Author: Tom Fitzpatrick

Life

By on 1 Comment

Why are people refusing to get COVID 19 vaccinations?  I used to say I was baffled about this but, after some thought on the matter, I actually understand.  I don’t agree but I understand because I know seemingly intelligent college educated non-Republican people who refuse to take the vaccine. They distrust what they are being told. I get it.

Distrusting people in authority is a rite of passage that most adults go through eventually. There are only so many lies, half-truths, and obfuscations you can listen to before you realize they are giving a version of the truth, a truth that will probably go on public record and be remembered.  But probably not the complete truth. I expect it.  I listen to the person’s spiel and then read in between the lines for the real meaning. In the end, I only have best guesses.

Even people who I vote for and generally support are suspect. Again I expect it. People will say one thing but I know what they really mean but they have to say it this way because if they were completely truthful they would go down to defeat in the next election. A good example of this is the position most Democratic politicians took on gay marriage 30 years ago. They all, quite sensibly, opposed it.  As a gay man, I accepted that position because I realized that any Democrat would be committing political suicide if they supported gay marriage.  Despite this craven surrender to political expediency, which should make their positions at least a little suspect, I believed that these Democrats would do very little to stop gay marriage. It turns out I was right. It also confirms, how can I say this in the kindest possible way, that they are less than truthful. And these are the people I am voting for.  They may be a liars but they are our liars.

Richard Branson, the billionaire astronaut, recently got caught in a lie that had absolutely no effect on his reputation.  When he flew into space, he made this big deal about riding up to the space station on his bicycle.  The problem is that he actually didn’t.  The bicycle ride was filmed on a different day than the flight into space.  He flagrantly lied about his arrival while also being caught pretty brazenly manipulating his public image so that we can have a better version of him, something that would capture his playful billionaire self, something, however, that wasn’t exactly true. A big falderal occurred when the lie was caught.  But now, a few weeks out, does anyone remember his little slip of the tongue? No. They do, however, remember Branson went into space and seems like a regular fellow. It’s the image he wants to convey and we are basically all right with his public relations manipulation.

But shouldn’t Public Health officials be exempt.  Maybe but then why? I believe, for the most part, they are telling me the truth.  I believe that their recommendations are sound and I will follow them. However, I have to admit that I don’t believe everything they tell me. When they say that people who have had COVID19 should get vaccinated, I am a little doubtful about it.  I thought that was the whole point of the vaccine – to trick my body into believing it has already had COVID. I would think the actual disease would be as effective if not more effective in doing this.  Health officials reply with some type of blah blah about variants and antibody durability.  OK, but wouldn’t the vaccine have exactly the same problem? It is painful to listen to health officials justify vaccinating recovered COVID patients. They look uncomfortable and give me the perception that they are lying. I would be much happier if they said the only way we can be sure that everybody is safe from COVID is to get 300 million plus people COVID antibodies.  The best way to do that is through vaccination. There is very minimal risk to getting the vaccine and if you get one we know you are safe.  Your name can be checked off the list, so be a pal here and get your vaccine. But instead they awkwardly respond with unconvincing scientific blah blah that leaves me doubtful about what they are saying.

There is this conundrum about our present situation.  We like to think of ourselves as independent thinkers. I won’t just let someone tell me what to do. I will ask questions, make sure I get the facts straight. I won’t blindly listen to some authority figure I barely trust.  I would like to say that I did a thorough investigation of the COVID vaccine, but the only investigation I did was half listening to the nightly news and finding out the address of where I could get my shot.  I did what I was told to do. You might say this is a public health emergency. We need to act quickly in order to prevent deaths, just get the damn vaccine and stop making our lives difficult.  Yes, this is true but it is true in any emergency. Which means all a politician has to do is declare an emergency. Who decides what is an emergency?

This is where it gets scary. Don’t worry though I certainly will be there to ask the challenging questions.

By on

I don’t think the phrase white privilege really captures the white experience with race. Class is an important element that has an effect on low-income whites. Privilege isn’t the word that these people would use to describe their life, so they resist this idea. In this polarized political atmosphere,  I’m not sure there is any way or words to change their minds. I would like to try though because there is an advantage to life in USA if you are white. Some whites get more benefits for their race than other whites. But the advantage does exist. I can best illustrate this advantage through my personal experiences with the police when I was between the ages of 13 and 18.  

