I am writing this post in February. I have survived through November, December, and January. It hasn't been pretty. First there was cold. Then there was bitter cold, and now we have the ice and the snow. My God, the snow.
I hate where I live and I am not crazy about a lot of these people- I know the cold makes them crazy. But whenever I have to watch the Weather Channel or as I have come to think of it- All Global Warming, All the Time!-I am forced to listen to incredibly attractive people explain what Magnum, or Ivan or something or other is doing.
Are we so starved for things to hold our attention that we need to name every single one of these storms? Really? Where I am, they still discuss the blizzard of '78 with reverent tones. It doesn't have a name- it has a condition-blizzard- and a year-1978. Most folks with a functioning I Q understand the storm in question.
Is it a rating things? Will Goodyear and other products begin lining up to sponsor this mess?
If it is snowing, the accumulation is edging past five inches and the wind is blowing, do we really need a name for this?? Won't hey remember that crappy year it wouldn't stop snowing be enough to ring a bell?
I understand, the Weather Channel has to remain relevant. The novelty of having a go to channel to always get the weather report is gone. Of course, that might have something to do with always getting the latest update on the drought in Singapore- when all I want to do is figure out if I need to grab an umbrella on the way to work.
How about if we make things easy? Instead of 'honoring' every relative by naming a storm after them- how about we name storms like this: Month, Year. If there is more than one storm in a month, we toss in the week. It's just crazy enough to work. Of course-if they follow my advice- we'll never have winter storm Tiffany or better yet winter storm Shaniqua. Both of which would make me giggle.
I wish that we could take a step back and get over ourselves. Think about it, you'll thank me later.
No comments:
Post a Comment