The Rich Are Different

“That’s one of the nice things. I mean, part of the beauty of me is that I’m very rich. So if I need $600 million, I can put $600 million myself,” he said.
–Donald Trump, in an interview with Ashleigh Banfield, wherein he also announced that something about President’ Obama’s birth and past is a tad fishy.

At the risk of sounding like some kind of commie yet again, can I point out that the psychological pathology of the above statement (and video) makes it clear that far from being placated further, America’s rich need to be kicked to the curb, pronto, because they are as certifiably crazy as any inbred potentate throughout history, and likely, unchecked, to cause at least as much damage?  I suppose the string of increasingly younger and more costly women in his life may make Donald Trump think he sees “beauty” in the doughy, fright-wigged horror in the mirror, but then again, other corrupt (and physically revolting) nincompoops have thought the same, improbable, thing; it’s a story as old as time.

Money in copious quantities, especially in a culture as money-worshipping as ours, does more than just work to derail democracy and impoverish everyone but the moneyed; it turns its grabby, narcissistic recipients into, alternately depending on the day, whining, put-upon victims, or superhuman, divinely-inspired conquering overlords.  Both notions are, not to put too fine a point on it, a little divorced from reality, and ought to be treated as such.  When bailed-out banksters justify their serial thefts from customers, taxpayers, and even shareholders, they proudly declare that they are doing “God’s Work.”  When clueless environmental scofflaws are confronted with criticism for killing people in large numbers and wiping out ecosystems, they peevishly lament not having their yacht-racing “lives” back.   Then, take the Koch brothers.  Please.  Ripping people off and ruining the planet is their selfless “life’s work,” to their addled minds, and as such their combined $40 billion or so can never be enough.  We, as a country, owe them, precisely because they do have so much money.  They’re every bit as beautiful as The Donald, with the trophy wives to prove it.

The evidence clearly shows that while we’ve been endlessly told that money is good for the rich, but bad for the poor, as Lewis Lapham memorably put it, the opposite is closer to the truth when one considers the glaringly obvious effects on the comparative mental health of the two groups, not to mention the effects of this puzzling theory on society as a whole.  After a certain point, money does make a person too crazy to be listened to, much less hold high office, but yet we are forced to listen to them day after shocking day, and yet nearly all of them think they should either be President, or at the very least get to pick who is.

Whether it be Jan Schakowsky’s plan for a millionaire’s surtax (supported by an astonishing 81% of those polled), the rollback of the Bush (and Reagan, for that matter…) tax cuts, the removal of the Social Security cap, or all three, something must be done, at once, to free rich people from their crazy-making money.  They’re all drunk, and somebody’s got to take away the punch bowl.

13 Comments

  1. nancy says:

    Trump/Palin 2012! Michelle Bachman can be Attorney General (she’s a lawyer, ya know), Mel Gibson, Sec. Def.(think Braveheart). Oprah can be Ambassador to Mar-a-Lago. What strange country are we living in? Time for a Guiness. Erin go bragh and all that.

    Oh and in the “tilting at symbols” department, the House has decided to save the budget by scrapping NPR.
    Take it away Congressman Weiner.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJFivQYjC-Q&feature=player_embedded

    Hag, just keep in mind. The meek are to inherit the earth.

    • cocktailhag says:

      Now that’s a real Dream Team. Sadly, nothing’s too ridiculous to entirely dismiss, these days. Sarah Palin for Ambassador to Russia? Why not? Rand Paul for Surgeon General? Go for it. We’ll probably just end up with more (absent) Hope and Change by pure, unadulterated default. Whoopee.
      I was just reading about the Obama administration’s latest comments about nuclear power and Bradley Manning, and I got a sudden urge to drink (more) heavily. I’m Irish, too.
      Loved the Weiner diatribe, although I thought it could have been more substantive… Too much humor, not enough of it the gallows kind.
      Well, at least the non-meek took care of that Death Tax thing ahead of time… Or we’d be screwed again.

  2. dirigo says:

    This guy is a jerk. He’s rich, hard working, and very successful, and he has had his own weird television career (unlike Jack Welch). But when all is said and done, he’s still a jerk – and a bad hair jerk at that.

    Martha Stewart should fire HIM.

  3. meremark says:

    -

    It so happened that I saw the video segment broadcast, the points of reference in it anyway. (I almost never watch TV … alas, the things we do for amore’.)

    Through it I imagined there is a scripted farce being played out, and The Donald only reading his lines.

    Situation: The expected slate of rightwingers are being dropped off the back end or tossed under the front of the 2012 campaign bandwagon. The field of ‘serious’ prospects has evaporated from more than a dozen to about 2, (Romney & Pawlenty), or 1, (Mormon Romney), during the brief 5 months since the last elections.

    Punditure persons have observed already that there is no credible GOP 2012 contender obvious in the politiscape. (Rumors have surfaced that Wisconsin’s Walker was being positioned in the wings to make a grand delayed entrance with surprise rightwing-approval poll numbers, but that black-suit hole card got discarded after being bluffed by a phone call.) One by one, each of the ‘possible’ contenders propped up after the Nov. election, has fallen in the approval numbers, gaffe after gaffe, into oblivion below half the ‘likely voter’ support polled for any unspecified generic Democratic opponent, whether Obama or not.

