Well, I actually don't want to talk about video games. But for the purposes of this post, let's start by considering the character of these two arch rivals...who first faced off in the seminal arcade game back in the 80's. Sure, Pong and PacMan and Space Invaders preceded these two...but their debut was the moment when video games assumed sympathetic anthropomorphic form. And what classic rivals they were: Donkey Kong, the larger, brutish, unthinking thug who had kidnapped the princess; in opposition, the hero was played by a simple plumber, equipped only with the insistence that wrongs be righted.
We've just been informed about the results of a ranking called The Atlantic 50 (not surprisingly collated by the magazine of the same name). The methodology is threefold: survey 250 Washington insiders on who most influences their thinking; assess the reach of each of these 'voices'; and then grade each for 'webiness', the extent of their reach online and via social networks.
And right at the top, what do you know--there's Mario and Donkey Kong--assuming, as I do, that Paul Krugman of the New York Times slips easily into the role of Mario...and that Rush Limbaugh (from the planet of the same name) is the quintessential Donkey Kong. Picture the 'kidnap victim' here as civil American discourse, and I don't see how you can fail to see the radio radical as DK.
What pleases me is that somehow Krugman comes out on top. If you don't know his work, he is the unapologetically wonkish Princeton economist who wound up writing a column that correctly predicted, among hundreds of lesser alerts, the folly of the Iraq invasion and the collapse of the mortgage markets. By character and accomplishment, he is the prototypical 'pointy headed liberal' that Nixon first started warning about in the 70's. He is the antithesis of Limbaugh, who is nearly always wrong, doesn't care, and if pushed, will concede, "hey, I'm not a journalist--I'm an entertainer".
For Krugman to lead this pack...in the center of what is clearly the most self-centered pocket of America east of Sunset Boulevard...where the hard right exerts influence far beyond its importance in the nation...well, I'm hoping that this says something. Because it may mean that even the people who despise him...also concede Krugman's command of the facts. They need to understand the reason of the matter...if only to prepare their next set of fallacious talking points.
And if we can ever move back to a discourse where the facts matter...well, there may be hope for the princess after all.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Monday, September 14, 2009
Owning and pOwning
The other day one of my favorite conservative adversaries was complaining about the 'socialist takeover' of our government. "I guess if that's what they want, fine, but I just worry about the future of my children and grandchildren". Interestingly, his issue of the moment was not a public option in the health care system (I'm guessing that he also fears a future where one or more of his grandchildren, despite their hard work and best efforts may still be denied medical care). Instead, what still bugged him was the government-arranged 'resignation' of GM CEO Rick Wagoner, even though that happened six months ago.
It must be said that the government, now owners of 60% of GM, were simply exercising the same oversight that boards of directors have applied to millions of American workers.
But no matter. In the end, I agree with him. I wish the government didn't have to spend a minute of its time or a dollar of tax payer money worrying about GM...or Countrywide Financial...or CitiGroup...or any of the rest of them. I wish the people hired and paid to run these entities had simply done their jobs.
But they didn't. Consequently, I do support the intrusion of government by an order of magnitude--but in a specific way. Not in the role of holding the reins of private industry. Instead, when necessary, slapping the hands that hold those reins until they bleed.
During the Bush years we saw the evil genius of reactionary thought played out transparently. As was evident, part of that playbook called for repeating the Reagan mantra, "government isn't the solution, it's the problem". A fundamental tenet of this creed is that all government workers are lazy, fumbling bureaucrats who couldn't hold a job in the 'real world'--unless, of course, they are firemen, policemen, members of the armed forces, the nurses in VA hospitals who care for those servicemen and women, members of your family, or yourself. On the other hand, underlying evidence in support of this cynicism came regularly in the form of 'Brownie' mishandling the FEMA response to Hurricane Katrina...or now, the retrospective failure of Chris Cox and his cronies exercising oversight on the likes of Bernie Madoff, or for that matter, all of Wall Street.
What's that you say? The people I appointed to these jobs were idiots or co-conspirators? No! The government is the problem, don't you see?
The fact of the matter is that the SEC is exactly the type of place where government should be 'pOwning' business. Its powers of punishment should not be limited to financial penalties, but also incorporate criminal recourse. The entities they oversee should be taxed to fund 100% of this enforcement, just like we're expected to pay 100% of our speeding tickets and the salaries of the policemen who issue them. And the budget for those agencies of enforcement should be multiplied until success is realized.
