2010 Forecast: Heavy Smug and Smirks

So now we have reached not only the end of another year, but also the end of another decade. Forget the technical argument of the century changing at 2001, not 2000; I'm referring to the traditional way of classifying decades, starting with 2000 and ending with 2009. In a recent column, Paul Krugman referred to the passing ten years as the "naughties". However one refers to it, the last decade merits review and analysis. Which I will naturally do in future posts.

What I would instead like to do on this last day of the year is look ahead to 2010 and what might happen. After 2001, though, I must proclaim that I am released from science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke's timetable of future events. Unlike his movie (and novel) 2010, the United States and the Soviet Union will not, I repeat will not be on the verge of nuclear war due to proxy skirmishes in Central America (the fact that the Soviet Union no longer exists helps to convince me of this). Jupiter will not explode into a second star, causing everyone back home to embrace each other and forgo war. And the Chicago Cubs won't win the World Series (wait, Clarke didn't predict them winning; he wasn't that unrealistic). Instead, life will continue pretty much as it has been this past year. Some more politicians and celebrities will flush their reputations down the toilet with disreputable behavior. The media will exploit this and make a lot of money doing so. There will be more terrorism attempts at home and successful ones abroad. Congress will tackle new projects, in particular immigration reform, that the GOP and the media will say are political "Waterloos" (or something similar) and will bring on the downfall of the Democrats and Obama. Again. They'll say that again. And then the 2010 midterm elections will arrive and the voters will cast their ballots according to how they see the economy moving. Which by all accounts should be in full-blown recovery by then. The Democrats will win some and lose some, coming out of the process still firmly in the majority, albeit not necessarily with a 60 vote supermajority in the Senate.

Smugly smirking Fox News Channel hosts will continue to have as guests smug smirkers knocking the Obama administration, while MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, Ed Schultz, and Rachel Maddow will continue to offer up their own opinions smugly, accompanied by their own lineups of smugly smirking head-nodders. Ho-hum, why don't I just turn off the TV and do something else the whole year?