Vacuums

I read on Digby yesterday that the Japanese nuclear disaster has now been rated equivalent to Chernobyl. Sampling some four hours of news "coverage" yesterday on MSNBC, all I could find was Mr. Weiner's weiner.  This is absurd.  Andrew Brietbart, who is nothing but a Nixsonian dirty trickster of of the Segretti Order, has now been elevated on NPR even to the status of worthy correspondent.  He "broke" the story.  Rachel Maddow spent much of her time developing an argument worthy of a Jesuit logic perfesser on why Mr. Weiner shouldn't resign.

Just a few days back the Republicans were working diligently to destroy Medicare as we know it.  Far as I know, this has not changed.  A Republican has now offered a plan which, if implemented, will destroy Social Security.  Silence.  There was serious talk, on NPR and in print, that if the Debt Ceiling is not raised as required, social security checks might not go out--the argument being, paying creditors such as China and other major international bond holders might well be more essential to the maintenance of our economy than paying aging World War II vets living in assisted living facilities.  For all I know there might have been even more tornadoes this week.  Heard anything from Tulsa lately?  Twisting the short wave dial here, at 2 AM, all I got was  "crackle crackle weinerdick crackle weiner crackle crackle crackle."  I can't wait for Ms Palin to weigh in on this momentous subject.  Surely she has some opinion.  Maybe she'll opine that Mr. Weiner must have a lame stream.  That'd be witty of her anyways.   He can always try Avodart.

The Press is a raccoon.  They spot a bit of tinfoil down a hole, stick they fisties down the hole, grab the tinfoil, and stuck they be.  Can't let go, can't get that paw out.  Possibly the Press is driven by polling?  The public, ass that it is, wants more coverage.  Or maybe the Press in this case is driving the bus.  Fox?  Sure.  ABC?  Natch.  This is absurd.  I'd like to see a graphic comparison of Weiner coverage over the past week to 9/11 coverage, or D-day coverage.

Speaking of 9/11.  I miss those two or three days when all air traffic was grounded.  Damn, that was nice and quiet, wasn't it.  My friend suggested yesterday, when I mentioned that lovely quiet to him, that maybe we ought to have a day a week of no air traffic.  It's good for air pollution.  It would save fuel.  Let's go for it.   How many Americans would benefit from one day a week without any air traffic.  How many would suffer?   How does that compare to stopping social security checks for a month?