Daily Archives: July 25, 2011

Obama’s idea of “fairness”

Imagine an armed gang that stole money from a few, took much for themselves and their friends, and then promised to give some and more in the future to others who did not own it.  Alas, the armed gang is caught, and forced to pay restitution. The “we don’t have the money anymore, we spent it, and we gave it away” excuse wouldn’t fly. And especially the excuse that “we promised to give even more money in the future when we steal more” would not fly. Imagine trying to argue with a straight face that it isn’t fair to make the burden fall solely on those who were promised ill-gotten gain in the future, so it’s only “fair” to make those who were stolen from to allow a little more theft in order for the thieves to make good on their promises.  What an absurd example, John! Nobody in their right mind would make such an argument.  Well, I never claimed Obama was in his right mind, but he makes the “argument.”

Obama claims that it “isn’t fair” for the rich to not have to sacrifice a little when we ask others to “sacrifice.”  Oops. Only problem is that one group is “sacrificing” something that they did not pay for. They are “sacrificing” Christmas presents from the government that they did not earn and do not deserve.  Comparing spending cuts to taxes is like comparing the gift recipients with the gift givers. Imagine the recipient bitching and moaning that the gift giver did not spend enough money (or thought or time) on the gift.  Or whining and moaning if the gifts were not as big as promised by a third-party (elected officials), or as big as expected, or even as big as imagined. 

But we live in a fucked up political system.  People are promised goodies by their elected officials.  Elected officials have no constraints on them. Promise the world, then worry about the deficits later, always later.

The only “fair” thing would be for all elected officials who promise constituents goodies that we can’t afford would be for them to be voted out of office (or worse, see previous post).  When Obama talks about “fairness,” grab your wallet.

 

Perhaps we need to go Islamo-facist terrorist on them?

As in “go postal” on them, except in addition ad the terrorists’ organizational skills.  What?!! Is John drunk blogging again?? Sadly, no. I’m totally sober (for the moment).  But hear me out. 

The problem, as I see it, is that our political system is broke.  On the one hand, we have liberal congressmen from liberal districts that just don’t care–they want to increase deficit spending. It is the opium of the masses that keeps re-electing them.  On the other, we have conservative representatives from conservative districts who swear up and down that they will not raise taxes and lower spending. Then they get into the swamp known as “inside the beltway” and suddenly they weaken in the knee, they bend to the lamestream media, the bow to the Establishment, and they break their vows and agree to increase spending money that we don’t have.  Then there are the moderates, who are too stupid to breed, in my opinion.  End result, we are screwed.

We tried, we really tried, going the traditional route to take back our country, with the tea parties and the town hall meetings and with electing a whole slew of freshman conservative Republicans to the House. And what has it gotten us? Zip. Zilch. Empty douchebag.

I put my well-known intellectual prowess into solving the problem.  My solution? Our leaders have to be taught to fear us.  Not just patronize us and lie to us and tell us what they think we want to hear and then do what the hell they want to do. I mean real, primal fear.

My initial thought is that we need to shoot some of them.  Not just one or two, randomly.  Nope, a whole slew of them.  Imagine, if you will, a bunch of newly elected officials who just took a big vote on a bill to increase deficit spending.  They are hailed in the press. The talk shows adore them for being leaders and ignoring what those rubes back home want. Then the first time they tritty-trot back to their districts, boom.  Not one, not two, not three, but dozens of them are taken out by patriots who resolved to give their lives for our country. 

The problem with lone gunmen is that people just call them crazy and ignore them (well, most of them are crazy). Speaking of crazy, Islamofacists are crazy. But you know what? People don’t fuck with them. The masses fear them.  The lamestream media licks their boots. People are afraid to say anything negative about that pedophile prophet of theirs out of fear for their lives.  It’s wrong when the camel buggerers do it for their idiotic reasons. It’s not wrong when you are doing your patriotic duty to save America.

How would this scheme work?  A few thousand patriots could swear secret allegiance, prepare and then sit back and wait anonymously. Sort of like the terrorist cells do. Try to fit in with society. Pretend to be a liberal immoral idiot so that you don’t stand out. Sure, they should warn the elected officials before the vote. But the pigs in Washington won’t believe them.  Then BLAM! They who survived would believe them the next time, and they would fear the ones who were not caught or who did not have to, ahem, take out their elected official because he or she voted to cut, not increase, spending.

Three or four waves of such assassinations should get the message across. And, like the terrorists, the patriots could then take credit when lone wolf crazy assassins go postal (as they did at first with this Norwegian crazy).  Soon, people would be looking under piles of hay and behind doors and under the bed for the patriots that probably are not within a hundred miles of them. The end result, our representatives would stop spending our children’s’ and our grandchildren’s money to give people something now that they did not earn or deserve.

Too extreme, you say? Not politically correct. I’m open to suggestions. This new show about the alien invasion gave me a couple of alternative plans.  One, surgically implant shock collars on the newly elected officials.  They get three chances. The first time they vote to increase spending, they get knocked on their ass. The second, to the hospital, and the third, to the morgue. Methinks spending would decrease precipitously.

Too extreme still you say?  Okay, fall back plan. As the “skitterers” do, steal their children.  As soon as the election is certified, steal their children. As many as possible. The mere threat to harm the kids should be enough to keep them in line. Heck, maybe they would even self-impose term limits when they miss their kids. And while they are in possession of the kidnappers, they could be taught conservative values.  Who can argue that the kids will be worse off than living the spoiled life of a Congressman or Senator’s son or daughter. The world would be better off without a few Al Gores and Kennedys (and Bushes) children. 

Still too harsh? Not politically correct? Not cool to be talking such smack so close to the Norway shootings and the Arizona shootings, blah blah blah?  Well, shit, this world has so many shootings, if you wait an acceptable period of time we’ll all be dead before there is a lull in mayhem.  Besides, you got a better idea?  Tarring and feathering, perhaps? Okay, I’m all ears…

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.  Can anybody really argue that we haven’t traded one tyrant across the pond for a few hundred across the country?