Author: David

 

I promise myself, every time I see a particular road sign to write a post about it.  But before I do, a side trip down an apparent rabbit trail.

 

I once knew a lawyer who had descended beyond scoundrelry and rascelry into downright disgusting. One of his shady—though completely legal—deals was the management of a trust he’d devised for the bequests of a client, a very foolish, trusting client.  (Hereafter, instead of citing this lawyer’s name, in its place, I’ll simply use the name “Damned Lawyer”) When the client died, the lawyer had full control of managing the donations from this trust to various charities and non-profit groups.  In each and every case, the lawyer’s name was attched in some way, such as the Damned Lawyer Memorial Methodist Church (the lawyer was still alive, but he stipulated that the church be named after him in that way when he gave the church money from his client’s funds to build a new building).  And every road leading into the little town where that church was had a huge billboard proclaiming the Damned Lawyer Memorial Church.

 

He used someone else’s money to proclaim himself benevolent.

 

Every time I saw those signs, I felt the disgust I feel now when I see a similar sign proclaiming the G. Damned Congressman Highway.  Now, don’t get me wrong.  I do not see the idea of naming a portion of a highway after a public servant, as is done around here in naming portions of roads after state troopers who are killed on duty, as a bad thing.  Indeed, naming public works after public servants (such as the slain state troopers) is a good thing.  But naming public works after a politician, someone whose “benevolence” is all taking money from someone else to spend it on something the politician can claim “credit” for is beyond distasteful and into downright disgusting.

 

The only monuments, IMO, that ought to bear the names of politicians are their headstones.