FinermanWorks

Herbert Hoover found himself in Purgatory, sentenced to 5000 years of reading books on economics, finance and civics. But, after just 44 years of torment, Hoover may receive clemency. Press Secretary Gabriel explained the possible change in policy, “As catastrophic as Hoover was, he still is better than George Bush.”

According to the Purgatory Parole Board, “Mr. Hoover was an oblivious ass whose dour personality alone could have induced a Depression. You would not have wanted a beer with him, especially if it led to your arrest for violating Prohibition. But however inept and exasperating his response to the economic collapse, he did not cause it. The 1920s had been a frenzy of financial speculation with a stock market propelled by wishful thinking. The madcap market could not sustain itself, and Hoover had the abysmal luck to be President–after only six months–when reality ruined the party.
Now, if Hoover had been President for seven years and had encouraged every irresponsible financial practice that led to an economic collapse, then 5000 years would have been too short a time here.”

The Parole Board also noted that Hoover had inherited, not started–his unnecessary war: Prohibition. And, to his credit, at least his administration captured Al Capone. Furthermore, Hoover had not escalated the war on alcohol by invading Canada, or rationalizing the existence of vodka to justify an attack on the Soviet Union.

In view of these extenuating circumstances, the Board is considering a reduction of Mr. Hoover’s torment to 1000 years or at least upgrading him to a private sulfur pit instead of the one he is currently sharing with Milton Friedman.

Meanwhile in Hell, the Emperor Caligula has applied for a promotion to Purgatory, asserting that at least he was better than George Bush.

I am not going to worry about this election. Diebold has already counted my ballot; and it seems that I have voted for McCain six times in Florida and Ohio.

Of course, I have yet to recover from the 2000 election…but neither has Western Civilization. That election did answer the profound philosophical question: in a race between an idiot and a fool, who’d win? We now know: the idiot will. The idiot might do something inadvertently right while the fool will do everything meticulously wrong. Bush spoke as if he were in fourth grade, and Gore spoke as if we were in fourth grade.

In this election, John McCain claims to represent the mainstream against the liberals. McCain isn’t mainstream, he is a swimming pool at a country club–the shallow end. But Sarah Palin is genuinely folksy…just like a septic tank.

Barack Obama should accept the mantle of liberal. After all, look who is on Mount Rushmore. By my count, that is three liberals–and even Washington was a revolutionary. Secular humanist liberals founded this republic. Without them, this country would be under the hereditary rule of upper-class twits….Well, until 2000 it wasn’t.

In fairness, I will acknowledge the Conservatives’ contribution to America: they lost the Civil War.

On this day in 1066, William the Bastard won the battle of Hastings and improved his nickname. Ironically, the Conqueror could have done just as well in a probate court. William had a better claim to the English throne than the English king did. (Yes, possession is nine tenths of the law; but William’s one tenth included a better army.) The legal wrangling and the bloodshed all stemmed from the inability to the late Edward the Confessor to make up his mind. Who would succeed the childless monarch? Edward apparently promised everyone the throne.

He had promised both his cousin William and his brother-in-law Harold Godwinson. His half-greatnephew Edgar also thought he was in line to the throne. King Edward’s Christmas cards probably read, “You May Already Be a Winner.” Fortunately, few people could read at the time; otherwise there might have been some 200 claimants to the English throne. (That didn’t happen until the 15th century and the Wars of the Roses.)

When Edward died on January 5, 1066, the council of English nobles chose Harold to be the next king. Harold was the most powerful noble in England and he was a distinguished soldier; in fact, Harold had been the de facto ruler during the reign of his ineffectual brother-in-law–whose only real skill apparently was praying. Since he was already doing the work, Harold would seem entitled to the formalities and its perks; besides, why shouldn’t the English have an English king? That would be fair and democratic, and completely anachronistic and wrong.

