Tuesday, October 25, 2005
Mousey logic
This problem is difficult for rodents to solve. Most cats can handle it, almost all dogs, and all humans with enough IQ to live independently can solve it.
When you appoint an unqualified friend to an important office, and the friend messes up royally, most humans of executive level would learn something from the experience; especially when so many highly qualified people are visible through the open door. When a chief executive continues to jump toward unqualified friends immediately after such an embarrassing experience, we're entitled to wonder.
Not that there's anything essentially wrong with gummint jobs or patronage, when used sensibly. FDR avoided national collapse during the Depression by giving gummint jobs to laborers, writers and artists. Nothing odd about that combination of trades, either. A classic revolution explodes when writers and artists detonate the mass of laborers. Even in ordinary times, patronage can keep political adversaries occupied and [nominally] loyal.
But none of that applies here. Harriet Miers is not a potential revolutionary or opponent, and the alternatives are not chancy or mysterious.
More seriously, I suppose this is an implementation of electoral engineering rather than pure lack of native intelligence. Assuming the base will just lay down and take all sorts of abuse, while trying to win over a few NARAL members with repetitive jabber about "trailblazing womyn". It's still stupid, because this one appointment was the only remaining source of hope and loyalty for the base, and those NARAL members will never vote for anyone who ever knew a Republican. ¶ 9:31 AM
This problem is difficult for rodents to solve. Most cats can handle it, almost all dogs, and all humans with enough IQ to live independently can solve it.
When you appoint an unqualified friend to an important office, and the friend messes up royally, most humans of executive level would learn something from the experience; especially when so many highly qualified people are visible through the open door. When a chief executive continues to jump toward unqualified friends immediately after such an embarrassing experience, we're entitled to wonder.
Not that there's anything essentially wrong with gummint jobs or patronage, when used sensibly. FDR avoided national collapse during the Depression by giving gummint jobs to laborers, writers and artists. Nothing odd about that combination of trades, either. A classic revolution explodes when writers and artists detonate the mass of laborers. Even in ordinary times, patronage can keep political adversaries occupied and [nominally] loyal.
But none of that applies here. Harriet Miers is not a potential revolutionary or opponent, and the alternatives are not chancy or mysterious.
More seriously, I suppose this is an implementation of electoral engineering rather than pure lack of native intelligence. Assuming the base will just lay down and take all sorts of abuse, while trying to win over a few NARAL members with repetitive jabber about "trailblazing womyn". It's still stupid, because this one appointment was the only remaining source of hope and loyalty for the base, and those NARAL members will never vote for anyone who ever knew a Republican. ¶ 9:31 AM