During my adolescence, I had at least five contacts with the police departments located in the suburban Kansas City neighborhood where I grew up. I would say that there were no real crimes involved, more of a rambunctious teenager getting into trouble but in each and every case I possessed marijuana and in some cases I was as high as a kite. The police in a city like New York could have used the stop and frisk policy to send me to juvenile detention. They didn’t though.

My first experience with the cops was when a friend of mine and I found an old street sign in an alley. It looked like it had recently been removed and a new sign was posted. The sign was attached to the post with a large block of cement at the end.  My friend wanted the street sign but we didn’t have any tools to remove the sign from the pole. My friend feared that someone else would find this treasure, so we decided to lug sign, pole and cement block to his house where we could remove it. As we carried the post across the busiest street in our little town, the local cops stopped us and let us know that we couldn’t have the sign. We actually argued with them because we said it was just lying in the alley. The cops disagreed with our logic. They called my Dad who instructed me to do whatever the cops said and to get home. My Dad didn’t even have to come and collect me.  The cop made sure we returned the sign to where we found it and that was that.  

The next time, one of my passengers in my car dinged the door of the brand-new truck parked next to us. The truck owner, needless to say, was angry because his once perfect truck was now imperfect.  He called the cops.  The truck owner got even angrier because he realized we were high on grass and happily pointed this out to the cops. My Dad was called to collect us. The man calmed down after he had trouble locating the damage to his truck. The cop kept asking do you really want to report this. The man, much calmer at this point, decided not to. So, by the time Dad arrived the problem was sorted. Neither the Truck driver nor the cop mentioned the pot smoking to my Dad.  No crime was reported despite me reeking of marijuana.

Then I was at a high school’s dance, my date and I ducked out of the dance to my car for a joint. As we returned to the dance, a policeman stopped us as he noticed us in the car. He made us return to the car and shined his flashlight into the car. I’m not sure what he was looking for but all he found was a six pack of beer. Neither me nor my date were of age, so he made us dump the six pack. Again, no crime was reported despite me reeking of marijuana.

My most serious altercation with the cops came when the police stopped me because he saw a passenger in my car passing a joint. I was caught red handed with pot. My friends and I were hauled down to the local police station where our parents were called.  The police weaved a terrible future for us, going to court, possibly juvenile detention.  Not only was I in trouble with the law but my parents would definitely find out that I was smoking pot. Plus, I also demonstrably lied to my mother about where I was going. I told her I was going to the library and I was miles away from the library and in completely the wrong direction from the library to our house.  Because the cops found the pot illegally and admitted as much to all the parents who, I might add, weren’t in the least big angry about this illegal search and seizure. Now, I believed the cops just wanted to scare a bunch of teenagers and had no intention of arresting us.  They let my Dad take care of the punishment which he did. I got off scot free for possession charges and the only crime noted was me driving with an open can of beer in the car.

The next incident, my friends and I were driving by a road construction site and one of my passengers decided he wanted one of the orange pylons on the side of the road. I drove him close enough to one so he grabbed it and I fled the scene with our take. Because I was driving, and the construction crew had my license number, several days later the police came to my house to retrieve the pylon.  As my parents were out of town at the time I took this opportunity to spend the day getting high. I was barely coherent when the policeman arrived. He was kind enough to ignore my condition and just asked for me to return the pylon. No crime was recorded for the pylon or the pot.  

My last run in with the cops was when a friend of mine was having an informal party because his parents were out of town.  People just showed up at his front lawn.  By the time I arrived, there was only room on the public sidewalk. Soon after the cops arrived. For some reason the host thought the cop looked like Barney Fife, the hapless cop from the Andy Griffith show, so he began to taunt the cop with Barney Fife remarks from the safety of his front porch.  The host absolutely forbid Barney Fife from entering his yard without a warrant. He could remove the people from the sidewalk however.  I was, unfortunately, on the sidewalk. As I was underage and had a beer in my hand. I also had a bag of weed in my front pocket. Other than losing one more beer to the sidewalk, the cops left without further incident.

I believe this is what should happen when cops and teenagers come into contact with each other. In each case, the cops, even when they dealt with argumentative teenagers, handled the problem without incident.  Or, if it was a more serious situation, they informed my parents that there was a problem and got them to deal with it. Remarkably soon after I turned 18, I became somewhat more responsible as I don’t recall any further incidents where I was carrying pot when stopped by a cop.  I grew up. I made better decisions.

Would I have had the same experience if I had been black?  I don’t know but I seriously doubt it. The difference is when white cops stopped me, they, maybe saw their own kids and knew that one day soon this kid will be all right. Does the cop make the same connection when he sees a black kid? Or does he see a future criminal who needs to be dealt with now in order to stop future crime? This perception makes a world of difference in how a person is treated.

