Stickybuffalo.com

ENVY

Let me start things off by taking my own whack at the now well-thrashed piñata of Mitt Romney’s latest pronouncement, that complaints of widening inequality are simply “envy.” I think that to some extent, in the current political climate, this attempt by Romney to claim the crown for “most out-of-touch presidential candidate since George Bush, Sr.” needs no real rebuttal; by all means let him self-destruct. Those taking the occasion to make or repeat useful points about inequality, meanwhile, have already done a fine job.

But I thought of one more point, yesterday, which I think is interesting enough to record here; I think this might be a good response if one were in a debate with Romney (and actually wished to contest his dismissal of inequality). A bit long for a genuinely good sound-bite, probably, but oh well. Here goes:

Think about it this way, Mitt. Imagine you have a friend who plans to start a company. He’s going to need a lot of start-up capital for this enterprise, say $200 million. So you and, say, 98 other friends all go in as investors; not necessarily in equal shares but all 100 people have contributed something to this project. The $200M total is reached, the company is launched, and huzzah! your investments produce a success. Or, that is, they produce growth, but not for 99% of those who made that growth possible, you included. Certainly, the amount of initial contributions varied so one would likewise expect investors’ shares of the growth to vary, but everyone should receive something. Except that 99% are receiving absolutely nothing, with all of the growth going to the enrichment of just 1 in 100, the CEO having through some chicanery or other arranged to keep all the company’s growth to himself. This is entirely contrary to how things were supposed to work, themes of “a rising tide lifts all boats” and “everyone in this together” having been constantly repeated when money was being collected. And so, naturally, you and the rest of the 99% intend to protest this outcome, vocally and aggressively. Asked to respond to your charges, the CEO shrugs disdainfully, waves his hand and pronounces them “just envy.”

And undoubtedly, Romney’s warped corporations-are-people perspective would find various reasons why this is an invalid parallel. He still insists that Romneycare and Obamacare are completely different, after all. But I’m not sure he convinces anyone else. (more…)

It’s been some time since I’ve done one of these posts, and I hadn’t even really intended to be writing any sort of “series,” anyway. But, hey, maybe it’s a decent idea. I can certainly think of a thing or two to say to one state in particular, of late… I actually wrote this up about a week ago and then thought, hm, isn’t this just gratuitous even by SB “standards?” But having given it further reflection, actually: no. The problem is not going away, and may well be getting worse. So, then…

Dear Tejas,

Could you just go the fuck away, at some point here, already?

Seriously, for all that we hear about fucking Texas this, Texas that, Texas Texas Texas all fucking day long day after day week after week all year ’round, what positive contribution to anything has come out of Texas in recent memory?

The Mavericks’ victory in this year’s NBA finals, maybe? I didn’t personally see this as positive, but I realize that many non-Texans nonetheless embraced the Dallas team as America’s sweethearts in spite of being the expensive toy of Mark Cuban, whom most people otherwise agree is a dumbfuck jerk. Aside from myself, there was indeed widespread sentiment that a Mavs victory was desirable, because old Dirk Nowitzki “needed” to get a championship finally, and more importantly because someone needed to prevent the Miami Heat from getting one, because they had been appointed as the “bad guys,” because they seemed to be obnoxious and full of themselves… like, in other words, the entire state of Texas…

Still, for argument’s sake, I’ll grant that the state of Texas was somehow the savior of the NBA this year. Considering all the noise which comes from that particular renegade former province of Mexico, I don’t think “hero of the NBA finals” goes very far. What else does Texas have to its credit?

…yes, that would be the sound of crickets chirping if this were a podcast.

(more…)

It’s that time again. Yesterday, the MMQB column of vacationing Peter King was turned over to First Sergeant Mike McGuire for some July 4th, rah-rah boosterism about America’s activities in Afghanistan.

Criticism of this, particularly on our most exuberantly patriotic, flag-waving All-American holiday, would no doubt be very poorly received by many, were they to read any such remarks. Despite the fact that the very document which makes this day a holiday, as the anniversary of its adoption, objects repeatedly to the government of the day’s expansion and elevation of the army within American society. America’s founders were indeed, like much of the nation throughout its early decades, suspicious of and opposed to standing armies in general, British or American. Hardly much precedent for an obligatory “support the troops” sentiment, then.

All the same I’m sure that King, who has sort of “adopted” McGuire as a patron hero during the past several years, would probably at least question my timing in making critical comments, if nothing else. Which is fine, since I’ve long questioned the active and energetic embrace by King, and many others, of “the troops” as a sort of all-purpose, all-weather, nonpartisan, unifying cause for unequivocal celebration. (more…)