Comments on: Too Smart To Succeed

By: DLS

DLS — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 20:04:23 +0000

“The people in charge of the economy (regardless of party) are insanely intelligent, far too much for their own good because you have to be that smart to justify their BS outlook. Intelligence without wisdom is nothing.”

Well, they're “playing government” and “playing nation” in many cases, as I've observed aloud before, and often blundering while experimenting with this, playing with that.

But “for their own good” has more than one meaning, and do they neglect how well they will do, for themselves, while in power? No. Already, we see a managed consolidation of the financial sector, which has obvious beneficiaries, in addition to tax money given to financial institutions and then given to those in leadership positions there. We see not only interference in GM and Chrysler already, but with the upcoming “climate” legislation, for example, a prime opportunity not only for insiders to profit from federal R&D and grant monies and political “industrial policy” energy-related decisions, but likely, too, as I have warned, as intermediaries if “cap and trade” (interventionism and politically-based energy rationing) is imposed on us. Al Gore is the celebrity already identified frequently as ready to benefit in such an unseemly manner from political decisions, but the entire Obama Team insider contingent and well-connected political and business allies should also be expected to benefit from such schemes, to name just one, striking example (cap and trade).

By: DLS

DLS — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 19:58:00 +0000

“So smart they can't even tie their own fucking shoe laces, even if they can arrange to profit from cap and trade and other decisions that affect them and their peers.”

By: ProfElwood

ProfElwood — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 22:37:28 +0000

The elitists exist in only the Democratic party? I guess that means Bush, Bush, Reagan and Newt are/were all Democrats. Wow, it's all finally coming together now! That's why all those people with big Ds and Rs next to their name voted to repeal Glass-Steagall — they were all following the DNC. I feel so enlightened now!

By: TheMagicalSkyFather

TheMagicalSkyFather — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 19:48:33 +0000

I specifically remember hearing how wonderful everything was for 8 years while jobs did exist but at about half the wage they did pre911 and then even those jobs evaporated. It was wonderful, for Wall Street and it continues to be wonderful…for Wall Street.

By: JSpencer

JSpencer — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 19:19:34 +0000

“The problem for Democrats is that most people don’t actually dwell in “this economy.” They live in the one where they work (or don’t), the houses in which they live (or no longer live), the credit cards they have to afford (or not afford) to pay some bills, and the local government services they are getting (or no longer getting). That economy stinks. For many people it’s still getting worse.” ~ MS

I had to laugh, since that particular concept has been a problem for the republicans at least as long as it has for the democrats. Same old…

By: dgfunk

dgfunk — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 19:00:24 +0000

Excuse me, but how do the “economy” and the economy wind up as two separate things? The post makes it sound like Wall Street is being coddled while “Main Street” is being ignored for some reason, like it's possible to build the roof before the foundation is finished. But, hey, as long as the author can rail against the Democratic “elites” what does it matter that the post is a brain dead pile of compost?
If Mr Silverstein really wanted to help those poor folks on Main Street, he would support the passage of a healthcare bill that provides universal coverage. That way, people could get care when they're sick or injured regardless of their employment situation.

By: dduck12

dduck12 — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 15:34:48 +0000

Is hubris the same as “too smart”?

By: AustinRoth

AustinRoth — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 15:21:14 +0000

Yep, I misread it. Oops.

By: mikkel

mikkel — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 15:12:29 +0000

Uh Austin, did you think that the Soviets were dumb? Michael's entire point is the primary rallying cry of conservatism and non-centralization of power…

He's entirely correct. The people in charge of the economy (regardless of party) are insanely intelligent, far too much for their own good because you have to be that smart to justify their BS outlook. Intelligence without wisdom is nothing.

By: vey9

vey9 — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 14:51:54 +0000

"And then do things that really improve their economic lives rather than instructing them about their intellectually and academically improving macro-economic parameters."

Well, they could expand the wars to the point of needing a draft. That would soak up most of the excess labor. Or they could bring back the CCC to get the drug dealing kids out of the cities and put them to work in clean fresh air. Or maybe bring back the WPA Writer's Project to give all these nattering nabobs something important to write about rather than complaining about how hard it is to find work because the newspapers keep folding.

Any other ideas?

By: AustinRoth

AustinRoth — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 14:50:57 +0000

(T)he people running this Administration’s policies aren’t stupid. No, sir. They’re very smart. Too smart, in fact. That’s their problem — and the reason the Democrats took such a whacking in yesterday’s elections.

Oh, excuse me while I go clean up all the puke off my keyboard.

The old 'Democrats are just too damn smart for the dumb old masses to appreciate' meme. Talk about the exact kind of condescending intellectual superiority complex and ivory tower elitist mentality that has traditionally kneecapped the Democratic Party.

"If only everyone could admire us as much we we admire ourselves, and accept our obvious worthiness to rule over you, the U.S. and the World would be such a better place."

Nope, I just cannot understand why THAT isn't a winning campaign slogan.

Well, actually I can. Democrats cannot, though.