There’s a line at the end of the movie Die Hard where a lead character reacts to the villain’s revealed motive for his elaborate heist.
It’s just about the money. That’s all. End of story.
I’m starting to wonder if that’s not a real advantage for the other side. Grand schemes, dire outcomes. Maybe these are unintended consequences. But surely they can’t be driven by anything small. Surely not just that.
We get so hung up in looking for the big picture that must be there, that we are trapped in that pursuit. Because it’s not there. The fact that it costs us a lot for them to get something so little doesn’t matter to them. All the better that we’re drawn into the weeds by refusal to accept that the expense imposed on us by their passions is of such disproportion.
Earlier today, Rush Limbaugh discussed reports of a 2009 Halloween party at the White House. So over-the-top was this that Tim Burton himself was said to have done the decorations; an original Chewbacca costume from the Star Wars films was lent to be worn for the entertainment.
The media hadn’t reported on this at the time, Mr Limbaugh said, because of concern of the image it would paint of President Barack Obama and family — indulging in such extravagances, at taxpayer expense, while so many regular families in America were losing their homes to foreclosures, their jobs to an economy akin to the Great Depression (in effect, if not actually so named).
Rush Limbaugh then said that as much talk as there was about Democrats versus Republicans serving ideologies, fighting over polar-differences that each side in their hearts must have believed sided with them as right, the real end was nothing more than self-gratification.
The fundamental motive to be President of the United States is simply to be and have all that that is of that position. Period. End of story.
If this offends your politics, then consider the presidency of Richard Nixon instead. Watergate was really just a petty burglary. A petty burglary rooted not just in assuring the re-election of Richard Nixon as President of the United States, but that he was overwhelmingly re-elected. Because that would make what he was and what he’d have of it, “better.”
I don’t pretend to know what motivates President Obama. To be honest, I haven’t given it that much thought. But I think Rush Limbaugh is correct in that grander schemes aren’t always explained by grander motives.
It may even be that the correlation is an inverse one.
