Media won't take a week off, and war by concensus?

I took a week off to go on a fishing trip, had a great time, and now I am back after a week of knowing nothing about what was happening in the so-called "war on terrorism", the latest deaths by anthrax (does anyone know if the rock group by that name has changed it yet?)--it was a wonderful week!

I didn't fish--I swam and hiked and explored, picked up an antique whiskey bottle among other things and thought nothing of Osama, Taliban, "anti-terrorism legislation", and wondered if the media would ever take the week off from its self assigned roll of telling us what, how, and when to think, whether war propaganda or, what is now politically correct, or whatever, as the conservative media such as WorldNetDaily trying to out-do CNN and FOX in its war-speak. Heck, I would have gone to Timbuktu just to miss it all!

But then I remembered I had this editorial to do, so I got on the Internet ASAP and got to my "http://www.msn.com/" home page (with IE 5.0) and saw this article-"Slate: How long should the war last?" (linked to from the MSN homepage). Now has the media gone nuts in the week I was gone? Are they so desperate to create the news they are asking "a concensus" how long they think the war "should" last? On the same page is this link--"Is there life on K-Pax?" That's like asking back in the late sixties--"Is there life on Vulcan?"

To those I respond: The war should last until Bin Laden is caught (which, seeing as how the powers-that-be are taking their sweet ol' time trying to catch the guy, could mean the rest of my life); there is no life on K-Pax, or in it, and as for Vulcan, only at a "Star Trek" convention.

Now, what weighs more: a pound of Osama bin Laden's brain, or a pound of Bill O'Reilly's?

The media really needs to take a week off. When it comes back, there may be more life in it!

Go To Page: 1