boomlet?

what kind of a word is "boomlet," CNN?

well, that's what they're using to refer to the upswing in U.S. babies being born. but they didn't need census data to tell them that, they could've just ASKED ME. (see my december post where based on my own empirical research, etc., i concluded EVERYONE IN THE UNIVERSE BESIDES ME was pregnant).

what's interesting is that the boomlet (the word is actually kind of growing on me now, like a good kind of tumor) is bucking the trend of other western nations toward fewer children, CNN reported. but instead of blaming the rising birthrate on women who were successful enough in life to find someone to reproduce with them (a positive thing!), apparently "experts" also cite "a mix of reasons: a decline in contraceptive use, a drop in access to abortion, poor education and poverty" (negative things!).

to be fair, the article goes on to say americans also just like children, and we like having a lot of them when we're doing well and prospering. [we're doing well? with oil at $100 a barrel, soaring debt, the war in iraq, all those foreclosures??? huh. somebody shoot me, i had no idea.]

argh. i. will. stop. writing. about. kids. babies. now.

[i'm applying for jobs in cali-for-ni-yay! the wine country! i'll keep you posted. i'm sure i'll be sending in my application packet for these positions along with 7,000 candidates, so while there's a good possibility i'll be blogging from my parents' garage next year at this time, let's hope not!]

p.s. oh. well, i guess CNN didn't invent the word "boomlet," some demographers did. those crazy demographers! first they invent the word "census" back in the 1800s or something, then "boom," and now "boomlet." maybe they should just go get jobs with webster's if they want to be so fancy with words.