFEE-flavoured coffee! They got mochacinno, they got chocacinno, frappacinno, cappucinno, rappacinno, Al Pacino, WHAT THE FUCK?! WWW dot what the FUCK dot com!
Extremely vulgar, but since people can relate in a distant way, also extremely funny. Not to be taken seriously. Denis Leary's rants are more for his personal venting than for any actual relevance to everyone's life...
On the other end of the spectrum, we have George Carlin...
You take the word "nigger", there is nothing wrong with the word "nigger" in and of itself. It's the racist asshole who's using it that you ought to be concerned about. We don't care when Eddy Murphy or Richard Pryor say it. Why? Because we know they're not racist... THEY'RE NIGGERS! Now, I know I'm whitey the blue-eyed greyboy honky motherfucker mySELF... Don't bother MY ass...
Vulgar? Perhaps. But can you really argue that it's vulgar when he makes valid points, and presents the rant intelligently? Probably, but you shouldn't, damn you... George Carlin has perfected the art of ranting, and his subtleness makes you wonder when he's telling it like it is, and when he's being sarcastic... That's where his humour lies.
So what DOES make the perfect rant? Well, I have a feeling that somewhere between "WWW dot what the FUCK dot com!" and "There is nothing wrong with the word 'nigger' in and of itself." the truth lies...