brainrow

Bill Clinton used to bite his lip and tell suffering Americans, “I feel your pain.” George W. Bush is different. New York Times columnist Paul Krugman says Bush feels no pain:

Why doesn’t Mr. Bush get any economic respect? I think it’s because most Americans sense, correctly, that he doesn’t care about people like them. We’re living in a time when many Americans are feeling economically insecure, but a tiny elite has been growing incredibly rich. And Mr. Bush’s problem is that he identifies so totally with the lucky, wealthy few that in unscripted settings he can’t manage even a few sentences of empathy with ordinary Americans. He doesn’t feel your pain, and it shows.

Here’s what Mr. Bush said in India, when someone raised the question of the political backlash against outsourcing: “Losing jobs is painful, so let’s make sure people are educated so they can find — fill the jobs of the 21st century. And let’s make sure that there’s pro-growth economic policies in place. What does that mean? That means low taxes; it means less regulation; it means fewer lawsuits; it means wise energy policy.”

…

The fact is that we’re living in a time when most Americans are seeing little if any benefit from overall income growth, because their share of the economic pie is falling. Between 1979 and 2003, according to a recent research paper published by the I.R.S., the share of overall income received by the bottom 80 percent of taxpayers fell from 50 percent to barely over 40 percent. The main winners from this upward redistribution of income were a tiny, wealthy elite: more than half the income share lost by the bottom 80 percent was gained by just one-fourth of 1 percent of the population, people with incomes of at least $750,000 in 2003.

And those fortunate few are the only people Mr. Bush seems to care about. Look at what he had to offer after asserting, in effect, that workers get outsourced because they don’t have the right education: lower taxes, deregulation and fewer lawsuits. Funny, that doesn’t sound like “pro-growth” policy to me. Instead, it sounds like a wish list for wealthy individuals and big corporations.

Mr. Bush once joked that his base consisted of the “haves and the have-mores.” But it wasn’t much of a joke.

I just watched the Academy Awards show, all the way through, because Jon Stewart was hosting. Big mistake. Every time I’ve watched the Oscars, I’ve sworn I’ll never watch again. This time I double-dog swear. Horrible, horrible, horrible.

The only good moment in three and a half hours came early, when George Clooney won for best supporting actor:

And finally, I would say that, you know, we are a little bit out of touch in Hollywood every once in a while. I think it’s probably a good thing. We’re the ones who talk about AIDS when it was just being whispered, and we talked about civil rights when it wasn’t really popular. And we, you know, we bring up subjects. This Academy, this group of people gave Hattie McDaniel an Oscar in 1939 when blacks were still sitting in the backs of theaters. I’m proud to be a part of this Academy. Proud to be part of this community, and proud to be out of touch.

For a moment there, I got my hopes up. Words of wisdom: never get your hopes up while watching the Oscars. (Quote courtesy of Crooks and Liars.)

While flipping channels this weekend, I heard a pundit discussing George W. Bush’s recent dismal polling numbers, and the difficulty Bush faces in improving those numbers. At the end, he said that about the only thing that could help Bush’s popularity right now would be another terrorist attack.

The pundit didn’t mean to suggest that Bush would actually welcome a new attack. He just wanted to show how tough Bush’s position is right now.

You’d have to search for a while to find someone with a lower opinion of Bush than my own, and even I think the notion that Bush wants a terrorist attack is outrageous. And yet I don’t think we can put that thought completely out of mind, either.

This New York Times editorial says George W. Bush is Iran’s best friend:

At the rate that President Bush is going, Iran will be a global superpower before too long. For all of the axis-of-evil rhetoric that has come out of the White House, the reality is that the Bush administration has done more to empower Iran than its most ambitious ayatollah could have dared to imagine.

In Iraq, Bush has empowered Iranian-aligned Shiite fundamentalists. In India last week, Bush unilaterally abandoned the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and handed Iran a great argument to use when their own nuclear ambitions come before the United Nations.

