To be sure, dear confused reader, there will be no explosion of any literal sort if Harry Reid decides to go "nuclear" today, tomorrow, or any other day. What is "going nuclear," in Senatespeak, you might ask? Reid and the Democrats (or whoever is leading the Senate) can circumvent the more typical two-thirds vote to change the Senate's rules. With a simple majority, Reid could make it so that a 51-vote majority can end or block a filibuster from the minority party when it comes to presidential appointees. It looks nothing like this:
The term is rife for puns and metaphors. Although I don't think the current fad is as bad as the "fiscal cliff" we were either going to run into, fall off of, or swan dive from (depending on the writer) at the end of last year. D.C. loves war metaphors. How often do politicians "set off firestorms," "mount attacks," or go "on the offensive" without actually doing any of those things? Politicians even run in "campaigns," which can be defined as "a series of military operations intended to achieve a particular objective."
Yes, this all might be a little superficial, but if we are to believe the Sapir"“Whorf hypothesis that the vocabulary we use to describe a topic affects the way we think about that topic, maybe it isn't. It's clear from the headlines of the last few days, Congress = War.