One thing the British get right is their two-tiered journalism system. They have both serious news and news for retards, like we do in America, but the two are kept segregated, with only a rare overlap. It’s not like the US, where the serious journalists act like retards, or where the retards are occasionally given a platform to speak as though they know what they’re talking about.

There were like five papers in the UK this week that were running increasingly breathless articles about a photograph snapped of David Beckham from a Lakers game. See, if you look at his eyes, they’re looking in the same direction as the bent-over cheerleader. Thus the papers keep discussing whether or not Posh Spice will forgive him for looking, if a shopping spree she had taken the following day was related at all to the cheerleader, if Beckham and the cheerleader knew each other, etc… Dumb shit, especialy when you consider that the woman in the picture is looking in the same direction, as are a handful of other people in the seats, leading one to believe that what it’s a picture of is Beckham following the action on the court. But the retard papers know that there’s a hungry market for this sort of nonsense, and so they keep feeding the frenzy. Being famous in the UK seems like it may be a much harder job than being famous in America, all things considered- because the retard press will make big stories out of nothing and not let them go. This doesn’t happen in America, because having only one press, there isn’t enough time to devote solely to single retarded issues. So if you’re photographed in a way that makes you look silly, odds are your moment will pass. Even if you’re running for President or something, eventually people will stop talking about why you’re a bad bowler.

But the trouble with this is that, by combining the journalism of the UK retard papers with the importance of their serious papers, you’re left making retarded shit seem important. In order to justify the time spent talking about bowling scores or whether Obama made a huge gaffe by ordering orange juice instead of coffee, or whatever, they have to make it seem like these things might actually be important. does obama’s poor showing at the bowling alley mean he’s disconnected from the american people, who like to bowl?

It’s embarrassing, because while it never reaches the depths of inanity that the UK papers do- they don’t just make shit up out of whole cloth and then pretend that it’s affecting someone’s marriage, say- it’s legitimized by the fact that the retards talk about it like there’s actually an intellectual basis for it.

Check it out- there was a photo of Angela Merkel, the chancellor of Germany, at the opening of the Oslo Opera House a couple days ago, where she’s showing a lot of cleavage. And the retard papers ran articles about it with headlines like weapons of mass distraction and talked about how the dude she was talking to had to struggle to maintain eye contact. The serious papers ran articles about, um, her policy on biofuels and the resignation of her top advisor. But if Hillary Clinton wore that dress? You’d get articles in the US press about whether people would have a different opinion on her policy on biofuels because of the titty she showed, and whether her advisor’s resignation was related at all to the cleavage story.

Which is so obnoxious. Because even though the daily mail, which ran the weapons of mass distraction headline, has a circulation about six times that of the guardian, the gulf between the two in importance means that the dumb shit is never equated with the things worth talking about.

And man, watching the clips from that debate this week between Obama and Clinton, it sure is embarrassing, even for someone who is bombarded with images of David Beckham maybe stealing a glance at a Lakers girl’s ass as front-page news.