0612 - Thinking

Before going any deeper into the subject, we want Readers to know that we are firmly and irrevocably in favor of Thinking, despite the neglect of this healthful exercise at local, state, and Federal (definitely) Government. Indeed, our Political Seer was watching the Senate hearings on the nomination of Roberts, J. to be Roberts, Chief Justice. All Senators gave long boring statements, irrelevant to the issue of confirmation, Several disgraced themselves as noisy blatherers, but the candidate shone. That man is smart. On the recommendation of our Seer, we adopt his prediction of a strong confirmation vote, and we endorse the nominee ourselves. Now, will our Readers who attack us as “Liberal” please understand that calling someone a name is not argument – and BTW (By The Way, e-mailese), being “liberal” is not the same as being wrong. The word is actually a nice one.

Further to thinking, we have often drawn Readers’ attention to the difference between 1) Wisdom and 2) smartness and quickness. Wisdom is knowing what you don’t know. If you never admit there is something you don’t know, if you never admit an error, then you are not wise. President Bush for the first time in recorded memory took responsibility for shortcomings, but he wasn’t happy about it, and he didn’t say what he had learned. What he should have said, but didn’t, was that he had appointed a FEMA head (and assistants) who had no qualifications. But he didn’t. He also did not draw the comparison with the Iraq Botch and his clinging to the plainly incompetent (though highly verbal) Rummy. But, it’s a start: one botch at a time.

Going off subject for a moment – not an unusual practice here – we want you to read the perfect acidulous art review. The New Yorker has arrived, with a review of a retrospective of one Robert Smithson at the Whitney Museum. The reviewer (Peter Schjeldahl) says: “In visual mediums, Smithson was some combination of the congenitally talentless and the allergic to sensory enjoyment. I defy anyone to defend anything in the Whitney show as being satisfactory to look at.”

Now, that’s an acid review. We could say the same about the New Orleans debacle, but CNN reminds us that the hurricane forecasters were damn perfect in predicting and warning, and the Coast Guard was ready and able. Which brings us to the subject of naming someone to oversee the big flood of Federal money to be disbursed for relief and rebuilding. We have thought deeply, and we have a nominee both smart and qualified, and whose naming would be a stroke of political genius. If we were in the White House (all but unthinkable, eh?), we’d ask Bill Clinton to take charge. Note the brilliance. The rebuilding Czar will be criticized by everyone, no matter what he does – why not name Clinton? The naming would be treated as an act of high non-partisan statesmanship. And anyway, Clinton is very smart, except below the belt.

Our Staff, which loves to think, has been deliberating whether New Orleans should be rebuilt just where it was, below waterline, and if so whether the levees should be raised. Or, should most of the city be moved? We have no consensus, but we do think this should be decided before starting the rebuilding. It isn’t the American way, but we’d think first and rebuild next.

And on the subject of thinking, we do not want you Readers to chicken out on next week’s column. We intend to discuss taxes, and we know you hate the subject [this is true of all Americans and all Anguillians alike]. But, it is your duty to think, so please show up for duty. No slacking. It won’t hurt.

Next time: Taxes [OO #613]

| Printer-friendly page | Send this article to a friend |

Home