December 11, 2006

Just a small nuclear war, mind you

It's days like these you just have to thank your lucky stars your president assiduously avoids reading the news, because you just know this headline would have caught his twitchy little eye:
Small nuclear war could lead to cooldown

Using modern climate and population models, researchers estimated that a small-scale nuclear conflict between two warring nations would cause 3 million to 17 million immediate casualties and lead to a marked cooldown of the planet that could lead to crop failures and further misery.
For if you replace "crop failures and further misery" with "controlled freedom burn conditions under which democracy and energy independence for the 21st century would be liberated to fill in more lush than before," that could have come straight out of a presidential address.

Juxtaposed with stories about Al Gore being in Oscar contention for "An Inconvenient Truth," NASA finally getting cracking on that moon base and Iraq suffusing into about eight different flavors of disarray, it would only be a matter of time before those rusty synapses were set a firin' and plans for a combined pre-emptive strike against global warming/"graceful exit" from Iraq would begin to take form.

State of the Union time is just around the corner, you know. And though our fearless leader doesn't hold them in exceedingly high regard the rest of the time, if scientists are however indirectly telling him to nuke things, it's never too late to start listening.

Perhaps a few layers of insulation between the news and the newsmakers aren't so roundly terrible.

Take it from everyone's favorite, now apparently bipolar plagiarist, Jayson Blair -- too much news just isn't good for anyone.