After all the theatrics have ended, after all the television analysts have dissected the GOP debate candidates’ performances, what do we actually have left to digest? After all the claims and counter claims of one particular night, what are the defining principles these five men continue to stand on? This often gets lost with each particular debate.
Or, better said, if the primary season is a buffet, what are Senators Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, Dr. Ben Carson, Gov. John Kasich and Donald Trump serving you? Here’s some food for thought to chew on:
U.S. Senator Ted Cruz: steak, potatoes and gravy, steamed broccoli, apple pie
He will bury Obamacare, President Obama’s illegal executive orders and the IRS.
He will support the investigations into Planned Parenthood’s alleged improprieties, of which there are many.
He will support Americans’ first liberty – religious freedom, under a withering attack from Democrats and the Left
Dr. Ben Carson: a balanced diet of heart-healthy food
He will use his gifted hands to heal an America suffering from “heart disease”.
He will use his brilliant skills as a problem solver to make the right decisions in the Oval Office on the national conditions worsened by bad socialist policy over the last several years.
He’ll demand federal agencies cut spending … or accept their resignations.
U.S. Senator Marco Rubio: appetizers and angel food cake
He promises to deliver the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and corporations continued cheap labor through the amnesty policies that leave our southern border porous.
He will zing Donald Trump.
Governor John Kasich: diet pepsi and spam
He will bring jobs to Ohio.
He will not address the real problems gripping the nation.
Donald Trump: sauerkraut and liver
He’ll definitely name call those who oppose him and alienate many, leaving a bad taste.
He’ll wince every time television programs play video of him supporting single-payer, socialized health care.
He’ll finish the wall on the southern border.
We serve ourselves and our nation better by looking at one debate as just a piece of a greater pie. We’re considering who we may want to serve as our nation’s chief executive for the near four, possibly eight, years. We will do well to view the bigger picture, and to make it known what we want in the way of policy and leadership nutrition.
When we look past the political theater dominating the news and get down to what matters most, we discern that Senator Ted Cruz and Dr. Ben Carson have the most to offer. And they are thinking of you in what they want to accomplish in office.
The Arizona Senate passed two life-affirming bills this week.
Passing by a margin of 18-11m Senate Bill 1474 is written to prohibit the trafficking of aborted baby body parts in Arizona. Sponsored by Sen. Nancy Barto, these bills have been sparked by Planned Parenthood’s admission of selling baby body parts after it was exposed by the Center for Medical Progress undercover videos.
Also passing the AZ Senate by the same 18-11 count, Senate Bill 1485 prevents abortion mills from gaining eligibility to participate in the State Employee Charitable Campaign. Sen. Andy Biggs sponsored this commonsense bill.
Big Abortion is under investigation for defrauding the government and is in court accused of refusing to report the abuse of under-age girls in eight states. Congress voted to defund Planned Parenthood, forcing President Obama to own a veto and expose himself for defending a scandal-plagued organization.
By John Semmens –Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News
Donald Trump’s bid to become president received a boost from an unexpected source when racist loon Al Sharpton promised to leave the country should Trump be elected.
According to Sharpton, his pledge to leave the country “is a desperate plea to the people who love me to spare my having to move out” and “would save the government the expense of having to deport me along with all the other so-called undesirables Trump has threatened to oust.”
Trump’s campaign manager Corey Lewandowski predicted that Sharpton’s vow “will help Donald’s efforts to win votes. Getting endorsements from friends is nice, but having the right enemies can also be a big help. Of course, as an American citizen, Mr. Sharpton would be in no danger of being deported by a Trump Administration. However, as a tax-cheat he could face prosecution. So it’s not really a surprise that he might be planning to escape with his ill-gotten loot before that happens.”
In related news, Trump says he will open up the libel laws once he becomes president. “Opponents who tell lies about me, the media who repeat those lies, and editors who smear me as untrustworthy won’t be able to get off scot free,” Trump declared. “They will be held accountable for purposely negative remarks and sued until they are broken of this horrible habit.”
Clinton Contrasts Immigration Stance with Rivals
Eyeing the Latino vote, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton sought to distinguish herself from both fellow Democratic candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders and GOP front-runner Donald Trump by taking a pro-illegal immigrant stance.
“To those swayed by Trump’s plan to build a wall to keep Mexicans from coming to America I would like to know ‘who will clean our homes and mow our lawns?’” she asked. “These are the jobs that Trump and Sanders want to reserve for Americans. But do Americans really want these jobs, even at $15 an hour?”
