“Sometimes societies become too stupid to survive,” wrote columnist Mark Steyn last Saturday.
I cannot get the line out of my head. He was talking about America’s steady march to bankruptcy which, if it goes on much longer (like past November), will become irreversible. Has America become too stupid to survive? It would be an easy case to make.
We have a congress with the lowest approval ratings in history. Fewer than 10% of us agree with what our representatives are doing down there in Washington. The people answering the pollsters’ questions, however, are the same people who vote them in every two to six years! What does that tell us about ourselves? Answer that. Are we stupid?
Clearly, President Obama and his campaign operatives think we are. Either that or they’re stupid, and it wouldn’t be difficult to make that case either. Last Thursday, columnist Charles Krauthammer quoted our president speaking in September, 2011:
Warren Buffett’s secretary shouldn’t pay a [higher] tax rate than Warren Buffett. . . . And that basic principle of fairness, if applied to our tax code, could raise enough money [to] stabilize our debt and deficits for the next decade. . . . This is not politics; this is math.
But it’s not math. It simply doesn’t add up as both Krauthammer and Steyn emphasized last week. Both demonstrated mathematically that if the “Buffett Rule” were to collect taxes from wealthy Americans as the president proposes, it would take centuries to offset even one year of Obama’s deficits. So the president’s claim is either politics or stupidity, but it’s certainly not math.
My liberal friends - and I do have some, believe it or not - fervently believe President Obama is highly intelligent. For me even to suggest that he may not be makes them think I’m stupid.
The rest is here.