    If the revue was allowed to continue its stage run, by the 4th of July there would be no R-sided ballot names left in the running, really, for 2012.

    Enter Trump. A dummy placeholder. To draw the fire and occupy the air time of the blathering pundits, lest further public inspections and background investigations would scratch off the R.slate the last remaining couple of ‘real possibilities’ — defined as: names that could be pronounced on-air without erupting laughter.

    With Trump calling the cameras to himself, the fragile fool (Romney or whoever it is) gains extended time under the radar to make the required low-life connections and unexamined dealings during the entire rest of this year. Then

    presto! Trump jumps aside and voila’ The Candidate steps forward in a flash and races through the primary season unchecked, the only name on the goon ballot, popped out the R.Convention and into Nov.2012 before there’s been time to retrieve his rapsheet; (unquestionably it’s a ‘him’, this is the rightwing socio-defectives party we’re talking about).

    Trump is a placeholder. In the impossible hope that there’s a player to be named later who can withstand the public mass rejection.

    The greatest damage to Trumpublicans is an immediate dismissal as a farcical foil. Spit take. No, he doesn’t get to come back on the show next week and try to play out the string. Snip: he’s cut. One ‘interview’ and he’s totally outta there already.

    The wannabe Kings party has got nobody.

    -

  4. retzilian says:

    Well, they *have* candidates, but nobody who can win. Pawlenty is too milqtoast for the raving lunatics on the right (buzzz); Huckabee is fat, or was fat, and is from Arkansas (buzzzz); Mitch Daniels is too short, balding and would be linked to Dubya (which is still toxic)…buzzzz. Palin? Buzzzz. Bachman? Shirley U. Jest. Everybody hates Romney. Paul is the most popular, but the party bosses will kibosh him as well.

    So, we are stuck with the Obama disaster unless we put up another candidate.

    • cocktailhag says:

      Something about as likely as Sarah Palin getting a real job…. I do like Meremark’s theory about the placeholder, though. It is impossible for the Republican nominee to be elected; they have to do and say too many crazy things, so putting up a temporary candidate until the last minute seems smart..
      A pretty depressing prognosis, indeed.

  5. Ché Pasa says:

    All right, so let’s accept the fact that Our Ruling Class is a bunch of Stupid Jerks — many of them with criminal tendencies and very bad hair.

    So why do they rule not only our own most excellent selves but the rest of the world to boot? How come? Why do we pay any attention to them at all?

    I’m sure the sans coulottes were asking the same question before that little unpleasantness in France with tumbrils and guillotines and such. And they were asking the same thing in Bucharest in 1989. And in the various Tahrir Squares just a few days or weeks ago.

    Why do we pay any attention to them at all? They are stupid and they are criminals and they are bleeding us dry.

    Why do we let them?

    When we stop paying attention to them, except to clap the lot of them in irons, their power over us will be broken. But not until then.

    As long as their stupidity and their antics continue to captivate our attention, they will continue to rule.

    We’re well beyond the point where elections can bring positive change.

    We’re in the Redress of Grievances phase of politics. At that point, who the Parties put up for election becomes far less important than the power of the People to demand and insist on what is to be done.

    The ‘Baggers took advantage of Public Despair to insinuate themselves in Power, and the entire apparatus of Government is shuddering. Reaping the Whirlwind, indeed.

    The question is who is going to pick up the pieces?

    • cocktailhag says:

      Good question. It seems clear that a reelected Obama will continue placating the right and adopting their memes, which, paradoxically, will only make the right even crazier.
      The scary part is all the new police state apparatus just lying around, waiting to be used, should anybody really make a ruckus.

      • Ché Pasa says:

        Sure. There is a police state apparat in place, and it is periodically activated to suppress various leftwingers, rounding them up, subjecting them to subpoenas (that would be St. Patrick Fitzgerald of Scooter Libby fame on an anti-leftist crusade of some sort) raids and confiscations, threats, arrests, and so on.

        Yep. It is going on as we speak. In Portland no less than anywhere else.

        It’s harassment more than anything else right now, but it could easily morph into full-bore suppression of (leftist) dissent and enforcement of (rightist) conformity. We’ve been down that road before.

        Ultimately it’s a question of where the loyalties of the enforcers lie. And whether they can be shamed.

        Obviously, Our Betters (exemplified by Trump? Sarah P? Newt???) are simply incapable of feeling Shame, and it appears that His Serenity in the White House likewise knows not the bracing effects of shame.

        But then, neither did Bull Connor. And George Wallace only came to understand it a little bit after he was shot. It ultimately was the rank and file of the enforcers — and by no means was it all of them — who said no mas to their overlords.

        We’re not there yet. Headed there, but not there yet.

  6. avelna says:

    Well, supposedly a judge in Wisconsin has blocked the union-busting bill, for whatever that’s worth. Remains to be seen I guess.