© 2005 Greg Kaiser

feel free to copy and distribute entire document

Dnews - January 20, 2008

Will v. Reason

   In a 5-4 decision the Supreme Court held that the will of conservatives defeats reason in all matters. This is widely believed to mean that moral and ethical, fairness or even considerations of possibility, functional integrity, efficiency or competence have no weight in the determination of policy or constitutionality. Only the contest of wills is relevant or meaningful.
   The only exception to the new ruling is that will is of no consequence, if the will of a non-conservative dominates. The occasion of that undesirable [to neo-cons] circumstance is the reason they wanted this court, which is even more conservative than itís been for the past thirty years. Theyíve seen clearly that judges may only be activists in conservative causes. Many opponents believe that, since thinking people are almost always stronger than conservatives, the latter think they must rig the system to hold back their own extinction. If thwarted, theyíll soon be deader than the Dodo. However the system theyíve rigged is killing US all, even the fools who rigged it, but they canít or wonít see it. Conservatives donít acknowledge that theyíre ordinary human beings like the rest of US.
   Human cultural critic, agkaiser, commented that the decision marks the beginning of the long feared end. "The Supreme Court has cleared the way to eliminate the last vestiges of reason and morality from politics and economy. Civilization wonít survive ten years. This support for the conservative will, defeats the rule of law and sanity. It provides virtual anarchy for the masters of the corporate empire and slavery for the ordinary consumer/taxpayers who support the greatest scam [show] of all time, with their purchases. The problem is: the rich want all the money and want the consumers to work for nothing or at least very little, to enhance profitability. The idiots canít see that there will be no profits if consumers have no money to buy things. Further, if money is loaned to consumers, that interest will exacerbate the problem as will payment on the principle. Itís like trying to get the energy to walk by eating your legs. The money they loan US comes from past profits on the products we purchased. This kite canít fly forever! But they wonít give up high profits by paying US enough to buy the products on which the profits are made. Each individual among them sees its own bottom line. Collectively they are an idiot that canít see the destructiveness of their individual childish greed.
   "By the way, it may be too generous to call the neo-cons idiots or morons. Such estimates presume they are sincere persons of good will, who are merely misguided by their inability to think clearly. Obviously this is not always the case. Some are schizoid in their simultaneous belief in contradictory notions such as their contention that their greed is good for themselves and the community it victimizes. They are at cross purposes with themselves. This is beneath even the intellectual capacity of an idiot and deserves less respect. Others have a higher degree of self awareness of their cynical selfishness but still donít see the destructive cumulative effect of it. Again, this deserves even less respect than a moron."

   The opinions of agkaiser are not necessarily those of Delusanews or the editor and author himself.

   In economic news today, Central Bank Chairman, Ben Bernanke, announced that interest rates must be increased to avoid wage increases that might be inflationary. He said the confidence of Wall Street bankers and investors in their ability to maintain strong profitability was the primary concern of business and government. When asked to comment on the affect of the implied further impoverishment of consumers on profits from the sale of goods, he feigned a headache and left the podium, without responding. After five minutes of double talk supplemented by reading the phone book, one of Dr. Bernankeís assistants dismissed the assembled reporters from the royal court, with an admonishment to stifle any impertinence, "if you really understand enlightened self interest."

   Post Apocalyptic economist, Carlos Marques, explains what led up to the end days. -
   "Many believe that it was the looting of the commons, manifested as privatization, that accelerated dramatically after the 2000 election, which was the principle cause of the collapse. Not so! The plundering of Social Security and the Treasury outlays for military, police, prisons, Medicare etc. to privateers and mercenaries was the mop up. The main action and betrayal of America had been operating in plain view for centuries. While the latter day scavengers, feeding on privatization, did exacerbate and accelerate the dissipation, it was the slow concentration of wealth, signified by the increase in debt of all kind, in the control of banking, insurance, capitalization etc. that brought US down. In short, it was finance and inadequate estate taxes that broke US.
   "The bankers, or economists if you will, also facilitated the looting of American industries by CEOs and other stockholders. The politicians, that the late comers had in turn enthralled, helped them to loot pension funds, social security etc. while diverting the revenues that were earmarked to fund earned benefits to the profit of managers and investors. All such activity, including outsourcing and wage depression to increase profits, exacerbated the betrayal by the rich and accelerated the collapse but were, when all is said and done, the afterthought of those who wished a piece of the action before the break up of the game. Of course the big lie of corporate benevolence was enabled all along by conning a plurality formed by the alliance of working class Christo-fanatics and Babbit like middle class Republican clones. Both of these massively deluded subcultures would believe without question the spin and propaganda of the evil money masters, who denied the economic disease until even after the terminal end had been reached. Some of the idiots still havenít caught on."

   In local news, a homeless cab driver was arrested for felony impertinence to a 79 year old woman, to whom he responded when she told him his ilk didnít deserve medical care.
   According to the driver, whoís name is being withheld until the sentence has been served, "She defended the high price of drugís when her 84 year old boy friend paid $171 for a prescription. She said pharmaceutical research costs justified the price. I said 15% of pharmaceutical corporation expenses are for research and 30% for advertising and another 30% profit. [see Pfizer Annual Report 2004: 52.5B revenue, 7.7B research expense, 14B net profit plus profit of 6.7B hidden in common stock purchases. If pharmaceuticals were produced on a non profit basis the advertizing and profit savings would take away at least 60% of the expenses. If confronted with this reality the drug companies would spin-lie, flim flam or curse your heritage in denial but the bottom line is that nationalization creates a minimum potential savings of 60% on the price of drugs.] She said she had worked for a drug company and all those chemists are expensive. I said the numbers donít lie - CEOs, economists, managers and politicians lie! I said that I havenít had a prescription or seen a doctor for ten years because I canít afford it. That at age 59 Iíll be lucky to see 70, given the medical care I can pay for. She said I should give her friend and herself a discount on the cab fare to help them with the drug costs. I retorted that I would stand with her to deal with the real cause of high costs, excessive profits. We can demand the nationalization of pharmaceuticals and insurance. Why would she expect someone who canít afford his own to bear the burden of excessive profit in the cost of her drugs? That sounded like typical corporate spin and conservative self serving illogic to me. Had I despaired facing the improbability of a real solution, I might have asked if she thought that death was what I deserved, in her world view? Before I could, she told me I didnít deserve to live and called the cops."
   When asked by the arraignment judge what the impudent driver thought he deserved for the uppity impertinence toward his betters, the driver aggravated his jeopardy with more criminal speech. "If I ever express to one of my more arrogant customers what I really think of their pretentious notions and middle class hubris, I hope I can reign it in before I kill the idiot! With all due respect, and thatís not much, Ďdeserve has nothing to do with it!í The delusion of meritocracy, held and expressed by some bourgeois thrall, will push me over the edge one day. I hope my expression of grief for our dead democracy and outrage, with the hubris of wannabee neo royal aristocrats, is creative and non-violent."
   After hearing the drivers revised and extended remarks, the judge presiding at the arraignment ordered that he be remanded to the house of correction and held indefinitely without bond or further hearing. The jurist commented to the press, "Thatís one criminal malcontent who wonít be terrorizing decent people again! God gave US the Patriot Act and I intend to enforce the letter and the spirit of the law. Itís onerous, heinous and unpatriotic for cab drivers to speak unless spoken to by their betters. Everyone knows, driving a cab is as low as one can fall. I hope this example teaches a lesson to all those who serve the good people of our community."

   contact me:

Greg Kaiser
email to

I'll feed myself and provide other necessary resources so that I may continue to write.

A G Kaiser

return to Delusanews index