Plum Crazy

I haven't yet waded into the deep waters of the New York Times Travel section posting photos of the vacation homes of Cheney and Rumsfeld because, pretty much, I found all the outrage idiotic. I mean, really. From Michelle Malkin (Google it if you want to read the original) after she admits that Rumsfeld cleared the publication of the photos.

"What news value and journalistic end was served by publishing the Cheney/Rumsfeld vacation home piece and the accompanying photo? 'Because Rumsfeld gave permission' may cut it with the moonbats and fairweather privocrats. Not with me."

Let me attempt to answer her question. No news value and journalistic end was served by publishing this crap. There is only one value that was - it is the same value that is served by publishing pictures of the child of Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt. The one I like to call "making money".

Let's face it. A lot of people are fascinated by "how the other half lives". They love to read about the rich and famous. This explains the amazing popularity of dreck like "People" and "Us". I realize this may come as a shock to many, but Cheney and Rumsfeld are both - wait for it - rich and famous. This is not the first time puff pieces about their vacation homes have been published. With any luck, if anything good can come out of this entire stupid episode, it will be the last. I would personally be thrilled if magazines and travel sections of newspapers would stop printing "Look at the lovely home of XYZ famous person!" articles.

But they won't. So brace yourself to continue to be bombarded by this while you're waiting at the checkout line of your local supermarket. You may wind up knowing much more about the lives of Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes than you ever wanted to, but too bad, so sad. Many people like it, and it makes publishers money. We'll all manage to live through it.

After all. That which does not kill you, does not kill you.