It also skews crime statistics.  If the police wanted to pursue me, I would have been found guilty five times for marijuana possession. The cops decided to handle things differently. If I had been searched legally, which the cops could have easily managed, I would have had five charges of possession of marijuana. So, when commentators talk about the difference between white crime and black crime, keep in mind that a black teenager who had his marijuana possessions recorded would look like bigger trouble than me even though the police could have charged me with possession numerous times.

Police have a bit of grace in how they enforce the law. It’s subtle, unmeasurable so difficult to see. It does, however, exists. I know because I have experienced it. If I had been black these five experiences with the cops may have had different outcomes. But lucky for me, I was white and middle class and my youthful indiscretions have had little impact on my present life.

By on

I always thought that the study of history was a depressing exercise. History mostly chronicles conflict and change.  Wars, famines, and economic catastrophes are all pretty sad reads. Still I understand that the study of history was important because we want to avoid making the same mistakes again. History is a guidepost on how to have a better future. 

Governor DeSantis of Florida thinks otherwise. He thinks history should make students feel good about themselves and their country. Anything that challenges this sunny outlook should be axed from the curriculum so that nothing deters students from turning into patriots that love their country. But, is feel-good history actually helpful in understanding the past or, even more important, truthful. 

How does feel-good history work?  And, if balance is important, how do we discuss controversial topics without making some people feeling angry or upset.  How does one discuss slavery without also talking about America’s racist past? Or Jim Crow laws? Or the Tulsa Race Riots, or the European settler’s treatment of indigenous people. These topics require some basic understanding of racism make any sense. And, if racism is discussed, how can you prevent some students from feeling bad about what their ancestors did? 

If in Governor DeSantis’ efforts for balance, educators reduces events like the Civil War to a conflict between two groups of good citizens who disagreed about State’s Rights then his balanced approach will leave students with a warped view of what happened.  The Civil War was about slavery no matter what Confederate Apologist say today.  I know my position is correct from a cursory review of what Southern newspapers at the time were writing about and what Southern politicians at the time were saying. They weren’t talking about State’s Rights, they were talking about Slavery. Again, how would white students feel about learning this? I think some white students might feel badly about it.  And, if you didn’t talk about racism, wouldn’t students of color feel badly because that their history isn’t represented truthfully? Then, would Governor DeSantis skip talking about the Civil War altogether in order to avoid any hurt feelings? Really, if he wants to stop hurt feelings he would ban the teaching of long division which has caused more misery for students than any other subject I have encountered. 

Governor DeSantis wants history taught with heroes and villains. King George was a villain and George Washington was a hero.  History is a lot more complicated than that and incredibly messy. Because of that, it might make some students feel uncomfortable. What happens if we take away all the heroes in history?  Who will students admire? May be students will have a better understanding of history.  Maybe they will realize that people in history are indeed people.  People who make mistakes, believe things that are wrong, and behave badly sometimes. Maybe they will learn that heroes are not perfect. If the purpose of education is preparing people for the future, then I would prefer students who see the humanity in heroes over students who mindlessly worship people as heroes. 

By on

Whenever anyone talks about the dangers of Critical Race Theory (CRT), I think of my 12 years of Catholic education. The purpose of Catholic education, or so my parents thought, was to deliver good Catholic adults. It failed miserably with me and my brothers and my sisters. Not a good Catholic among 5 children. If after thousands of years of practice, the Catholic Church can’t deliver even one child out of 5, I really don’t worry much about CRT indoctrination. If the hidden agenda of CRT is making bomb throwing America hating Bolsheviks, I am confident that the marketing departments of America’s commercial enterprises will triumph over the theoretical dogma of CRT. 

People are pretty practical about grand theories. If you ask the average Catholic about the Church, they could care less about why the Church encourages Infant Baptism, or did Jesus’ body Ascend into Heaven, or was Mother Mary a virgin. They are drawn to the church for the big picture messages – love they neighbor and your sins will be forgiven by a loving God. They pick and choose what they believe. Birth control is a good example of individual Catholics taking what they believe to be most important and ignoring the rest.   For example, most Catholics today have much smaller families than previous generations.  If I had to choose why, I would say they are using birth control. The Church stand on birth control is quite different.

