We’re stupid, and treated like it

Are you stupid?

Sorry to be so blunt, but considering how you and I are being treated by most of our political leaders, it’s a legitimate question.

And the answer, based on the rhetoric emanating from the White House, Congress and presidential candidates on both sides of the partisan divide, is yes: Our political leaders don’t think we have basic walking-around sense.

Here are some of the things that you and I apparently are too stupid to know:

“ That the $161 billion “economic stimulus package” is a bad idea.

The politicians do not believe that we are capable of understanding that the government would have to borrow the money to give each of us a check for $600 or $1,200 or whatever the amount ends up being.

They assume that we’re so greedy we’ll fall over one another in our race to cash the checks.

And they’re lucky we’re dumb, or Congress might have to do what ordinary Americans do when household budgets get tight: find ways to increase income while reducing expenses.

“ That if you borrow more money than you can pay back, to buy a bigger house than you can afford, resulting in monthly payments that you can’t handle, you’re going to lose the house.

Politicians make lots of noise about “helping financially strapped homeowners” and regulating the mortgage loan industry, but they know there isn’t a whole lot the government can or should do about the former, and that any regulations they enact will help only future borrowers.

The rhetoric sounds good, though, and that’s all that matters to them, remember, ‘cause we’re so dumb.

“ That if they say “universal health care” instead of “socialized medicine,” we’ll feel better about the prospect of the government running America’s health care system.

Those good feelings, they hope, will keep us from contemplating the actual cost of government-run health care.

“ That bringing about change in Washington entails more than saying the word “change.”

Politicians apparently figure if they say “change” over and over, and occasionally throw in the word “bipartisan,” you and I won’t demand to know the specifics of what they would do differently and how.

“ That ending the war in Iraq would be a complicated undertaking.

Certain presidential candidates and congressional leaders imply otherwise. But think about how long it would take to withdraw our forces if today the president said to his secretary of defense, “We’re getting out, and I mean now.”

An Army general who met with my newspaper’s editorial board estimated the military would need 18 months to two years to bring home the people, weapons and equipment we’ve accumulated in Iraq.

Politicians might prefer that we not think too hard about what the leave-taking process would be like in a country so notoriously unstable.

Thinking could lead to questioning, and questioning could lead to a demand for facts and figures instead of pretty platitudes. It’s easier to treat people like dummies than to tell them the truth about the issues and challenges facing the United States.

Unless, of course, we dummies were to refuse to cooperate. Imagine if we began to say things like “That doesn’t make sense,” “How can we afford your plan?” and “What are the risks?”

People can’t treat you like a fool unless you let them. Right now, we voters are complicit in the way politicians regard us.

Question is, will we do anything to change their attitudes before the November election?