Watch how much time and oxygen is being devoted to the George Washington Bridge scandal.

[No Elephants]

And how much will continue to be devoted to it.


I can recall get ready for elementary school listenig to horror stories about every single weekday morning's traffic on the George Washington Bridge (and the Long Island Expressway: "LIE, LOL"--when LOL still meants "lots of luck.")

Yes, deliberately increasing traffic for four days because of a lack of an endorsement is a terrible, terrrible thing, especially when ambulances and fire trucks might be involved. But it was, after all, four damned days and currently on the table in Washington, D.C. are (more) corporate tax cuts and more cuts to social safety nets, both of which will last a hell of a lot longer than four days and cause more deaths and heartaches than traffic on the bridge. Maybe forever--or until both are cut even more, whichever comes first.

And, sue me, but I don't think this is on the same level as deliberately sabotaging national health care under Nixon and Carter or voting against a surge in Iraq that you later say you believed in because of personal ambition.

And how much do we hear about, for just one example, drone execution Tuesdays? Those have been happening one day every week for years.

Again, not saying abuse of political power without regard to human life for four days was not heinous and horrific. It was. But it's over and other things which will probably hurt more Americans for a lot longer are currently on the table.

[No Elephants]

1. P.S. Why is no one addressing the long term issue?

The need for more tunnels and bridges to give people who work in Manhattan reasonable access to Manhattan has been evident since I was a child. New Jersey, the other boroughs, Connecticut and beyond--people from all those have to get to Manhattan every day to work.

[Enthusiast]

3. I'm glad I will never have to deal

with such appalling traffic conditions. Columbus Ohio is bad enough.

[Enthusiast]

2. I didn't approve of Christie well before the bridge thing.

He was an obvious bully asshole. You could tell by the way he spoke to people.

But if they can keep this going we won't be talking about the push for fast track authority to pursue the TPP.

See, I'm suspicious of everything now. Hell of a way to live.

[No Elephants]

4. You are right to be suspicious. TPP and corporate tax cuts are on the table NOW.

Their effects will be around a lot longer than the Bridge traffic jam.

But, is media giving them the energy that the bridge shut down is getting? No?

How about Stewart and Colbert? No?

Every week, at the end of the show, George Stephanapoulous's This Week throws up the casualty count for troops that the government admitted to that week. But for that, we've had almost invisible wars for decades.

Colbert did, however, mention the wars in order to defend Obama from some of Gates's attacks. In his book, Gates had mentioned that Obama's main concern was getting out of Afghanistan. (Funny, five years later, we're still there.) So, Colbert mentioned that this put Obama with 82% of Americans. Talk about a false equivalency. Of 82% of Americans, only Obama is CIC with the actual power to get us out of Afghanistan, a tiny fact Colbert neglected to mention.

[Enthusiast]

5. As if the Afghan War has not been long and wasteful enough.

This proves, beyond a shadow of a doubt, as if we needed further proof, that Obama's appointments are terribly flawed.

Is the President being blackmailed? Or, is the President just this ideologically rightist? WTF? Obviously before the 2009 inauguration the NSA would have accumulated enough embarrassing information on almost any presidential candidate to blackmail them. Again, WTF?

We must hold Colbert to higher standards. You know, considering he represents the last bastion of true TV journalism. I kid, I think.

[No Elephants]

6. We should hold him to some standard beyond blind partisanship, no?

It's only very recently that he has done two or three bits even mildly critical of Obama.

He is a very brilliant man with a large megaphone. Stewart claims to hit both sides and he has done that a lot more than Colbert has. However, Stewart hits Democrats a lot less often and much more gently than he hits Democrats. Again, though, there is no money whatever and very little love to be had from criticizing both of the largest political parties based on consistent principles and no double standards. I can tell you that from personal experience.