Crooks or Cranks?

-
Here's a philosophical question for you with real world implications.

Given a choice between ONLY one of the following two options, which would you choose?
  • Governed by criminals
  • Governed by lunatics
 Speaking for myself, I'd choose the criminal element: they are at least predictable and on many occasions, their ruthless self-interest will align with mine.

If, on the other hand, you'd prefer to be governed by lunatics...well, you had your chance this weekend to show your support for the local members of the Flat Earth Society.

 The choice is yours.

PS - Had enough of these whack jobs?  There's hope for reasonable people again courtesy of the most trusted newscaster on television.

Comments

Lisa said…
I'm with you Dr. Ralph, give me the crooks!
11:13 PM
The Whited Sepulchre said…
Doc,
You've presented your audience with a false dichotomy. We are currently suffering from an unholy alliance of your two choices !

(I wish you could've been at the Tea Party, just so I could enjoy your reactions.)
8:24 AM
Hot Sam said…
I'll accept the false dichotomy for the intellectual challenge it presents, but can you please describe the nature of the lunacy and the criminality?

Are we talking Bernie Madoff criminal, Josef Stalin criminal, Kenneth Lay criminal, or Richard Nixon criminal?

Are they mad scientist lunatics, Rain Man lunatics, Mel Gibson lunatics, or Cindy Sheehan lunatics?

That may make all the difference in the world for my choice.
12:52 AM
Dr Ralph said…
Nick -- I'd say we have a range of criminals and lunatics that crosses the entire spectrum you describe -- and in both major parties.

Sad to state for our mutual friend the WS, I'm sure if the Libertarians managed to win enough seats to become more than a novelty we'd see them claim their share of brigands and idiots as well.

Looking forward to seeing you next week!
12:05 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Holiday Movie Cavalcade

-
I didn't do much over the holidays (alas) but I did see movies. More movies than in all of the rest of 2009. It was all mainstream fair, but enjoyable nonetheless. Read on: no spoilers. Sherlock Holmes Holmes and Watson as action heroes. Robert Downey, Jr. and Jude Law star. Early on, Holmes (Downey) does some bare-knuckle fisticuffs which were sufficiently violent that Spousal Partner decided she'd had enough. By the way, Rachel McAdams (as Holmes' love interest Irene Adler) is freaking gorgeous. Needless to say, this was " based on characters created by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, " and not part of the Holmes canon. Purists may turn up their noses but it was rousing good fun. Avatar (3D) I wasn't initially planning to see this (it registered a bit high on the hype-o-meter) but Youngest Son saw it with friends and said he'd see it again with me.  I find that I tend to enjoy movies a lot more if I've previously lowered expectations.What I'd r
Read more

Contact Fedex Delivery Dept For Your Package....

-
Dear Customer! We have been waiting for you to contact us for your Confirmed Package that is registered with us for shipping to your residential location. We had thought that your sender gave you our contact details. It may interest you to know that a letter is also added to your package. However, we cannot quote its content to you via email for privacy reasons. We understand that the content of your package itself is a Bank Draft worth of $800,000.00 USD, FedEx do not ship money in CASH or in CHEQUES but Bank Drafts are shippable. The package is registered with us for mailing by your colleague, and your colleague explained that he is from the Country but he is here in Nigeria for a three (3)months Surveying Project as he works with a consultant firm in Nigeria West Africa We are sending you this email because your package is been registered on a Special Order. What you have to do now, is to contact our Delivery Department for immediate dispatch of your package to your re
Read more

A few random thoughts on "Cancel Culture."

-
 A friend of mine recently took exception when I mocked people (mostly conservative) who tossed around the term "Cancel Culture." It seems in the opinions of many some (mostly conservative), it's a freedom of speech issue. Not really. And it's not a First Amendment issue either, when Facebook or Twitter cancels your account for praising white supremacists, or neo-fascists, or other right-wing dickheads. " Cancel Culture ," which, according to Wikipedia, was originally an outgrowth of the "MeToo" movement, (so not so much about speech as calling out behavior - specifically against women) has morphed now into the latest right-wing NewSpeak  term for "I'm being punished for expressing my opinion."  Dig a little deeper though and you'll find the issue is not so much about "free speech," as "consequence-free speech." I mean...if you are going to be an opinionated ass, at least have enough self-respect not to be a w
Read more