Sell Crazy Someplace Else

"Sell crazy someplace else. We're all stocked up here." 

- Jack Nicholson from "As Good As It Gets.

That's it ... 'nuff said.

OK, I guess that I can't leave it at that, as much as I'd like to.  But let's face it, that train (the crazy train) left the station a long time ago; and not only is it not coming back, but as Ian Anderson said in 'Locomotive Breath', "the train won't stop going, no way to slow down".  It would be nice however, if somebody would let you off for a rest once in a while, especially during what has already become another never-ending election season.  You see, during election season, every time someone dares to turn one of our sacred cows into steaks, the mental wards seem to let loose great streams of naysayers to speak to the Media.  Don't believe me, then let me cite some examples:

Rick Perry says that Social Security is a 'Ponzi Scheme' and everyone is up in arms.  How dare he attack one of the most important programs in the history of this nation!  Of course the fact that Social Security fits the definition of a Ponzi Scheme like a glove (and not the ones from the OJ Simpson trial) is irrelevant. The facts get thrown out the window because Social Security is in fact part of the fabric of American Society (and that fabric seems to be more than a little frayed these days).  After all Rick Perry must be a kook since he's a Republican from the same state as George Bush and that strange Ron Paul guy (who's not only also skeptical of this unsafe safety net, but tells the not-so-pretty truth about most of the rest of this country's economic problems).  Besides, the AARP and a lot of the early investors don't want hear the truth about Social Security for fear that they'll lose out on the money promised to them when they were forced by the government to join it.

Some candidates are saying that Global Warming is true, some are saying its not!  OK, even if we concede some validity to the prospect that the planet is getting warmer (for the sake of argument), do we therefore need to concede that the sole cause of it is Man?  Yes, I know that Man's technologies produce carbon dioxide, methane, and other 'Greenhouse Gases', and that Man could therefore be part of the cause.  On the other hand, there's a lot of other things on the planet that produce Greenhouse gases that could be contributing (like cows and pigs, and oh yeah ... volcanoes).  If the planet is in fact getting warmer though, couldn't it also have something to do with that big bright ball of fire that we see in the sky.  You know ... the Sun.  Let's face it, this planet has been getting warmer and colder since it was formed; and a lot of the same guys that are telling us that the Man is causing the planet to get warmer now were telling us that Man was causing the planet to get colder 40 years ago.  Which is it?  Or do we need to concede both sides of the equation to them so that there's justification for massive government regulation designed to save us (if it doesn't kill us first).  Besides, the guys trying to make the case can't get the weather right from day to day or year to year, let alone decade to decade or century to century; and seem to change theories far more often than they change their underwear.  (Sorry, that's not fair.  I have no idea how often they change their underwear.  Hey, maybe we can get some government funding to do a study and find out.)

Republican candidates are saying The 'Theory of Evolution' is right, no wait it's wrong.  No wait, it's a still theory, not proven fact.  New evidence is coming to the attention of scientists every day that cause this 'theory' to be modified; but that's what you're supposed to do with scientific theories.  You test them against the evidence and change them to fit the facts.  The 'Theory of Evolution' has itself evolved significantly since first proposed by Charles Darwin; and while he'd probably still recognize it, I'm not sure he could stake a claim to it any more.  As for the alternative proposal, that every form of plant and animal on the planet was created in seven days, I for one am just as skeptical.  The only proof seems to be a book that has been translated more times than 'Gone With the Wind' and probably become more garbled with each translation than Brent & Stuart Tarleton's speech when they tried to chat up Scarlett O'Hara at Tara.  Factor in that many of these translations were done at the behest of the government in power at the time or by a Hierarchical church bent on proving a point or controlling the peasants, and maybe we should all be more skeptical.  That doesn't make what was written wrong, but neither does it make the latest translation proven fact. 

The Democratic candidate seems to believe we can spend our way out of the current recession.  The discussion really heats up when talk begins about how to get us out of our financial doldrums.  In spite of crushing debt in this country, there seems to be a body of opinion that says that spending more money that we don't have is the answer.  Red or Blue, take your pick.  Both have managed to ignore easily provable facts of mathematics and contributed to the continuing disaster by endlessly debating their reliability for more years than I have been around.  Recently they seem to spend most of their time with their fingers in their ears singing "la la la la la" when you try to talk to them, until you want to slap them sillier than they already are.  The two sides of the argument often seem limited to the ones who say it's really not problem in the first place and those that believe we can fix it without spending less.  When someone does at long last stick their neck out far enough to concede the proven scientific principles of addition and subtraction are true, they cut it off, castigate the perpetrator as an apostate or a loon, and propose a fix that involves not reducing the spending, but reducing the rate at which spending increases.  You know, it's this kind of thinking that normally leads people to grand new chapters in their lives ... usually Chapter 7 or Chapter 11. 

Ahhhhhhhh!  Where did I leave my damned duct tape?

Of course this list of insanities could go on and on (hmm, sounds like an old Stephen Bishop tune), but doing so could be considered symptoms of obsessive / compulsive disorder (yep, back to the Nicholson reference); and I think you're starting to get the idea anyway. Besides it's almost time for one of the twice weekly therapy sessions I attend during election season (which means year round these days) in the misguided hope that it will help me to cope with the madness. Let me tell you though, for those of us really paying attention to what's going on in the country these days, we're already getting plenty of crazy.  Go sell yours someplace else.