The Iraq war has given al Qaeda a great recruiting tool and a practical training ground for trying out new terror tactics.

The Dubai ports deal will provide considerable inside knowledge about U.S. port operations and security to a government whose royal family has had friendly relations with the Bush family and with Osama bin Laden.

At what point does incompetence cease to adequately explain this administration’s behavior? Is there some point at which even the most skeptical observer has to acknowledge that there is some malign will at work here?

In some ways, the terrorists have done more than anyone to advance George W. Bush’s fortunes. Whether through ineptitude or malice, his presidency has been helpful to them, too. Their fatal embrace has benefitted both Bush and the terrorists. It’s been very bad for the rest of us.

For several weeks now, I’ve had just one final chapter yet to read in The Once and Future King, T.H. White’s novel about the legendary King Arthur.

I keep putting off reading that last chapter. I don’t want to let go of this book.

The novel brings together four shorter books. The Sword in the Stone, originally published in 1938, tells of Arthur’s childhood and his education by the wizard Merlyn. The Queen of Air and Darkness, first published (with a different title) in 1939, tells of Arthur’s early years as king. The Ill-Made Knight, published in 1940, tells of Lancelot and Guenever. The Candle in the Wind recounts the end of Camelot. It was not published separately.

The early parts of the novel are full of mythical creatures, magic and humor. Merlyn turns the young Arthur into various kinds of animals, so he can live among them and learn from them. As the story progresses, it grows more serious and more rooted in reality. By the end, we are left only with truth and consequences.

One legend says that Arthur did not die, but only sleeps under a hill in Avalon. He will return in England’s hour of greatest need. The legend is poetic and poignant and beautiful. That may be why three books about King Arthur were popular in the early years of World War II.

The legend is also, of course, utterly wrong. White’s Merlyn understands this. Early in the young king’s career, Merlyn refuses Arthur’s entreaties to tell him what to do. Arthur was educated so that he could think for himself. When the king finally does start thinking for himself, Merlyn’s relief and elation is electrifying.

In any era, people don’t solve their problems by waiting patiently for a hero to appear. Real heroes do not rise out of an enchanted mist. They are mortal people who step forward in a time of trouble to do what is needed. That kind of heroism is within the reach of anyone, yet it is so exceedingly rare that those who exhibit it become the stuff of legend.

A perennial:

Did you hear about the fire at the White House? Firefighters were able to confine it, but Bush’s personal library was completely destroyed. Both books. Including one he hadn’t finished coloring yet.

Last week on PBS, I saw an ’80s video clip of Gore Vidal telling the same story about Ronald Reagan. It was an old joke even then. I first heard it on a 1971 comedy album by an odd comedian named Stanley Myron Handelman, with Spiro T. Agnew the butt of the joke.

The following joke arrived in email. I see that it’s already been posted around the web in various forms, with various people the butt of the joke. I suspect it’s another perennial.

President Bush recently went to a primary school in Macon, Georgia, to talk about the world.

After his talk, he asked if the children had any questions. One little boy put up his hand, and the President asked him his name.

“Kenneth.”

“And what is your question, Kenneth?”

“I have three questions:

1. Whatever happened to the weapons of mass destruction?
2. Why did you give a tax break to the super wealthy?
3. Did you steal votes to win both elections?”

Just then the bell rang for recess. President Bush informed the kiddies that they would continue after recess.

When they resumed, the President said, “OK, now where were we? Oh, that’s right, question time. Who has a question?”

A different little boy put his hand up. Bush pointed him out and asked him his name.

“Larry.”

“And what is your question, Larry?”

“I have five questions:

1. Whatever happened to the weapons of mass destruction?
2. Why did you give a tax break to the super wealthy?
3. Did you steal votes to win both elections?
4. Why did the recess bell go off 20 minutes early?
5. What happened to Kenneth?”

Oh boy! Bumper Stickers!

I found this place by clicking on an ad. Their designs don’t seem as polished as some others, but I admired some of the sentiments.

I’ve never ordered from the company, so I can’t vouch for them.