I was robbed!

There’s robbery. There’s highway robbery. And then there’s waking up shivering in a snowbank bruised and bloodied with no pants. Such is my situation after being snubbed by Matt Taibbi for his Supreme Court of Assholedom. I want to be clear, I hold no ill-will toward him or any of those appointed to this most esteemed high court which enjoys original jurisdiction, but Jesus was this a bitter pill to swallow after sending him a résumé complete with a killer sample court opinion for this pro bono position. See for yourself. (I’ve omitted some of my personal information.)

Dear Matt,

Please accept my “résumé” for consideration in your search for associate justices for the Supreme Court of Assholedom. I’m a college instructor who holds a Master’s degree in Political Science…I have studied constitutional and international law, and have extensive experience dealing with assholes. For one thing I live in Boston. For another I have held several existential crisis-inducing customer service jobs in which talking to assholes was more than 90% of the job. I also worked as a governmental administrative assistant; and in that capacity my chief responsibility was handling constituent issues, which much of the time simply meant, “troubleshooting with assholes.” Also, I have been known to be an asshole myself on occasion. Just the other day I told a snide customer service rep to go fuck herself. You’d think I’d have some empathy. Nope.

I also have a website, http://www.inebriateddiscourse.com/. (Recommended blog writing sample: http://www.inebriateddiscourse.com/2011/01/sarah-palins-justifiably-unjustified.html.)

Finally, maybe I can put a face to my name, but we briefly crossed paths at your Griftopia signing in Boston/Brookline in November. I think I made a Mapplethorpe joke. Anyway, I don’t know if that helps my case, but it certainly can’t hurt. Unless you thought I was an asshole. But in which case that would demonstrate I have experience in this field. (This position lends itself to some bizarre criteria.)

Even if I’m not selected for a judgeship, I’d be interested in the Solicitor General position, should there be one. Kind of like Elena Kagan was, but without the old-Jewish-man-in-drag look.

I have written a sample opinion from a hypothetical case, America minus Lower Manhattan v. Larry Kudlow. If you have any questions about my candidacy, please don’t hesitate to contact me at max.canning@gmail.com.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

Max Canning

AMERICA MINUS LOWER MANHATTAN v. LARRY KUDLOW

Ruling: ASSHOLE

Asshole Gradient: 5,037

JUSTICE CANNING delivered the opinion of the Court:

Petitioners America minus Lower Manhattan (America) allege, inter alia, that Larry Kudlow (Kudlow) has engaged in Assholery on a regular basis via innumerable pro-oligarchy statements during the telecast of his show, The Kudlow Report on CNBC. For the purposes of this case, America has asked the Court to examine Kudlow’s September 23rd 2008 on-air remarks in support of the Trouble Assets Relief Program (TARP), and juxtapose them with Kudlow’s remarks on same program December 7th, 2009.

In championing the bailouts of Wall Street, specifically TARP, on 9/23/08, Kudlow alleged, “This is a bailout…of Main Street, of middle class folks who desperately need credit.” Kudlow was advocating the rescue of the financial services sector by the federal government in direct violation of the very free market principles he said he favored. His prediction that TARP was a bailout of Main Street was dubious then, and seems more preposterous now in light of subsequent developments.

Kudlow’s hypocrisy and deceit alone on this occasion fulfill the necessary criteria for Assholedom. However, the Court’s examination does not end there, being obliged as it is to consider Kudlow’s position on bank bailouts vis-à-vis statements he made on his program the following year. On December 7th 2009, in response to a story about possible money left over from TARP, Kudlow declared that the excess money should go to “pay down the debt” and not to bolster “social safety nets” for America. Thus, Kudlow favored spending $700 billion in taxpayer money on rescuing the nation’s largest financial institutions, but was against spending any leftover money on actual individual taxpayers.

As the Court noted in Working Stiffs v. Evan Newmark and Wall Street Journal, wealthy individuals can have no reasonable expectation of immunity from being deemed an Asshole by this Court (or by people in general) if they advocate, either directly or indirectly, oligarchy, plutocracy, aristocracy etc. However, the burden of proof for Assholedom for working class advocates of oligarchy etc. is greater given that they are more likely to be ignorant of the inevitable consequences of assenting to the principles espoused by such establishment media personalities. This is discussed further in Annoyed Coworkers v. Gomer McYokel. In that ruling, the Court rejected Coworkers’ contention that McYokel was an asshole because he made pro-oligarchy statements at work, having found that McYokel lacked the intellectual capacity necessary to understand the consequences of a flat-rate national income tax, which he advocated.

The Court did however, rule McYokel an asshole after examining the harsh and berating nature of his workplace pontifications. Continuously harping on a given topic, whatever the content and after others have made clear their total lack of interest, is grounds for a declaration of Assholedom, unless it can be shown the ranting is a byproduct of mental defect as defined in Canning Family v. Quasi-Retarded Uncle Phil.

Kudlow is both a well-to-do individual and one that is of reasonably sound mind. (Note that the Court rejected a motion to consider Kudlow’s substantial cocaine use in the 1980s as possible grounds for an Uncle Phil exemption.) The Court thus finds that Kudlow has indeed engaged in Assholedom on the occasions cited above. Therefore, Larry Kudlow is an Asshole, and with a gradient of 5,037.

DISSENT: None.