Which brings me back to CRT.  First, and most importantly, public schools are not teaching CRT. It is an academic theory so laden with technical jargon to make it incomprehensible to the average adult much less a child. I am completely fine with people not teaching any of the theory unless it was before nap time. Now, on the other hand, where CRT might prove helpful is when educators are putting together a history curriculum. An understanding of CRT might encourage these educators to include sessions about how race affects people of color and can help us understand the history of our country.  If they don’t want to talk about race, how are they going to explain what happened to the indigenous people when they encountered the European settlers? Or why Africans were forced into slavery.   If it wasn’t racism, explain the terrible treatment these groups received from the European settlers?  These discussions would certainly benefit from an understanding of race.

Critics of CRT are pretty coy about what they want instead. By conflating teaching about race and racism with CRT, they are campaigning to remove race completely from the curriculum. Which means what? The Civil War was about two groups of good citizens fighting about state’s rights. The indigenous peoples happily relocated to reservations to make room for the European settlers.   Will they talk about lynchings? The Tulsa Race Riot? Discrimination?

It annoys me that Liberals are put on the defense over something like CRT. Critics are going after some of the most strident parts of the theory and saying this is wrong and because this particular point is wrong, it makes the whole theory wrong.  I have never believed in any doctrine 100 percent and I don’t think anyone ever has. The important takeaway from any theory is the big picture and, from where I stand, the big picture message from CRT is that to understand America, race and racism has to be talked about. I believe that to be true. So, until something better comes along, I am comfortable with big picture CRT and will leave theoretical CRT to the academics. 

By on 1 Comment

Boney Fingers

Work your fingers to the bone – whadda ya get?
Whoo-whoo. Boney Fingers – Boney Fing-gers.

                                                            Hoyt Axton

Hoyt Axton’s great country western song rumbles around in my brain a lot these days. There is this strongly held notion that hard work eventually pays off. We continue to pass this notion down generation after generation to ensure children know that hard work, at some point, may be necessary for success. 

I grew up thinking that hard work mattered – anyone who put in a full days’ work would receive the fruits for their labor. Nothing luxurious – a roof over your head, enough food for your family, affordable transportation and decent education for your children.  The perfect middle class idea was a man putting in an eight-hour day at a job while the woman staying at home to raise the children. For a short time, it was the expectation in post-World War II America and, to a large extent, the whole western world. The prosperity was so prevalent that we were lulled into to believing that all a person had to for the good life is work hard.

Yet there is more than enough evidence that this notion is false even when prosperity was the norm.  Everybody knew people who have worked hard all of their life and received little. This notion of hard work fails to consider other factors like Intelligence and luck. And even people who have all three elements going in their favor, often failed. Hard work is just not enough.

Yet, we continue to sing the praises of hard work.  Why? There are people working three jobs to keep afloat with so much debt that there is little expectation that in this life time, these debts will be paid. Don’t worry the hard work mythers have an answer for that.  There are stories about people who were in exactly the same situation who worked their way out of their problems, continued to work hard and now are billionaires. It is possible only if you keep trying.

These success stories are singular experiences not the norm. These stories, in fact, are rare. How many billionaires do you know? Most people do not achieve that kind of success from hard work.  These myths rarely highlight the luck or smarts involved for these people to succeed.  All that is needed is that nose to the grindstone.  This is the lesson we pass on to children so that they continue to work hard.  Wouldn’t want them to stop working hard now would we?

To me, the notion of hard work is pernicious. Everybody talks about hard work as the answer to our problems and people are working themselves to death for what? Western society is rife with addictive behavior – we drink too much, drug too much, gamble too much, buy too much, watch TV too much – the list is endless. The answer is work.  Work on your addictions, work on your relationships, work, work, work.  The problem is always the individual not working hard enough to succeed. This, of course, is a distraction. If you view yourself as the problem, you will always be addressing how you don’t quite measure up to the system. It is a distraction from the real problem – the system. All most people will get from hard work is boney fingers.

By on

The US government has been a little cagey lately about the existence of UFO’s which leads me to believe that there may be some evidence to suggest that they exist and we share the universe with other intelligent life.

Do we know what we are going to do if we find it? 

If we discover intelligent life that is less technologically advance than us, how do we proceed? Given our history, my fear is that we would use this technology to conquer the planet, strip the planet of their mineral resources and bring back the intelligent life in chains to display in zoos.  Is that what we want to do? 

