EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- One American Who Isn't For Sale
- Edward Snowden: Saving Us from the United Stasi of America
- Major Loss to Organic Farmers as Court Rules in Favor of Monsanto
- The Judicial Lynching of Bradley Manning
- Remembering Satyajit Ray’s Hirok Rajar Deshe: On Edward Snowden, Resistance and Inverted Totalitarianism
Popular content
Today's Top News
Blowin’ Like a Circle ‘Round My Skull
It is altogether a good thing that we have abandoned certain terms formerly used to describe persons who, through accident of birth or subsequent injury, suffer from mental delays or disabilities. Understanding, compassion and every assistance society can provide is due such individuals. Often they surprise us as they prove able to do more with less than we would have assumed possible in those times when they were observed, measured, classified and forgotten. And, having adopted a more decent, humane language for innocent victims of circumstance or God's perverse fancy, we are thus freed to apply the no longer used classification system to our public servants.
For instance, take President Bush. Please. There has been much discussion concerning his degree of impairment and the causes of it. Clearly, his years of drug abuse and intoxication have reduced him; his halting, slurred speech, blinking incomprehension and goofy smirk suggest the loss of much higher-order cognition. But, then, his family situation cannot be discounted. His father is none-too-bright, his brothers likewise. One brother, a crooked banker, is a criminal (we leave aside in today's brief investigation, the evidence condemning George W. as a war criminal). Genetically, he, as the saying goes around here, "ain't much." And how much of his disability may we attribute to being raised in a home with a weak, ineffectual father and Godzilla's big sister for a mother? Who can know? These things are complicated, to be sure.
Googling George Bush together with each of the three old terms reveals a puzzle. Google discovers the following number of references for our President: Idiot: 2,340,000; Imbecile: 122,000; Moron: 1,020,000. Curiously, people apparently feel he is either at the high or the low end of the less-than-average intelligence spectrum (IQ 50-69 or IQ below 20), with few placing him in the middling-imbecile range (IQ 20-49). The second-lowest number of Google hits lands him, in fact, in what I think is his most likely slot, Dull Normal (IQ-70-80) , where he receives 142,000 references.
Clinical descriptions aside, Google weights Mr. Bush's personality: Fool, 1,900,000; Clown, 819,000, Jerk, 860,000. Socially, culturally, politically, we find he is an Embarrassment 587,000 times. Interesting. And material for much discussion and perhaps many fascinating essays. But I do not come here today to discuss George Bush.
After all, he is only one man, however stupid, and however much a mistake it was to put him in charge of our country. More baffling, and more ludicrous, is the behavior of the millions of persons and tens of thousands of institutions who have chosen to put their excess cash into the stock market. You will not have missed the excitements of the past few weeks as investment banks have crumpled and folded like cheap lawn chairs under a fat man's fundament; nor the drama surrounding Congress's casting toward the titans of Wall Street nearly a trillion dollars of money we do not have and will be able to secure only by bleeding our children. Some members of the House of Representatives voted against this egregious welfare boondoggle apparently on principle a week ago, but within a few days many such objections evaporated as the bailout bill was "sweetened", as they say in the compliant press. The additions to the original bill might be more properly described as fat, greasy, gristly, lardy, rancid pork. Essential to our collective economic well-being, apparently, are:
Sec. 503. Exemption from excise tax for certain wooden arrows designed for use by children
Sec. 317. Seven-year cost recovery period for motorsports racing track facility
Sec. 308. Increase in limit on cover over of rum excise tax to Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands
Sec. 504. Income averaging for amounts received in connection with the Exxon Valdez litigation
Sec 502. Provisions related to film and television productions
Sec. 325. Extension and modification of duty suspension on wool products; wool research fund; wool duty refunds
Sec. 309. Extension of economic development credit for American Samoa
Sec. 201. Inclusion of cellulosic biofuel in bonus depreciation for biomass ethanol plant property
Sec. 211 Transportation fringe benefit to bicycle commuters
So you can see, as so many members of both houses and both parties and most newspapers and all television networks assured us, we "had to do something", we "had to act now." It was imperative that we pass this giant, poorly-understood, hastily-concocted bill to "calm jittery investors" and "restore confidence in the Market." So mid-day Friday last, the Market that we worship and fear and that makes us both wealthy and jittery, was up by about two hundred and fifty points. Upon hearing that Congress had done as its moneyed masters directed, the Market immediately lost those gains and dropped a hundred and fifty points further. Monday morning Europe and Asia panicked. Monday the Dow-Jones shed another three hundred, sixty-nine points. I Thank God Tom Allen and Olympia Snow and Susan Collins pledged their support for this fragile and beautiful creature in my name.