The council of nobles did not have the right to choose a king. Besides, where did you get the idea that Harold Godwinson was English? Does the name Harold tell you anything? Do real Angle-Saxon names end with “son”? Remember, the Vikings did get around. Eastern England was inundated by the Norse invaders; York was originally pronounced Jorvik. In the 11th century, England already had three Danish kings: Knut, Harold I and Hardicanute. So Mr. Godwinson would have been the fourth.

Being Norwegian and French, William of Normandy felt that he had as much right to the English throne as a Dane. Furthermore, William actually was related to Edward the Confessor. A cousin outranks a brother-in-law, especially when the marriage probably was never consummated. (Edward did have something to confess.) Finally, William could claim to be the overlord of Harold Godwinson. When Godwinson had visited Normandy in 1064, he had received a complimentary knighthood from William. That turned out to be more than a friendly gesture; from a legal perspective, Harold had made himself William’s vassel. Of course, any graduate of Constantinople University (which was the nearest law school in the 11th century) would have found the loophole: Harold only would be a vassal in Normandy, so just stay out of France.

Unfortunately, Harold did not think of hiring a smart Greek lawyer. In fact, he was unrepresented when William went to court. The Norman duke sent a delegation to the Pope, hoping to wangle Rome’s endorsement. Pope Alexander II was very flattered. Few rulers ever showed the Pope any respect–certainly not those imperial thugs in Germany. Alexander was usually preoccupied trying to enforce celibacy on the clergy. But here was a chance to determine the fate of a kingdom. The Pope considered the weight of the Norman’s claims (and bribes); not hearing any English arguments, Alexander decided in William’s favor. So William invaded England, with the blessing and authorization of the Pope.

Having cavalry and God on his side proved decisive for William. While the cavalry was more useful at Hastings, the Pope’s endorsement stifled further opposition from the English.  Obedient to Rome, the clergy of London delivered the city to William.  Besides, the English were getting used to the idea that their kings would be foreigners.

And they now have had 1000 years of practice.

PAUL KRUGMAN WINS NOBEL PRIZE IN ECONOMICS
White House Adds Nobel Committee to Axis of Evil

Citing his remarkable clarity for an economist–and unpredecented happenstance of actually being right–the Nobel Committee awarded Paul Krugman its prize in economics. In announcing his prize, the Nobel Committee spoke of Professor Krugman’s cogent economic analysis: “Whereas other economists would describe George Bush’s counter-intuitive cerebralizational calibrations, Professor Krugman says ‘moron.'”

Krugman’s most recent works are “I Have Never Heard Such Rubbish!” “How Can You Believe This Idiot?”, and “I Told You So, I Told You So.”

Unfortunately, Krugman has proved too correct. Whereas the usual Nobel Prize in Economics amounts to 10 million Kroner, this year hasn’t been so good. If the professor can get to Stockholm–at his own expense–he is welcome to stay at Max von Sydow’s apartment; there is a fold-out couch in the living room. As for the prize, this year it amounts to 1400 Kroner, the deluxe blue-ray DVD of “Fanny and Alexander” (the full length–all 47 hours), one tenth of a Munch painting (his choice), and a monthly delivery of two pounds of lox for the rest of his life.

While flattered by the award, Professor Krugman is not sure that a trip to Stockholm is worth the risk. There is some question whether he would be allowed back in the United States once he left. Press Secretary Dana Perino would only say, “Why would an economist need a beard? What is his real motive?”

McCAIN LINKS OBAMA TO NAT TURNER

Accusing his opponent of coddling terrorists, John McCain demanded that Barack Obama denounce the leader of a 19th century slave rebellion. “Why hasn’t Senator Obama disassociated himself from this extremist, murderer and labor organizer Nat Turner? Let me tell you about Nat Turner. He used a honest discussion on the minimal wage as an excuse to murder 60 men, women and children in Virginia. And is this how Obama intends to campaign in that state?”