As has been reported frequently of late, a year after the financial meltdown, the financial system not only has not reformed--it's actually worse than it was two years ago. Unregulated greed and unmitigated gall never left 'the Street'. The faces may have changed, but the practices have not. The only difference is that now, the successor clones are using 'house money'--our tax dollars--to help place their new reckless bets.
I have an acquaintance with a spoiled young daughter in college. In the process of failing to bother with any academics during her freshman year at a lovely campus in California, she also managed to wreck the nice new car Daddy had bought her.
His response was quick and firm: "that's it! I've had it! The next car she wants she's going to have to research herself--I'm not going to just go pick it out for her!"
This is where we are with Wall Street. They have no fear of Daddy, because they know Daddy has no teeth.
Time to sharpen up the incisors.
It must be said that the government, now owners of 60% of GM, were simply exercising the same oversight that boards of directors have applied to millions of American workers.
But no matter. In the end, I agree with him. I wish the government didn't have to spend a minute of its time or a dollar of tax payer money worrying about GM...or Countrywide Financial...or CitiGroup...or any of the rest of them. I wish the people hired and paid to run these entities had simply done their jobs.
But they didn't. Consequently, I do support the intrusion of government by an order of magnitude--but in a specific way. Not in the role of holding the reins of private industry. Instead, when necessary, slapping the hands that hold those reins until they bleed.
During the Bush years we saw the evil genius of reactionary thought played out transparently. As was evident, part of that playbook called for repeating the Reagan mantra, "government isn't the solution, it's the problem". A fundamental tenet of this creed is that all government workers are lazy, fumbling bureaucrats who couldn't hold a job in the 'real world'--unless, of course, they are firemen, policemen, members of the armed forces, the nurses in VA hospitals who care for those servicemen and women, members of your family, or yourself. On the other hand, underlying evidence in support of this cynicism came regularly in the form of 'Brownie' mishandling the FEMA response to Hurricane Katrina...or now, the retrospective failure of Chris Cox and his cronies exercising oversight on the likes of Bernie Madoff, or for that matter, all of Wall Street.
What's that you say? The people I appointed to these jobs were idiots or co-conspirators? No! The government is the problem, don't you see?
The fact of the matter is that the SEC is exactly the type of place where government should be 'pOwning' business. Its powers of punishment should not be limited to financial penalties, but also incorporate criminal recourse. The entities they oversee should be taxed to fund 100% of this enforcement, just like we're expected to pay 100% of our speeding tickets and the salaries of the policemen who issue them. And the budget for those agencies of enforcement should be multiplied until success is realized.
As has been reported frequently of late, a year after the financial meltdown, the financial system not only has not reformed--it's actually worse than it was two years ago. Unregulated greed and unmitigated gall never left 'the Street'. The faces may have changed, but the practices have not. The only difference is that now, the successor clones are using 'house money'--our tax dollars--to help place their new reckless bets.
I have an acquaintance with a spoiled young daughter in college. In the process of failing to bother with any academics during her freshman year at a lovely campus in California, she also managed to wreck the nice new car Daddy had bought her.
His response was quick and firm: "that's it! I've had it! The next car she wants she's going to have to research herself--I'm not going to just go pick it out for her!"
This is where we are with Wall Street. They have no fear of Daddy, because they know Daddy has no teeth.
Time to sharpen up the incisors.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
School Daze
At this moment the President of the United States is directly addressing school children across the country.
But not all of them.
Because, of course, many parents have determined that their little ones will not, damn it, be subjected to the propaganda of this evil socialist scourge. After all, as the dizzy home schoolers have learned, the best way to teach your children is to keep them out of school.
Now, it is tempting to just plainly say what's at work here: ironically, the parents making these types of decisions by definition are dealing from a gene pool which is so deprived that school won't really help their kids anyway.
But the larger issue should not be lost.
The people who have turned this innocent moment into a political battle have once again shown themselves to be political terrorists of the level that renders Al Qaeda a forgettable afterthought.
Shame on them.
But not all of them.
Because, of course, many parents have determined that their little ones will not, damn it, be subjected to the propaganda of this evil socialist scourge. After all, as the dizzy home schoolers have learned, the best way to teach your children is to keep them out of school.
Now, it is tempting to just plainly say what's at work here: ironically, the parents making these types of decisions by definition are dealing from a gene pool which is so deprived that school won't really help their kids anyway.
But the larger issue should not be lost.
The people who have turned this innocent moment into a political battle have once again shown themselves to be political terrorists of the level that renders Al Qaeda a forgettable afterthought.
Shame on them.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)