But why would I expect rationality from either stock speculators or Congresspersons? The former are flighty, unstable types, given to wild passions and profound fears, eager to buy into untested schemes and quick to lose faith in the system they profess to love and understand if it "fails to meet expectations." The latter live to line their own pockets, help their friends, secure re-election funds, position themselves for appointment to corporate boards upon retirement, and issue press releases calculated to mislead the victims of their malfeasance. It was in fact Democrats, the party of the people, rather than Republicans, the party of wealth and privilege, who most eagerly championed this "Rescue" effort.
No, my friends assure me, it is to the top we must look for leadership. A new President is in order. Sure, George Bush was an inspiration for many years, and we are still grateful to him for giving us two expensive and interminable wars, and for easing a bit of the onerous tax burden on billionaires, but we tire of him. We will vote in record numbers next month to elect either John McCain (more tax cuts for the rich), or more likely Barack Obama (more war in Afghanistan and, if they don't shape up PDQ, Pakistan). Surely that will change things.
Really? After the bailout bill failed (both candidates voting in favor of it) and before it passed (both again in the affirmative), each candidate proposed his own "sweetener" to make it more palatable. Apparently they came up with this brilliant idea independently of each other. This amendment, they said, was designed to do something "for families."
"Families", it seems, have been worried that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation only guarantees bank deposit accounts up to a hundred thousand dollars. Both candidates advocated raising the cap to a quarter million. Now, there are seven or eight banks in Damariscotta, Maine. Any of them would be pleased to have me deposit a hundred thousand dollars with them. Other members of my family could spread their hundreds of thousands across several accounts in as many institutions. I was unaware that so many of my neighbors had so many accounts in excess of a hundred grand that their money was not adequately protected.
But this is not the first time I have misread the public mood. I have foolishly spent my income on food and housing and transportation, rather than squirreling away so many hundreds of thousands of dollars that the banks cannot hold it all. My neighbors have apparently been more prudent, and they will be "reassured", they will have their "confidence restored" in knowing that they can now receive insurance protection for two hundred and fifty thousand dollars per account, thanks to the concern and attention and wisdom of candidates John McCain and Barack Obama.
Idiots. Imbeciles Morons. You decide. Then, by all means, vote if it makes you happy, if it makes you proud, if it restores your confidence.
At the close of books Wednesday evening, correspondent Cooper had on deposit in his account at Damariscotta Bank & Trust Company a little over sixteen hundred dollars, although fifteen hundred of that is reserved toward his twenty-eight hundred dollar property tax bill, so he is not as well fixed as a glance at the raw numbers might suggest. But this sum is about as close as he has gotten in nearly sixty years of life to testing the hundred thousand dollar cap on FDIC protection, so he remains comfortable and not jittery. He in fact confesses some measure of glee at watching the venerated Market teach its accolytes some sharp lessons. Send him such investment advice as you like.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...




32 Comments so far
Show AllI'm still going to vote--for Nader. I know, its pissing in the wind, but nonetheless, he stands for what I believe in. I'll at least sleep better knowing I'm not responsible for the continuing thuggery, looting and murder by Washington, Wall Street and the MIC.
Hopefully when we piss into the wind the wind will be blowing into the faces of duplicit politicans in both major parties.
Thank you, Mr. Cooper for this wonderful and funny article. I have not laughed this hard since I rescued my money from Washington Mutual.
Who needs centrally-controlled commerce that creates such oppression, chaos, and destruction? The top reason to not bail out the Wall St. casino is the fundamental insanity of investing our individual wealth with far-flung strangers. The wisest investment is clearly in our own individual and local community enlightenment and well-being.
