The Democrats can take Congress and the presidency, but must they really take my favorite Bruce Springsteen song too? What will I be left with? Also, we should apparently note that, while the 2000 and 2004 elections warranted extensive post mortem analysis about just how it was possible for so many Americans to be seized by such obvious lunacy, this election bears no further examination because it demonstrates the obvious fact that the Dems are totally rad, and what more is there to say?
On the upside, maybe this will increase the U of C's stock price. The city of Chicago could finally get its moment in the sun, and last night's broadcast from Grant Park could mark the beginning of a national Chicago lovefest. (Not that such a thing has ever happened, as evidenced at least by the continued unimportance of Hope and Crawford, but I have the audacity of hope on this question. Chicago has more going for it from the start than backwoods Arkansas did.)
On the other hand, what if it ushers in a decade of rule by university professors? Worse yet, political theorists? A worse scenario, I could hardly imagine.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
Economists? Sociologists? Kantian linguistics professors?
No, theorists would be by far the worst. Sociologists could go either way. And economists already run everything. Jury's out on the Kantian linguists; I guess we'll have to see what they're made of.
What is a Kantian linguist?
Chomsky.
I see.
Whatever Withywindle says it is.
Bruce Springsteen? When?
hum iii: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvaPnmcdb3Q
Right, cheer up! The Chicago skyline hasn't received that much airplay since Adventures in Babysitting.
I'd prefer not to have Chomsky running anything. I try not to listen to him, but everything I've ever heard out of his mouth is either obvious or wrong. And while it may be grossly unfair, I get that "tweedy pervert" vibe from him - you know, the aging professor that sleeps with his students. I know nothing about his personal life, but I've never known anyone who makes my skin crawl this way who wasn't either a con man or a jerk, so until I know better, I'll be dubious...
I know an ex-student of his who says he (Chomsky) is an monomaniacal narcissistic self-promoter. And he is apparently blind to any criticism of the latest version of minimalism, no matter how convincing the criticism is for anyone else.
Hm, bad news for the political prospects of Kantian linguists, I guess. But I still think political theorists would be worse.
Would you believe the Founding Fathers were political theorists?
No.
They were lawyers.
Also, where did my comment delete option go?
Post a Comment