Giving God any credit for the happy outcome of the water landing of Flight 1549 reminds me of the little story told by Peter Callaghan in "While You Were Sleeping" about his vaunted saving of two baby raccoons that had fallen out of their nest, to the effect that (spoiler!) he first knocked those baby raccoons out of the nest with a rock.

Well, I guess God needs to give himself a little PR boost once in a while.

And I will call those pilots heroes before I'll ever say that of anyone who makes a game-winning touchdown or "brings home the gold!"

Kathy Najimy comes to mind…but then I get stuck. Nia Vardalos maybe?

An awful lot of human beings have pets, and most of these human beings have these pets not as a matter of prestige, or covetousness, or investment, but simply for companionship. Is having and caring for a beloved companion a luxury? I doubt most human beings who have such companions would ever consider this a valid question.

Put it this way: what else could anyone in tough circumstances sacrifice that could cause as much guilt and heartbreak as giving up a beloved pet? By the time someone is compelled to do that it's no longer a matter of coming up with one more way to trim the household budget but of struggling in the grip of an unholy nightmare.

My wife and I engaged in premarital sex (yes, yes, with each other) before we got married. Sadly, our marriage has only managed to last twenty years to date. Can we nominate ourselves as the Florida Poster Couple on the inability to commit after premarital sex? Or do you actually have to live there?

It is seldom mentioned that "Watchmen" did not start out as a project initiated solely by Alan Moore. DC Comics had acquired a stable of super-hero characters from Charlton Comics and Moore saddled up to do something with them. DC then got cold feet about what Moore was concocting, since he was using properties the company hoped to utilize beyond one maxi-series (as it was referred to at the time), but retained interest in the project using recast characters. So Charlton's The Question became Rorschach, Blue Beetle became Nite Owl, Captain Atom became Dr. Manhattan, and so on. The changes were material, but not so much as to entirely obscure the essence of the originals. DC was satisfied, however, and Moore and Gibbons charged ahead into comics history.

No one is, or is likely to, salute the Charlton characters who were central to the origin of the whole "Watchmen" phenomenon, but the fact remains that they were, and still are, part of the template of what has now managed to reach the big screen. Without them, for better or for worse, you wouldn't be seeing what you're seeing.

Another question greatly ignored follows this numbingly circular situation:

"You need to have health insurance."

"But I can't afford health insurance."

"But you need to have it."

"But I can't afford it."

"But you need it."

"But I can't pay."

"But you must."

"But I can't!"

And so on and so on and so on. I've concluded that no one can legitimately say a word about the need for insurance without equally addressing the burden of the cost of same. Far too many proponents of "need" have been ducking and weaving on the "cost" factor for years, if not decades, as if somehow not being able to afford the insurance is a non-factor. Perhaps it's a relic of the "Everyone works for an employer who provides full medical so what's the problem?" era, which has emphatically passed.

Revenge is a difficult thing, once you get past the anger. That's why we have government, laws, law enforcement, the courts, the penal system…to enact, enforce, and apply the remedies society as a whole has determined it desires for acts of wrongdoing. It is, if nothing else, a way for society to deal with such things while setting anger at least at a remove as a prosecutorial motivation.

It works imperfectly, no question, and nothing frustrates an angry mind more than a sober mind when it comes to dealing with outrage. Would I like to punch one of these smug AIG execs in the face? Right now, I'd like nothing better. How would I feel about it afterwards? Absolutely terrible. So there's definitely a limit to my own feelings about revenge. On the other hand, if they canceled this so-called contract on bonuses (and I very much agree that bonuses not based on performance are not bonuses by any definition, no matter what some legal beagle has set down) I'd be very gratified at all levels, before and after.

And I know that would just be a start to dealing with far bigger problems. The thing is, can I not support the efforts to deal with those bigger problems and also get a little appropriate revenge in the bargain?