Clinton professed to “understand the GOP’s racist desire to block these future Democratic voters, but what can Sanders be thinking? Is the short-run preservation of menial jobs for Americans who don’t want them worth delaying the day when Democrats, bolstered by the votes of millions more Latinos, can monopolize political power at the local, state, and national levels? Those of us who believe in progressive values need to take the long view, as President Obama has, and do everything we can to ensure the Party’s permanent ascendancy”
“As president, not only will I bar the construction of any more walls, but until those that exist are torn down I will build ladders and ship them to Mexico so migrants can more easily and safely enter the United States,” she announced. “This will enable us to complete the transformation of America that President Obama has initiated.”
In related news, Sanders brushed aside fears that socialism in America could lead down the same destructive path it has in Venezuela, where shortages of toilet paper now plague that nation. “Look, for most of human history people have gotten along without toilet paper, clean clothes, and adequate food,” he pointed out. “We are tough enough to survive without luxuries like toilet paper. Its absence from the sewage system will clear the pipes and lessen the burden on the environment. I’d call shortages of such unneeded luxuries more of a feature, than a flaw, of socialism.”
Kerry Complains Released Terrorist “Broke His Word”
News reports that former Gitmo detainee Ibrahim al Qosi has rejoined al Qaeda has Secretary of State John Kerry in a snit. “We had an agreement with him that he was not supposed to do that,” Kerry complained.
Kerry’s remarks in testimony before the State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee left no doubt that he was mightily peeved. “We go to great care in drafting the papers detainees must sign before we let them out of prison,” Kerry said. “Contractually, I think these signed agreements are airtight. I believe we will have a strong case for a breach-of-contract lawsuit against this man.”
“You know, part of the problem may have been that he was released to Somalia,” Kerry observed. “If it weren’t for Congressional opposition we could have released him in the United States as President Obama wanted to do. So, in a way, Congress is just as much at fault for al Qosi’s return to terrorist activities as anyone.”
The Secretary used this incident as an opening argument for the President’s proposal to close the Gitmo facility and bring any remaining detainees to the United States. “This US military prison on the Island of Cuba is an impediment to improving relations with the Castro Government,” Kerry lamented. “Shutting it down and ceding the land back to Cuba would be a major step for our country in atonement for the damage we have done to the Cuban Government over the last 50 years. The President has graciously given Congress the opportunity to participate in this historic rapprochement. I urge them to grasp this opportunity or risk missing the boat if he has to go it alone.”
DOJ Tries to Nix State Requirement of Proof of Citizenship to Vote
The US Department of Justice joined with plaintiffs suing to prohibit the U.S. Elections Assistance Commission (EAC) from allowing states to include proof of citizenship on voter registration forms. Further, the DOJ barred the EAC from hiring lawyers to defend the agency in the lawsuit.
Bowing to provisions in Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution, the Tenth Amendment, and the Seventeenth Amendment, the EAC consented to permit states to regulate voter eligibility in their jurisdiction. The League of Women Voters objected and filed suit demanding a preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order, arguing that “requiring proof of citizenship presents an unacceptable legal barrier to voting by non-citizens. The right to vote is an essential human right that must be extended to all humans regardless of their status under arcane eligibility requirements. Non-citizens are subject to the same laws as citizens are. They must be permitted to participate in the selection of those who govern them.”
U.S. District Judge Richard Leon called the DOJ’s actions “unprecedented” and “extraordinary. It is the Department’s legal responsibility to defend a federal agency against a suit launched against it. The Department has neglected this responsibility. Further, the Department’s prohibition against the agency’s access to outside legal representation compounds its dereliction of duty.” The Judge lifted the DOJ’s ban on outside counsel, denied the League’s request for an injunction, and promised to rule on the restraining order within a few days.
Unchastened by the Judge’s ruling, Attorney General Loretta Lynch challenged “the authority of a mere district judge to countermand the policy set by the President of the United States. President Obama was elected by the people of America to transform the way our government operates. Judge Leon’s mandate is not broad enough to outweigh the President’s sacred obligation to fulfill his promise to the voters who elected him. So, I doubt anything will come of the Judge’s efforts to block or undo whatever the President wants done.”
In related news, the New York City Council is considering an ordinance that would explicitly allow non-citizens to vote. Bertha Lewis, head of the Black Institute, heartily endorsed the idea saying “it’s about time that the 1.3 million residents of this city who aren’t citizens to get a say in electing those who govern them. They should have just as much right to protect their interests in welfare and public housing as those who are citizens.”
