|
|
|
June 22, 2010
This awful spill was caused by greed!
When I read about the Obama $7.00 a gallon gasoline "Global Warming" agenda, my reaction to the "plan" was to exclaim, "I'm beginning to think that these people don't want to get reelected!" I didn't want to write a post, though, for I'm worried that the direction of the "spill spin" is still undetermined, and my biggest fear is that the Democrats might be trying to figure out a way to use the mess (with media help, of course) as a campaign issue. In the minds of too many people, there's an equation which comes down to this: BIG OIL = GREED = REPUBLICANS! The greed equation has an unfortunate tendency to be self-activating during periods of financial stress (something we saw in the last election cycle which left McCain trying to simultaneously stand up for the free market while bashing greed, which left him pleasing few leftists, and even fewer conservatives and libertarians....) As the idea that "they" don't want to be reelected, Roger L. Simon thinks that in his heart, President Obama really doesn't: Ever since viewing his depressing and disconnected "energy" speech last week, I have been mulling whether Barack Obama actually wants to be president anymore. That was an address given by a man who looked very much like he didn't want to be there, didn't want to continue. He appeared slumped and worn, as if he aged eighteen years in eighteen months. His demeanor was oddly distracted.I am sure he fantasizes about basking in the glory of being a former president, and it would not surprise me if he is jealous of Bush. But I think Obama is enough of a politician to realize that these are just fantasies, and are not a real option. The Democrats have power right now, and they are not about to let go of it. Especially when they have an opportunity to use to their benefit a growing disaster aided and abetted by their own incompetence. The problem with the greed equation is that it lets them off the hook every time. The Republicans are "for" greed, while the Democrats are against it. Oil represents pure greed -- of the sort we should all be ashamed -- even if it is an ugly necessity. So not matter what happens, what counts is that the disaster was caused by greed, the Democrats are fighting greed, and therefore they are the heroes. A depressing post by Jay Tea that Glenn Reynolds linked yesterday reminded me that all roads lead to the greed equation (the Democrats being against, and the Republicans being for). ...the situation below the former Deepwater Horizon platform is developing into an ecological catastrophe that could scar -- and economically cripple -- the US for a very, very long time.Jay Tea outlines four hypotheses as to what might be going on: 1) The disaster isn't as bad as we all think it is, and the Obama administration knows that.While none of these really matter in terms of the greed equation (which is implemented as political spin), I can't help notice how bullet-proof in nature the leftist ideology is. Actually "bullet-proof" is understatement, because the bullets can actually serve to strengthen it. As the disaster grows in size and scope and becomes more unsolvable, the more emotionally appealing the "greed" argument becomes -- both to demagogic politicians and to cringing citizens who believe in collective guilt. The magic of being on the Democrats' side of the greed equation is that condemning greed allows you get to deny your own greed and gain the moral high ground in the process. This works in a similar manner to the egalitarian superiority racket. Elitists who fancy themselves "superior" deny it by expressing utter contempt for "inequality," (which establishes their superiority!) while those who are in fact greedy, power-loving consumers (of taxpayers' dollars and oil) condemn all greed. This proves their generosity, and they see themselves as taking from the greedy only to give to the deserving. How generous of them! (And of course, deregulation is greedy, while regulation is generous!) That this is total hypocrisy is lost on most people. So the question becomes, who are you going to vote for? The greedy? Or the generous? The spill was caused by greed. Are you part of the solution, or part of the problem? I sincerely hope the voters are not that dumb. Because if they are, my only recourse is to hate them, which always sucks. posted by Eric on 06.22.10 at 12:05 PM
Comments
Ah. The reviled rich. I know a multi-millionaire who thinks billionaires are greedy. Definition of greedy: anyone who has more than you do. OK I'll play. Governments are the greediest bastards on earth. M. Simon · June 22, 2010 02:55 PM None are greedier than those who want the government to steal their livelihood for them and their political cohorts. Brett · June 23, 2010 06:56 AM None meaner, either. Brett · June 23, 2010 06:57 AM I would suggest it's not that voters are dumb, but that they don't pay much attention. They believe what they see from the NYTimesWashPostCNNABCCBSNBCetc. So if you're going to hate people, hate them for the right reasons. Veeshir · June 23, 2010 11:23 AM You've got to be kidding. I thought you had half a brain. Who do you think is driving this train to hell - Republicans? If you drive a car or live in a house you are just as much to blame as anyone else. Sorry Shit Happens Keith O · June 23, 2010 02:41 PM You've got to be kidding. I thought you had half a brain. Who do you think is driving this train to hell - Republicans? If you drive a car or live in a house you are just as much to blame as anyone else. Sorry $hit Happens Keith O · June 23, 2010 02:42 PM Opposition to greed makes it easier for the "herd of independent minds" to stampede in another direction. Any regulation or government program will make some people rich. If a government program formerly admired by the left turns out to be a mistake, opposition to profit makes it possible to blame everything on greed and backtrack without admitting that yesterday's leftists were mistaken. Joseph Hertzlinger · June 23, 2010 11:13 PM I thought I had half a brain too! Eric Scheie · June 24, 2010 09:28 AM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
June 2010
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
June 2010
May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSAAGOP Skepticism See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
• Real storm? Or election year storm?
• BBC Covers Amateur Fusion • Can't? Or won't? • As the remarkable becomes unremarkable... • Tariffs • Got An Old Hard Drive? • His Allies Are Deserting Him • Greedy • This awful spill was caused by greed! • Flying in the face of zero tolerance
Links
Site Credits
|
|
The only way to fight this is not in the short-term, through the polls, in whatever the next election cycle happens to be, but in the long-term, through media and popular culture, and advertising/marketing and propaganda.