Three days later, the reporters capable of arithmetic began questioning McCain’s allegation. The Nat Turner Rebellion had occurred in 1831, 130 years before Obama was born. The McCain campaign replied, “Obama obviously needs more than 130 years to denounce his terrorist association.”

Nat Turner’s Rebellion lasted two days. In its suppression and aftermath, more than 100 blacks were killed or executed, including Turner. McCain credited the verdicts to strict constructionist judges, the type he would appoint. “If they had been Obama’s liberal judges, Turner might still be alive.”

In her campaign, Governor Sarah Palin continued this particular attack; however, she kept referring to Obama’s ties to the terrorist Nat King Cole. The McCain campaign defended the discrepancy by noting the song “Mona Lisa” referred to a painting by a homosexual.

We begin with a public service announcement.

HELP. I am living with a Cubs fan! For the last several few nights, I have gone to sleep listening to wails and shrieks. And I have awakened to the very same soundtrack. Let’s just say that the mood of Masada was much more chipper. I have tried consoling Karen that losing is part (actually all) of the Cubs’ charm. But I fear that my wife is so distraught that she now wants McCain to win; if the Cubs can’t win, no one deserves to survive.

Speaking of the Apocalypse, Costco has a product to tide you over. Karen and I were shopping there today, hoping to find Halloween candy that wasn’t a Melamine surprise from China. (This year, the candy will be more frightening than the costumes.) While wandering the aisles, we saw a display of white tubs labelled “Emergency Food Supply.” Containing 275 servings of such dehydrated delights as ‘ala king” (they don’t actually promise the chicken), cacciatore (the meat is anything you catch), and western stew (don’t be snobbish about cockroaches), all you add is boiled water. (And the radiation probably will do that for you.) Priced at only $99.95, “Emergency Food Supply” has a shelf life of 20 years! Given the economy and world events, I am not sure how many of us could make that claim.

Sarah Palin has just defined herself as “Joe Six Pack.” That might mean that she is a transsexual alcoholic. However, I suspect that she is trying to identify herself as a paragon of simplicity: the homespun, ordinary soul who meets the travails of life with a can of beer. This is her rebuttal to those who criticize her ignorance: the ignorant are entitled to representation, and she is their candidate!

While I would never question her inadequacies, I do wonder about the term “Joe Six Pack.” Do those homespun, ordinary folk really aspire to the image of being alcohol-besotted slobs? Is that how they would publicly identify themselves? No, the term is demeaning and reeks of condescension. In fact, I first heard the term used by another Republican governor: Pierre Du Pont IV. At least, the lord of Delaware wasn’t pretending to be one of the folks. On the contrary, the message of his campaign was:Vote for me or I will fire you.

But Sarah Palin is not threatening the serfs; she is claiming to be one. Yes, Governor Palin can empathize with every hand-to-mouth, hardscrabble soul who also happens to have a monomanical vanity, a ruthless desire for power, and a tyrannical personality.

She is an elitist without the encumbrances of etiquette or education. “Joe Six Pack”? No, Debbie Demagogue.

“If I had to choose between betraying my country and betraying my friend, I hope I should have the guts to betray my country.” E.M. Forster

Forster had it easy. Tonight, in the name of friendship, I am going to watch “Lou Dobbs.” I normally would avoid his show because I never had an inordinate fear of Gabriel García Márquez, Jose Ferrer or King Juan Carlos mowing my grass–and thus dispossessing the millions of Episcopalian Harvard graduates who were vying to be my lawn service.

However, tonight at least, Mr. Dobbs will be changing the subject of his tantrum. Dobbs is vehement (as if he had any other adjective) in his opposition to the Federal bailout of Wall Street. To discuss this fulmination, Dobbs has invited on his show a friend of mine who–for lack of self-respect and social skills–is a professor of economics.

So, in the masochistic name of friendship, I will watch Loud Dobbs tonight. But I would feel less shame if the good professor were appearing on Maury Povich and being subjected to 600 paternity tests.