Thanks rtdrury, "Neighbor First" instead of "Country First" when your "country" is defined by those in charge as the interests of the wealthiest of the wealthy. Trickle down all that love on me, "America," trickle 'er down! I'm waiting...I'm still here...uh...
I would like to propose that simple legislation be introduced, voted on and hopefully passed, that requires any person seeking to become a candidate for political office to take the Wechsler I.Q. test for adults, the MMPI/The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory that does quite a good job weeding out anti-social/psychopathic/sociopathic personalities, backed up, if necessary, by the new tests that include brain-scan reactions or non-reactions that strongly suggest that the candidate or candidates might likely be a psychopath, and that these scores and findings be included in medical records open to the public before an election.
Like chicken soup, it wouldn't hoit, and would be a simple protection for the public at large who seem to have become sitting ducks for the stupid, the addicted, the insane and the wicked.
Also with such a law, we likely would have a choice then of persons who did NOT reflect the "values" of a good portion of our own population. See Caribou Barbie a/k/a Sarah Palin inciting racism in her favored "red-neck" mobs to a point where KILL HIM becomes a rallying cry.
I say AMEN to that! We expect so much from other public servents, yet allow ones like G.W., and Palin in without a thought. I don't know the Wechsler IQ test, but I can imagine what the MMPI would show on these two - as well the current VP.
I'm just going to piss in the Idiot Wind, from the Grand Coulee Dam to the Capitol! and pretend I'm voting. For anyone. Who'll know the difference?
Nader can't win and neither can you! Vote Nader 2008 and be true to yourself.
bongofury sez:
"Nader can't win and neither can you! Vote Nader 2008 and be true to yourself."
By all means, if you want to be a loser, vote Nader.
Or, alternatively, be true to yourself and work for policies and ideals you share with Nader with all due respect, but vote for the candidate who can prevail over John McCain and open the door to more progressive change. Many of us took the plunge in 2000 and voted Nader on the theory that it made essentially no difference whether Gore or Bush was elected. Continuing to do the same thing expecting a different result is... that's right, still the definition of insanity.
..
Sections 201 and 211 are okay by me. 308 might be good--getting drunk could help us cope if Bush/McCain/Palin/GOP wins.
Outstanding article. You nailed it, Mr. Cooper.
Delightfully scathing!
when bush leaves office, some reporter will ask him what he thought of his eight years in office. his response: "it wuz sew eezy, the american people are so stupid. now lee me alone, i gut money to spend." a bullet would have been too good for him.
oh, and once again, mr. cooper hits it out of the park. another great job. thank you.
Okay, we all get a good wheeze at the expense of the Bush family and meanwhile the enablers behind the scenes just can't wait to introduce us to either idiot McCain/Palin or Imbecile Obama/Biden with their casts of cronies.
Or haven't you noticed that the two leading contenders agree on just about everything and along with their Congessional and Senatorial cohorts have been backed to the tune of several hundred million dollars in campaign, bribe, and hush money?
Nader/Gonzalez
or
McKinney/Clemente
and look up how your current congresonal representative and Senator voted on the bailout. If they voted yes (like Pelosi, Hoyer, Rahm Emanuel, and so many other Democrats) then vote for their opposition. The same goes for Republicans who actually proportionatly put up more opposition to the bail out than Democrats.
Poet
Poet sez:
"Imbecile Obama/Bide"
So you figure being Editor of the Harvard Law Review and graduating Magna cum Laude is evidence of a lack of intelligence?
Me, I'd take your figuring that way.
Just like your pick for President.
Do you want McCain?
Explain the difference between McCain and Obama, more specifically:
How they differ in policy regarding the major issues (energy, the wars of agression, and the financial melt-down for instance)
how different their financial supporters and advisors are (as in "he who pays the piper gets to call the tune").
As another poster here likes to state,"to know and not to act on that knowledge is not to know".
Don't worry Cntrl-z, your candidate (Obama) will win and other than a political style statement it won't make any difference at all.
Poet
A simpler way - and I suspect, more accurate - to assess these two men is to look at both of them directly and size them up as someone would who was free of the unnatural load of media-soaked-and-manipulated preconceptions we are all packing, despite our best efforts to be discerning. Surely it's folly to say you fail to see an appreciable difference between them. Obama and McCain are both quantitatively and qualitatively worlds - nay, galaxies - apart. Vote as you will, but let's keep our wits about us.
