You’re all idiots!

Ever since the 2000 presidential election, the Left has been racking their brain trying to figure out why George W. Bush has been so popular, and remains so even after the “disastrous” Iraq war. Neal Starkman finally comes up with an answer: Dubya voters are a bunch of dumb shits.
What can explain his popularity? Can that many people be enamored of what he has accomplished in Iraq? Of how he has fortified our constitutional freedoms with the USA Patriot Act? Of how he has bolstered our economy? Of how he has protected our environment? Perhaps they’ve been impressed with the president’s personal integrity and the articulation of his grand vision for America?
Is that likely?
Granted, there are certain subsections of the American polity that have substantially benefited from this presidency. Millionaires and charismatic Christians have accrued either material or spiritual fortification from Bush’s administration. But surely these two groups are a small minority of the population. What, then, can account for so many people being so supportive of the president?
The answer, I’m afraid, is the factor that dare not speak its name. It’s the factor that no one talks about. The pollsters don’t ask it, the media don’t report it, the voters don’t discuss it.
I, however, will blare out its name so that at last people can address the issue and perhaps adopt strategies to overcome it.
It’s the “Stupid factor,” the S factor: Some people — sometimes through no fault of their own — are just not very bright.

Thank you Mr Starkman, for blessing us with your enlightened intelligence. It must be so, after all, the article was published in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer! Intelligence! Intelligencer! Get it?



  1. Al Maviva

    Funny, but I think I disagree with Mr. Starkman. I think that most of the problems in the U.S. aren’t caused by stupid people; rather, they are caused by impossibly arrogant asswipes who have some new plan to reorganize society that they feel compelled to inflict on the rest of us.

  2. Major Sean Bannion

    This is a subset what Hayek called “the fatal conceit,” and what Thomas Sowell called the “Vision of the Annointed.”
    It amazes me that the failures of the left in recent years all ultimately fall from their view of people as nothing more than sub-human proles to be moved around the chessboard of life.
    Robert Conquest too covers this in detail in books and articles too numerous to mention. Maybe the refusal to read anyone from the right side of the aisle means the left will be in the infinte “do loop” of powerlessness for a while.
    I’m not always a fan of “the masses” either. I don’t know antyone who can say they are a “big fan” of stupidity. I recognize the “types” of people described in the piece. When I see folks like this up close and personal I think, “Takes all kinds.” I don’t think, “Idiot.”
    Why do people who claim to be on the side of the little guy…hate the little guy so much?
    I don’t attribute to these people the gross stupidity that Starkman does. Collectively, they have a keen intelligence the left is unwilling to ascribe to them. Volumes have been written about why people are moving right. It won’t last forever, but it’s happening still because of people like Starkman which the left has in an overabundance. Underneath the disclaimers, his “big idea” is: if you don’t agree with me you’re a frickin’ moron.
    I don’t understand why he thinks that’s an argument designed to get people on his side.
    The Left overplayed their hand all the way up to the 90s. They were missing the signs that people were tired of being called racists, bigots, sexists, homophobes, ignorant or worse if they didn’t agree with the next big idea emanating from the fever swamps of the political left. People basically want to be left alone. Over time, if government, or other self-appointed busybodies, intrude too much, people move the other way. That’s happening.
    It probably will a while longer.
    Although, with the size of the current budget I’m not so sure “the era of big government is over.”

  3. David Crawford

    Hey, no busting on the name of Seattle’s lefty rag. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer is one of the cooler names for a newspaper in U.S. Right up there with the Cleveland Plain-Dealer and the New Orleans Times-Picayune.
    BTW, Seattles other newspaper is the Seattle Times. And yes, it is as boring as it name implies.

  4. Al Maviva

    The Post-Intelligencer?
    I’m guessing it gets called the Un-Intelligencer or the No-Intelligencer a lot, based on the quality of that article.

  5. David C. Welch, DO

    Let’s see; It seems that Mr. Starkman’s editorial regarding the “S Factor” was so eloquent and well thought out and presented in such an unemotional and intelligent manor, that I truly believe we should all respond with an expression that equally matches his obviously superior sophistication in terms the ever critical Left can understand:
    Okay, all together now:
    There. That about sums it all up, don’t you think?