First, let me wish myself a Happy New Year. (You, too–when applicable.) In the Jewish chronology, this new year is 5769. Of course, that’s just the retail value. Between us, at most it should be 3495.

So, looking back at the last year, what were the high points of being Jewish? Of course, we are all thrilled that Amy Winehouse is still alive. It also is flattering to think that Lindsey Lohan is dating a Jewish girl and might consider converting. (That should more than compensate for losing Gustav Mahler to Catholicism.)

And you cannot describe our pride in knowing that Joseph Lieberman is John McCain’s Rabbi Richelieu. We should also proclaim the tutorial brillance of William Kristol if Sarah Palin now knows the names of three European capital cities.

We also take vicarious pride in Nicolas Sarkosy. The President of France may only be one quarter Jewish but he is 100 percent pushy. You would not want to be in front of him at the lox platter. I could imagine him starring in the French production of “Curb Your Enthusiasm.”

This year’s Nobel Prizes were a bit unnerving, however. Gentiles won in all the real categories–even medicine. Fortunately, we always have economics as a consolation prize. And the winners–and our saviors–were Leon Hurwicz, Eric Maskin and Roger Myerson.

However, the Smartest Jew of the Year has to be actress Rachel Weisz. She took one look at the script of “The Mummy, part III” and decided to let someone else have the role. (Poor Maria Bello)

So, it is another year for Western Civilization’s Longest Running Road Show. Still under original management!

THE NEW CHICAGO TRIBULATION

It is now is official: I would be ashamed to seen in public with the Chicago Tribune. In its policy of cutting corners, the Tribune has debuted a new format. Imagine if the National Enquirer were combined with My Weekly Reader. Well, it is now available at Chicago newstands.

The NEW Tribune has big pictures with little stories. So a picture is not only worth a thousand words, it is also much cheaper. Even the truncated stories are in a more elementary prose. What a compliment to my reading comprehension and attention span.

The old Tribune was a repellent reactionary but–like Henry James–it was properly dressed and grammatical. This new Tribune has lost none of its bias but it now is a garish lout. There is a difference between being cheap and sleazy. As a further affront to my intelligence, the Tribune is bellowing how fashionable and up-to-date this format is. Really….imbecile chic. The Tribune’s new format has all the charm and style of truckstop gonorrhrea.

HIGH (VERY HIGH) SCHOOL MUSICAL

Speaking of venereal diseases, the drama class of a local high school will be performing “Rent.” Yes, the pampered teenagers of Highland Park, Illinois will be portraying a multi-libidinal assortment of AIDs-afflicted drug addicts living in slums. I don’t think that the production is supposed to be a parody–although in this version I expect Mimi and Musetta to be discussing whether “Crate & Barrel” or “Williams-Sonoma” makes the better heroin cooker.

Now, I don’t consider myself a prude. I have been known to use gonorrhea as a punchline. BUT is “Rent” a suitable choice for a high school play? I certainly don’t think that the high school repertoire should be limited to “Our Town“. Believe me, I have endured the opposite extreme. At my Chicago high school, the faculty advisor of the National Honor Society presented us with a choice of two topics for our induction: a tribute to either Walt Disney or Bob Hope. (So a musical tribute to venereal disease and drugs would have been out of the question.)

However, I think that other musicals might be more suitable for sophisticated teenagers and their naive parents. With Cole Porter, you have wonderful music, dazzling wit and–if the teenagers demand prurience–barely disguised alcoholism and homosexuality. The high school production can even augment Rodgers and Hammerstein with a little post-modern perspective: insinuate Captain von Trapp is molesting his children.

But “Rent” is just too sordid; however, I could offer this compromise. This would be the same basic story except the setting is now 1840s Paris, the derelicts are now artists, and we change AIDs to the far more appealing tuberculosis. I could even recommend a musical score to go with it.