Once we arrive on a planet, we change it. Should we be travelling the universe, reordering the worlds of other intelligent life just so we can have more iron ore?  Wouldn’t the temptation to bring back this intelligent life be too great for any explorer to ignore? Do we give the life a choice to return with us to earth or do we bring them back in chains? We discover that their meat is tasty, do we use them as a new source of protein – herding them into pens for their eventual slaughter? Do we leave them alone and let them evolve in their own time? Do we keep contact with them, trading our technology for their resources? Letting them evolve on their own time would seem like the most neutral answer to the questions but we are altering the environment of this planet without intending to do so.

I fear if the intelligent life doesn’t have a human like look that they would be doomed to subjugation and life in a zoo.

Or what happens if intelligent life finds us? These beings bring a more advance technology that could wipe us out quickly if we don’t co-operate with them? Do we fight? Or do we live to fight another day? What if this intelligent life wants to drag a million or so bodies to perform some manual labor.  Could we stop them?  Do we give them people in order to save the rest of the world?  How do we decide which humans to give them?

Intergalactic travel is all good and well but actually finding the life is probably a bad idea for both the human race and the intelligent life we find. 

By on 3 Comments

First, I have to confess I know very little about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. I am uninterested in them. I don’t read about them. I don’t watch them on television. My knowledge is limited to knowing that Prince Harry is in the British Royal family and Meghan Markle is married to him. Despite all this lack of information about the couple, I have an opinion about them.  I think he is dim and she is a megalomaniac monster.

I never really bothered much about having an opinion about them until a friend and I happened to start talking about them. It was soon after their interview with Oprah Winfrey.  I confess I missed the show. The interesting thing is before I could give my opinion about them, he gave me his impression.  It was very close to mine – Prince Harry is dim and Meghan Markle is a megalomaniac monster. Given my history with the friend, I am fairly certain he had as much interest in the royal family as I have – which is none. Why do two different people who have no interest in Meghan and Harry have exactly the same opinion about them. 

Meghan may be a monster and Harry may be dim. I don’t know.  I have no experience with either of them.  I have no relevant data to determine whether this is true or not. It may be. Or it may be incorrect. What concerns me here is that I have an opinion about people who I could care less about and who I so disinterested in that I haven’t bothered to learn more. 

You may say that they are public figures and their behavior permeates the news. I can buy that.   It could be easy to subconsciously pick up this information without actually trying.  They are in the news regularly.  I am aware of their names. Yet there are hundreds of people in the public eye that I have no opinion about.  Meryl Streep, for example.  I like her acting and I have from time to time read about her. The difference here is I still don’t have a particularly strong opinion about Meryl Streep. I like her acting but I don’t have a definite view about the her as a person. I like her because she is a great actress.  I can’t say if she is a monster, or dim, or bat-shit crazy.  All I know is her abilities which is really all I need to know. But Harry and Meghan I have a definite view of the person I might find. 

It concerns me that I have an opinion about someone with whom I have no interest. This opinion popped into my mind without any effort on my part. It obviously coming from somewhere.  Someone is influencing my opinion without me paying too much attention to who it is and why.  Someone wants me to know that Meghan is a monster and Prince Harry is dim. And I do. I have acquired an opinion without even trying. This is troubling.  

Even more troubling is that powerful people want me to believe certain things about which I am not paying very much attention to. I simply don’t care enough to learn more about the couple. But someone does care and they care deeply enough to try to influence my opinion. They have succeeded in this instance. I believe it to be true and am talking about it with other people as if it were true.  I won’t give it another thought because it seems like a silly irrelevant opinion. Why should I give it a second thought? I am not terribly worried about Meghan and Harry, I am fairly certain they will land on their feet no matter what travails they face.  I am, however, deeply concerned on how effortlessly I have been manipulated into having an opinion about them. 

By on 1 Comment

If you remember back in January of 2018, I was writing a blog.  It is now June of 2021 and this is my first entry since then.  Something happened.  

You see I got a job and started working full time.  I read all of these stories about writers who work day jobs and pursue their writing dreams in the evening.   I am not that person.  Goofing off has always had more allure to me that, well, almost everything else. If you give me a choice between writing for an hour or investigating 2012 Presidential Election voting returns in rural Kentucky. I will be wading through Election returns. For hours, maybe even days. My mind has always worked that way. At this point, it isn’t likely to change.

The good news is that I got laid off. Since I no longer have a job, my primary reason for not writing is gone.  I have the time to think again. A couple of times in the past month while thinking I think I should probably write some of these thoughts down. Then the other day while thinking, my old writing ambitions started churning and what do you know I decided to restart my blog. So, in the next few days, you should be seeing new entries in my blog.

