Pelosi Confident Women’s Votes Will Mean Democratic Sweep in November
By John Semmens: Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News
“Just looking at the top of the ticket has to give every Democrat a sense of optimism,” Pelosi crowed. “On the GOP side we have Mitt Romney—a man who virtually imprisoned his own wife, kept her from seeking gainful employment and used her to breed five children—all sons, mind you. Are women going to vote for this kind of misogynist or are they going to appreciate that before he was president Senator Obama helped his wife get a $300,000 no-show job in addition to gifting her with two lovely daughters?”
“If the comparative life stories of the presidential candidates don’t sway female voters the policy differences ought to,” Pelosi argued. “Democrats have a long record of championing women’s rights. Republicans tout marriage and family as the foundation of our social structure. Democrats have freed women from this trap by ensuring that they can still have children without having to marry a man, that the financial support they need is there for the taking from the generosity of the government.”
“Free food, clothing, and shelter isn’t all we Democrats have given to women,” Pelosi went on. “Thanks to Secretary Sebelius, the government has now mandated free birth control for every woman. And President Obama has appointed two women to the Supreme Court. No other president has done that.”
Pelosi admitted to being buoyed by polls showing that Democrats are favored by 65% of female voters. “The path to government of, by, and for women is clear,” Pelosi said. “Voting for President Obama is a no-brainer. However, he can’t do it alone. We need Democratic majorities in Congress to ensure this transformation won’t be blocked. If women unite to vote their interests the Democratic Party will be running things from here on.”
In related news, according to official records, women on the White House staff are paid 18% less than men. This is okay, though, according to White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew because “most of the men have more years of experience. There’s also the issue of job performance. You can’t just make a gender to gender comparison and conclude that somebody’s getting unfair treatment.”
Ironically, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act passed by a Democratic majority Congress in 2009 requires exactly that comparison and conclusion. Whether this Act will be enforced in this instance is unknown.
Heroic Effort Saves Plant
Over $200,000 in federal stimulus funds were used to relocate one manzanita bush from a highway median in San Francisco. This feat was undertaken even though the normal practice is simply to bulldoze unwanted vegetation in the path of roadway expansion.
“Every life is precious,” explained Representative Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) in whose district the expenditure was made. “Just because the same plant can be bought from a commercial nursery for under $20 doesn’t mean we should wantonly kill one merely because it is unwanted. Luckily, we were able to find it an adoptive home.”
The plant’s new home will be somewhere in San Francisco’s Presidio. It’s precise location is being kept secret to prevent gawkers who want to see the $200,000 bush from possibly trampling it to death.
While some may perceive that this escapade is another in a long list of wasteful government expenditures, Pelosi pointed out that “the $200,000 in spending helped support employment in my district, which is exactly what the stimulus bill was supposed to do.”
Abortion Lobby Assails Movie
The NARAL Pro-Choice America organization lashed out at the film “October Baby” for its message and methods.
“Movie-goers need to be aware that this film is out-of-step with mainstream America,” NARAL spokesperson Adora Slaughter contended. “It implies that carrying a baby to term is THE right choice. It conceals the fact that one-in-four pregnancies is terminated by abortion. The notion that one-in-four women might be making the wrong choice flies in the face of Secretary Sebelius’ determination that women have the right to make this choice and that insurers must cover it regardless of any psuedo conscientious objections.”
“On top of the film’s heavy-handed propaganda, the producers are donating a portion of the profits to fund crisis pregnancy centers,” Slaughter added. “Cleverly named so as to attract those whose pregnancies pose a problem, rather than helping these women dispose of the problem, these crisis centers seek to divert women’s choices toward the pro-life option.”
“So, here we have an unbalanced, one-sided message in the film that portrays the choice not to abort as somehow morally superior to a decision to terminate a pregnancy—despite the fact that protecting a woman’s right to choose has been the law of the land for nearly 40 years,” Slaughter complained. “Then the proceeds from ticket sales are dishonestly compounding the offense by covertly financing a point of view with which many theater patrons may disagree.”
NYC Mayor Says Common People Unqualified to Defend Selves
Using the Trayvon Martin shooting as a springboard, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg renewed his push for stronger gun control laws.
“If we learn nothing else from this tragedy we should at least come to grips with the fact that the average American cannot be trusted with firearms,” Bloomberg asserted. “I mean, if George Zimmerman weren’t carrying a gun would he have had the nerve to serve in the neighborhood watch? Probably not. But even if he did, isn’t it likely he would’ve kept his distance from a person he described as ‘suspicious?’”
As Bloomberg sees it, “we need to replace the antiquated and barbaric concept of ‘self-defense’ with a more civilized approach. Weapons should be restricted to trained professionals. If only the police had guns there’d be a lot fewer unwarranted shootings. Trayvon would still be alive and so probably would Zimmerman, albeit, perhaps a bit more battered and bloodied. After all, it’s not so easy to beat a person to death.”
Bloomberg dismissed charges of hypocrisy—he himself is accompanied by armed bodyguards wherever he goes—as “off target.” “I’m not saying that people don’t need protection,” Bloomberg said. “That’s what the police are for. If a person thinks he needs more protection than the police can provide he should be free to hire qualified professionals, as I have done for occasions when I’m not traveling with the bodyguards supplied by the City.”
In related news, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said that President Obama will not be making further comments on the Trayvon Martin case. “The President has already made his views known,” Carney told reporters. “Now it is up to the Florida authorities to see to it that Zimmerman is appropriately punished. Attorney General Holder will be monitoring events to ensure that this happens.”
President and Billionaire Agree on Taxes
Both President Barack Obama and billionaire investor Warren Buffett agree that they both ought to be taxed more. Both currently have the option of paying more than they owe. However, both decline to do so.
“While it’s true that I, or any other taxpayer, for that matter, could voluntarily contribute more of his or her income to the government, that’s not the point,” the President insisted. “Voluntary contributions leave the discretion up to the individual. Whether a person paid more would be a matter of personal choice.”
“What I am trying to establish is the principle under law that certain people must be made to pay more,” Obama continued. “If Warren and I were to voluntarily fork over more money it would dilute the political pressure in support of a higher tax rate. If people see that rich guys willingly give more they may feel less enthusiastic about the need to force them to pay more.”
“When you come right down to it, we are fighting the misconception that whatever money a person may have is his to do with as he pleases,” the President added. “We are trying to build a new America where the good of the whole supersedes the interests of anarchic individualism. The notion that what one gives to society is optional contradicts our mission of transformation.”
Ease of Vote Fraud Fails to Faze Attorney General
Project Veritas’ demonstration of how easy it is to vote in someone else’s name failed to inspire concern at the Attorney General’s office. The demonstration involved sending a scruffy, young, white man to 61-year-old Eric Holder’s polling place to see if poll workers would give him Holder’s presidential primary ballot. Despite the young man’s lack of photo ID he was offered the ballot.
Holder called the demonstration “a stunt that doesn’t prove anything. No fraudulent vote was cast. The only harm that was done was to people’s confidence in the integrity of the ballot. Maintaining this confidence is the key to preserving civil order. If too many people start to doubt the legitimacy of elections we’re in for real trouble. Fortunately, Project Veritas has very little credibility with the reputable media.”
A Satirical Look at Recent News