A friend of mine writes:
This man is innocent until proven guilty, BUT...
I have to admit. The thought of an elitist, multiculturalist, jet-setting, Frog-bureaucrat-snob ENA professor turned IMF President who was a likely Socialist candidate for President of France, sitting in the pokey in downtown Manhattan for jumping out of his hotel bathroom naked and trying to manhandle a chambermaid is a little too good to be true.
I had a good chuckle over that one. He writes, of course, about Dominique Strauss-Kahn, erstwhile IMF head. I continuously marvel at the enormous sense of entitlement guys like this seem to have, especially since most, like Strauss-Kahn, never seem to hold a real job.
Strauss-Kahn is a conspicuous consumer in Paris's fashionable quarters and he always flies first class for free on Air France. He stays in a $3000/night hotel room. You know who pays for that? Me and you. I love the fact that he asked the pilots to hold up the takeoff of his flight when he was waiting - he thought - for his cell phone to be delivered.
Women are apparently something he just takes when it pleases him, assuming they didn't kick too hard. A chambermaid, sure, I'll have that. Just an unimportant African girl whereas I, I am Dominique Strauss-Kahn, head of the IMF and future president of France! And, mon Dieu, it was only une fellation. Une petit chose!
What kills me is that these leftist elites are just that - elites. They supposedly represent the common man but would never actually be caught dead with one. And someone else always seems to pay their bills.
Don't get me wrong, the left does not corner the market in hypocrisy. The right will always have the occasional preening moralist who keeps a mistress or two on the side. The difference is this: a conservative philosophy recognizes man's fallacies, and as such seeks limits to power. Limited government limits the reach of avaricious politicians and officious bureaucrats. On the other hand, Obama, Soros, and all the other sherry-sipping globalists who hang out in Davos want to hand over the keys to people like Strauss-Kahn. He is, after all, the very embodiment of sophistication and certainly knows best how the rest of us should be living our lives. His moral trespasses come with the territory in any great man. The rest of us are unsophisticated rubes to expect such men to live by the pedestrian conventions of the middle class.
Monsieur Strauss-Kahn, enjoy the hospitality of the New York penal system. I'm sure your fellow inmates will revel in your bon mots and tales from the corridors of power. Just don't pick up the soap.
(Incidentally, for a great read on this general subject, I highly recommend Intellectuals by Paul Johnson.)
scott the majority of recent sexual scandals in this country have a heavy right leaning trend, from men's room on up, power breeds corruption not ideology
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteMaybe in the papers and periodicals that you choose to read, DeWitt, but not in reality.
ReplyDeleteI think Scott's point is clear: that this Socialist felt entitled to assault a women that he believed to be of "inferior station" in life. There's a trace of irony in there somewhere, n'est-ce pas?
The same irony that would exist had this been a religious right conservative. But then, that irony would not have been left unsaid in your journals of choice. N'est-il pas ce-vrai?
Scott, you say: "A conservative philosophy recognizes man's fallacies, and as such seeks to constrain the amount power. Limited government limits the reach of avaricious politicians and officious bureaucrats."
ReplyDeleteOk, OK, fine, but if limited govt limits avaricious and officious bureaucrats, who or what will limit avaricious and officious crooks in the free market, such as Blankfein and Daniel Sparks, who not only stole untold millions from their own customers, but lied about it, to say nothing of Madoff and on down the line?
Biddle, you are making Scott's case for him.
ReplyDeleteMadoff was a major Democratic donor, notably to Schumer, Dodd, and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.
Blankfein is a donor to Democrats.
I don't find a political donation record for Sparks.
The point is, if you understand that people aren't angels, you worry more about a large government where what you get--justice or subsidies--depends on whom you know and what's politically advantageous. There is no barrier to such a government being corrupt and incompetent as well; the international record suggests you will get Large, Politicized, Corrupt, and Incompetent as a package deal.
Biddle,
ReplyDeleteSomehow I knew this retort would come up. First, no one is suggesting that we do away with the criminal justice system. Even the most hard core libertarian believes that one of the legitimate functions of government is to protect all our rights.
Second, the private economy is not analogous to the public sector because there's greater accountability. That doesn't mean there are no crooks, it just means it's harder to pull off. There are shareholders, investors, accountants, and yes, regulators, and you must answer to all of them. That's a lot of checks and balances. Not a perfect system, but I don't know a better one.
In government, influence will always be for sale, which is why they should have very little to dispense. And who do people like this IMF pig answer too, exactly? Who looks over his shoulder? Why was he allowed to spend $3000 a night for a hotel room? If Lloyd Blankfein did that (and he very well might), it doesn't affect me unless I'm a shareholder, and I always have a right to sell my shares. To whom to I go do disgorge my implicit interest (as a taxpayer) in the IMF?