1) It’s Monday, January 26, 2015. It’s 6 days until the Super Bowl, 21 days until Presidents Day and 54 days until spring.

2) I’m especially thinking about spring. The New York metropolitan area is about to get nailed with what could be the worst snowstorm in its history. 1888. 1947. Fuggedaboudit. So spring can’t come fast enough for this scribe.

3) The folks at Five-Thirty-Eight point out that, should the blizzard forecasts prove accurate, six of the 10 biggest snowstorms in New York’s history will have occurred since 2000. 

Now, I’m willing to guarantee some TV scholar or wisecracking lawmaker will use this fact as evidence that global warming is bunk.

And the problem is that calling it “global warming” has actually minimized what’s going on. It’s “climate change,” and anyone with eyes and a little sense of history knows what that means. It’s not just the fact that snowstorms, thunderstorms, hurricanes and the like are bigger than they used to be, but big storms happen more frequently than they did when I was younger. It seems as though we get into these patterns that produce these massive weather events, and that poses a safety risk for millions of people.

4)  Donald Trump is apparently ticked off that “Meet The Press” host Chuck Todd scoffed at the idea that Trump is “seriously” considering a presidential run. 

Actually, Mr. Todd and I should both be ashamed of ourselves.

Putting “Donald Trump” and “seriously” in the same sentence — as I did in the first sentence of this section — is a violation of reason and sensibility, no matter what the context. It insults people’s intelligence. I apologize.

5) A new documentary on sexual assault at the nation’s leading campuses is creating a buzz at the Sundance Film Festival. It’s great that “The Hunting Ground” (whose backers include my former employer, CNN) can focus attention on this issue.

I’m looking forward to seeing it when CNN airs it sometime this year.

The Rolling Stone article about the University of Virginia that created such a furor late last year was a setback for those who believe this problem is a scourge. By not talking to anyone at the fraternity in question, the writer and editors left questions about the credibility of the young woman who was the story’s subject. That stunk.

I have no sympathy for a mindset that sees young women as prizes, commodities or notches on a belt. I want the film’s producers and backers to make an ironclad case against that mentality and rout it from every campus in the nation. And what I don’t want is some well-lawyered fraternity or sports program to come back and say, “They didn’t give us a fair shake. They never talked to us. We weren’t allowed to give our side.”

Let them give their side, as distasteful as it would be. I have no doubt young women who make accusations will be tarred as someone less than idyllic.

But sexual activity without informed, clear-headed consent is rape. Let that truth prevail, and if those accused choose to sully a young woman’s reputation instead of explain their own conduct, hold their goddamn feet to the fire.

No, it’s not.

So why is this Web site called Subjectism?

The original name was supposed to be The Subject Is M…, and every topic would begin with the letter M. Being that I’m Mark M. Meinero, I have an affinity for the letter.

But I registered the site as subjectism.com, not thesubjectism.com. And the letter M is not as topic friendly as I originally thought — unless I wanted every other post to be entitled “My, etc.”

So then I had to think about justifying “Subjectism.”

And here’s how I do it (wish me luck!):

I really don’t want to write about personalities or trivialities. (I’m sure I’ll slip into it) I want to write about real issues, real things that happen. Bruce Jenner’s current gender doesn’t interest me. The fact that President Obama mentioned the rights of transgendered people in the State of the Union address does.

Plus, there’s the idea of making up a word. That, I like.

So we’ll try this. I’m sure there’s some other name I can come up with if this doesn’t work. But this sounds right to me for now.

A little more than 13 weeks ago, I walked out the door at CNN.

For nearly 16 years, I edited and assigned stories, managed the CNNMoney Web site homepage and did a couple of other things as well. I worked with people whose talent left me in awe.

But the parent company made me an offer to leave that was really, really sweet. It still impresses people/makes them insanely jealous when I describe it.

And it was time to leave. I was starting to get that old-timey way of talking about how great things were back in the day that reminds the rest of the staff of how annoying their parents are, too.

Then there was the commuting. Commuting in New York is bad enough. Commuting from the part of the metropolitan area where I live is like living in the 19th century. The bus schedules are probably the same ones stagecoach lines used in 1888. The buses aren’t that much younger. I could count on three hours in transit, and knew four or five was just a jackknifed-tractor-trailer-on-The-New-Jersey-Turnpike away.

So I accepted the “voluntary separation agreement.” I said a long “Goodbye.” And thought about what I’d do next.

This is item number one.

Because CNN frowns upon its editorial employees spouting off on what CNN covers, I had to restrain myself. I had to resist comment online concerning topics and issues that everyone else felt free to say whatever-the-hell they wanted about. Elections. Controversies. Crises. I could talk about it with my family, my friends and even with my colleagues. But not publicly. Not on social media. Not in a blog. Not in a campaign.

That’s over.

That’s what Subjectism is supposed to do. It’s part sounding off, part therapy and all making up for lost time. There are so many things that interest/excite/bother me, and the opportunity to write about them is too much to resist.

Plus it seems only fair to let all the people whose copy I’ve edited over the years take comparable shots at me.

At the very least, I plan a 5-item thoughts-of-the-day post each weekday. There will also be single-item posts as the mood hits me.

At heart, most editors believe they are the best writers they know. This is my chance to test that.

Tell me what you think. I look forward to your comments as this blog makes its way into the Internet maelstrom.