Vol. 2. No. 58 March 16, 2007

The Bogus Economist
Counting

There are only three kinds of people – those who can count and those who can't. The Bogus Economist, for instance, just can't keep track of the number of strange happenings driving the evening news of late, from Brittney Spears' novel haircut to the frantic diaper-clad cross-country drive by astronaut Lisa Marie Nowak (allegedly for purposes of kidnap) to the free-for-all as to who is the father of the late Anna Nicole Smith's baby. It's pretty confusing.
Then there was the string of disasters for the Far Right. First, guru Ann Coulter solemnly informed a gathering of conservative Republicans (to loud applause) that not only were Al Gore and John Edwards “faggots,” but that Bill Clinton was “a latent homosexual.” Later, on Fox news, (where else?) Miss Coulter claimed the whole thing was “a joke” and would not offend gay people. This turned out to be about as accurate as the latest “light at the end of the tunnel” Administration message about Iraq.
Reaction to the Coulter charge was swift in coming. One critic remarked anyone who thought Bill Clinton was ANY kind of a homosexual probably couldn't find one at a Barbra Streisand concert in San Franciso on Gay Pride night. One gay blog opined Miss Coulter wouldn't know Edwards was gay unless she tried sleeping with him, which was unlikely to happen since Edwards had better taste. Another blogger thought calling Coulter a transvestite would be a pretty good joke, too. I guess gays just don't have Miss Coulter's sense of humor.
More recently, Newt Gingrich, principal author of the Republican Revolution of the nineties, disclosed that while he was bashing Bill Clinton for fooling around with an intern, he was....fooling around with an intern. Following the stories of Rush Limbaugh's addiction to prescription drugs and Bill Bennett's addiction to gambling, it seems only fair these guys should be free to have other addictions, too.
Maybe it's just me, but it seems the louder some people preach, the more they get into hot water for doing what they're preaching against. Naturally, the more “conservative” they are, the higher the standards for ethical and moral behavior they call for. Mr. Bush, for instance, came in with a promise of the highest ethical standards. I presume this did not include the Vice-president's Chief of Staff being found guilty of perjury and obstruction, his boss and Bush political advisor Karl Rove both implicated in “outing” a CIA agent, eight U.S. Attorneys with good performance records being fired amidst charges they were busted for going after Republican bad guys and Halliburton moving its offices to Dubai from Houston in order to avoid U.S. taxes. The reaction by the public to its government is increasingly one of sticking its finger down its throat.
What's the matter with us? Whether Republican or Democrat, white or black, rich or poor, we all seem to lose our moral bearings the minute we get into positions of power. O.K., you're more likely to be there if you're rich and white than if you're poor and black, but we've seen the story of Democratic Congressman William Jefferson of Louisiana and the $90,000 Federal investigators found in his freezer. Corruption seems to be less about black, white or green than about the opportunity to get away with something due to the junction of time and opportunity.
One way to deal with this is to change our criterion for elected office. Instead of asking whether a person is “conservative” or “liberal,” we might try finding out whether the person is or isn't a crook. We've already had a President who assured us he wasn't, but Mr. Nixon resigned all the same. I can't recall a President since Truman who wasn't involved in possible illegalities. Since we elected these folks, we've got to bear some responsibility. I overheard a veteran at Portland's V.A. Hospital say, “If the Good Lord meant for us to vote, He'd give us decent candidates.” So why do so many politicians give off the odor of day-old broccoli?
One answer is we're expecting our elected officials to do what we ourselves might not even dream of doing. Bear in mind most of our Representatives and almost all of our Senators are pretty well-to-do. Every time a Bill calls for higher taxes or fewer tax breaks for the rich , this is money out of their pockets. Before we ask a senator, for example, to vote against Mr. Bush's desire to make the tax cuts over the last five years permanent, we should remember most of these tax cuts were for those making over $250,000 a year. If you were one of these fortunate people, would you vote to take a few thousand dollars out of your own bank account? Would you vote for higher fuel economy standards knowing this might make your Exxon shares less valuable?
There must be a better way. If you or any of your friends can think of one, please send it on to boguseconomist@gmail.com and I'll print it. Somewhere out there, we've got to find the kind of American know-how that brings the potential of this country to focus on the common good.
It's all we can count on.

-30-
The Bogus Economist © 2007