Thank you for waiting so patiently.  I know it must have been Hell waiting for my next  blog entry.  I apologize for any of you who have suffered and hope that the bon mots that will soon appear will make up for my negligence. 

Talk with you all soon.  

By on 3 Comments

I try to meditate about 10 minutes each day. I call it meditating for lack of a better word. My best description is sitting quietly and concentrating on my breathing when my mind wanders. My aim is to bring peace to the start of my day.

Everything started great. That was until Emily, one of my cats, noticed me sitting there and decided to irritate me. I meditate just outside our bathroom. Emily is finicky about drinking water. She insists on drinking directly from the tap in our tub. No other way method works for her. When she sees anyone near the bathroom, she rushes to the tub and cries. Not meows, they are long grating cries that continue until someone turn on the tap.

I tried ignoring her. Really I did. I swear. I am pretty good at winning battles with her when I am doing things like laundry or reading the internet or watching TV. I will ignore or yell at her until she stops. In this case, her cries defeat the whole purpose of peace and quiet. I can’t center myself when I spend the whole time angrily thinking why doesn’t that damn cat stop crying. So I have incorporated turning on the tap as a part of my meditation and Emily became very co-operative.

Until that is she decided that she wanted to get in my lap after drinking from the tap. I sit in an office chair that safely accommodates my ass and not much else. This would work if Emily were a lap cat but she isn’t. She is sitting by the human cat. An open lap won’t do at all. She also needs a fairly significant landing space before she will venture a leap. She didn’t have a place on the chair and no room to jump. So she cried.

Again, I tried ignoring her but she was relentless. In frustration, I moved to the couch that gives her ample landing room for her leaps and a space next to me for her to sit while I meditated.

All was fine until she decided I should be petting her while she was there. She nudged my hand with her head. I can’t believe it. I have done everything to start my day peacefully why won’t this cat just leave me alone for 10 minutes. She won’t. How can you find inner peace when a pet-demanding cat is head butting your hand. You can’t, so I now spend some of my mediation time petting Emily until she is happy just to sit next to me.

Which worked but lately Molly, our other cat, spied Emily and I on the couch. She sometimes joins us on the couch. This wouldn’t be a problem except that Molly is a lap cat and in order to get to my lap she has to climb over Emily to get to me. This annoys Emily who, I might add, is a lot less accommodating than me in regards to irritations. She hisses and bats at Molly in a very unwelcoming way. This goes on until I break it up.

In order to stop the fighting, I move to the center of the couch which allows Emily to get on one side and Molly to maneuver on to my lap without walking over Emily. We now all sit quietly for ten minutes.

This works for now.

Until it doesn’t work and then I will have to deal with whatever new irritation the girls bring my way.

Peace and quiet will only come when I make peace with my irritations. Those cats are so Zen.

By on 2 Comments

The most interesting tidbit regarding the news about Steve Wynn sexual harassment accusations is the $7,500,000 payment to one of Wynn’s accusers. He is denying the rape/sexual harassment charges but not the pay out. I am assuming the payout then is real. He wanted to avoid the embarrassment of go through the criminal justice system, so, having an extra 7.5 million dollars to throw around, he bought the woman off.

I would invite Senator Grassley, who thinks the rich should get more tax breaks than the poor because the poor will only spend it on alcohol and women and not invest in making their businesses more competitive, to ponder this awful transaction. This money isn’t going to be job creating or investing in some grand entrepreneurial scheme; it is going to a victim of a crime, perhaps a felony, and to her lawyers. We could have distributed $100,000 to the worst welfare cheats in each of the 50 states and then put in another $100,000 to the worst welfare cheats in the 25 largest cities in the country and gotten more income generating dollars for the economy.

Let’s also face it. It probably isn’t good for Steve Wynn. When a person has that much loose change, he suffers under the illusion that he can get away with anything because he can buy off anyone. As we now know, that can get rich people like Steve Wynn and Harvey Weinstein into some very big and embarrassing trouble. If only Steve and Harvey had had less mad money, they might have found it in their best interests to behave and spent what money they had more intelligently.

I do think Senator Grassley is on to something however. It was only after reviewing my previous blog regarding the rich and taxes that I realized that Senator Grassley was correct that any extra money a man has seems to be spent on women and alcohol. Although he was only applying his rule to the poor, I propose it has a more universal application. I offer proof that the rich too spend their extra money on alcohol and women:

The amount Bill Koch paid for fake vintage wine. 400,000
The amount Bill Koch spent investigating fake wine. 35,000,000
The amount Steve Wynn paid to silence his victim 7,500,000