I hope nobody shoots Bu$h the inferior. It would give him sympathy he doesn't deserve. I also hope that for once people don't let him rehabilitate his reputation like Nixon. He is an extra foul turd and he must be remembered that way. Suicide would be good - somebody send him a pretzel.
Upgraded Pejoratives for Bloggers
George W. Bush isn't the only guy who gets called an "idiot" on the internet all the time!
Every time I publish a political essay that conflicts with the prevailing "wisdom" of the site where it appears, epithets like "moron" and "idiot" quickly accumulate around my name.
But as satisfying as it may be for so many pseudonymous posters to bang out "the idiot Jacob Freeze" or "the idiot George W. Bush" on their battered keyboards, they could signify an almost equivalent disqualification by writing "the gifted Jacob Freeze" or "the individual of highly superior intelligence George W. Bush," since even the highest categories on the scale of intelligence only include two or three people who will ever write anything other than gibberish about the monstrous complexities of American politics or the American economy.
I avoid the hopelessness implicit in this sad truth by narrowly basing my own opinions about political economics, for example, on a careful reading of Paul Krugman, and if a question about the political implications of foreign espionage arises where I don't have the guidance of Bob Baer or Pat Lang, I just shut up.
So the next time an internet pseudonym wants to insult George W. Bush, the enraged commenter might just as well hammer out "the genius George W. Bush" instead of "the idiot George W. Bush," because even geniuses don't understand politics any better than idiots, and you have to climb a hundred rungs higher up the ladder of intelligence before you encounter anybody who has a freaking clue.
Jacob Freeze
It would not be so such a bad situation if G.W. was just dim-witted or simply not competent to do the job he was given. In this context lack of ethical standards and other characteristics would be considered criminal behavior. The American people should have recognized this a long time ago and taken the steps available to them to safeguard protections that prevent politcal abuses. I think there is enough lack of moral character to go around and GW is the poster child. See you all in the remedial citizen class or soup lines.
I think I kind of agree with the sentiments expressed here, cynical as it seems. I'm voting Nader anyway.
I wish more people would put aside their irrational attachment to being saved by Obama's Democrat messiah complex to vote for someone would wants to try to rebuild this country.
Nader has stressed we need to bring union and skilled manufacturing jobs back to Americans. We don't make anything here anymore, our "wealth" is not backed up by doing anything substantial or meaningful to people. No wonder the schlock market is tanking.
"Goin' to the candidates' debate.
Laugh about it, shout about it, when you got to choose,
Any way you look at it you lose."
--From "Mrs. Robinson", by Paul Simon
hehe - thanks! i'd forgotten that.
jacob freeze,
great insight into the ladder of intelligence. perhaps geniuses and idiots are in the same boat, as you suggest, when trying to understand politics. still, a politician, especially the president, should have a basic grasp of leadership skills. bush has none whatsoever. he should be the poster child for the reason to practice birth control, or to keep the roe v. wade law in effect. to even include bush's name in the same sentence that includes these words "...the highest categories on the scale of intelligence..." is, like cooper's article, a bit amusing, if not disturbing.
In the "only-Nixon-could-go-to-China" category, in a sort of farcical stumblebum fashion, only the freemarketeers could have smashed up the machinery so badly that the government would be forced to start buying banks as the rats of capitalism ran frantically about the maze looking for the cheese this week.
THE US GOVERNMENT IS ABOUT TO START BUYING BANKS.
Did you hear the nutjob angrily screaming at McCain that we're "being taken over by Socialists"? Of course we're not -- but the surrender is significant, and since Free Market frauds put the country into an unpayable $10 trillion debt anyway, complaining about money that 'we don't have' is pitiable. The national debt spells the death of liberal capitalism.
This week we had the February revolution in financial markets. The Kerenskys will now try to continue the war; and in doing so, will bring red October.
Don't believe it? Think of where we were just two Octobers back.
It's a Barnum and Bailey world, just as phoney as it can be. Loved the list.
Joe
It's a melody played in a penny-arcade.
What I want to know is, what are those kids going to do with all those wooden arrows?