Pelosi Appalled by GOP’s Disrespect for Obama
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) pronounced herself appalled by the GOP’s stated refusal to confirm anyone President Obama nominates to fill the Supreme Court vacancy caused by the recent death of Justice Antonin Scalia. “The blatant disrespect goes beyond anything I have witnessed in all my years in government,” she claimed.
Pelosi said she was unaware of any comparable behavior on the part of Democrats toward Republican presidents despite public statements by prominent Democratic senators during the two Bush Administrations. “Statements made by then Senator Biden (D-Del) in 1992 or Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) in 2007 had no taint of racism since these were white men contesting the actions of other white men,” she asserted. “All were beneficiaries of white privilege, so no injustice was committed.”
The Minority Leader also dismissed then Senator Obama’s (D-Ill) attempt to filibuster President Bush’s Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito in 2006, calling it “an indiscretion of a youthful first term senator. The President readily admits it was a mistake. It would be spiteful to use that against him now.”
Those on the campaign trail for the Democratic presidential nomination were equally ardent in their reactions to the GOP stance against approving an Obama selection. Hillary Clinton urged that “the President should immediately name a solid progressive to the post in order to keep the transformational momentum going. As we have seen over the last seven years, Congress has obstructed the legislation the President has offered to advance this goal. Getting a solid Court majority in place could bypass this blockage.” Sen. Bernie Sanders (S-Vt) labeled the Republic attitude “simple racism. I don’t recall white senators taking such an implacable stand against the nominees of white presidents.”
A Satirical Look at Recent News
John Semmens is a retired economist who has written a weekly political satire for The Arizona Conservative since 2005. He says working on his satires is one of the ways he tries to honor the liberties our Founding Fathers tried to protect.
Please do us a favor. If you uses material created byThe Arizona Conservative, give us credit and DO NOT change the context. Thank you.
By John Semmens –Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News
The inconveniently timed death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia last weekend has set the stage for a major confrontation over the appointment of his successor. On the one hand, President Obama has asserted his determination to fill the position as soon as possible and denounced any opposition as “irresponsible.” On the other hand key Republicans have proposed that the vacancy be filled after the November elections, arguing that voters should be allowed to elect the person they feel the most confidence in to make the appointment.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ken) pointed to “an 80-year Senate tradition of holding off on approving nominees during an election year. Since Justices typically serve for decades it seems inappropriate that a ‘lame duck’ president should make such a momentous decision.”
Presidential Press Secretary Josh Earnest ridiculed McConnell’s contention, observing that “the Senate approved Reagan’s nomination of Anthony Kennedy in 1988. So, if a majority Democratic senate could confirm a Republican president’s nominee then, why can’t a majority Republican senate confirm a Democratic president’s nominee now?”
McConnell denied that the two circumstances were analogous. “Kennedy’s confirmation occurred in 1988 because senate Democrats blocked Robert Bork’s nomination in 1987,” he reminded. “Not only did Democrats block a distinguished judge from assuming a place on the Supreme Court, they also trashed his reputation for purely ideological reasons.”
The Senator also went on to mention that “before he became President Obama he was a senator who participated in the Democratic Party’s persistent obstruction of President Bush’s nominees for many court positions. Court vacancies went on for years as Democrats in the senate prevented an ‘up or down’ vote. And he participated in filibustering the nomination of Justice Samuel Alito in 2006 despite acknowledging that Alito was ‘an accomplished jurist.’”
Earnest contended that “McConnell’s stance is indefensible. These Republican nominees were on the wrong side of the march of history. Elevating them to high positions in our court system would simply have retarded the progress of the social revolution that Democrats have strenuously worked for over many decades. The GOP cannot equate the President’s prior struggle against counter-revolutionaries to their own efforts to thwart the advance of social justice and progressive values that any nominee he names for the vacancy will pursue.”
McConnell’s senate Democratic colleagues expressed confidence that an Obama nominee will be approved this year. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), one of the leaders of the filibuster against Alito, predicted that “Mitch will fold. He’s the most spineless wimp I’ve ever seen in all my years in government. He may have all the high cards—precedent, evidence, logic, and votes—but he’ll throw in his hand at the first sign of a Democrat or the media challenginging his position.”
Trump Tries to Clarify Heath Care Views
At a South Carolina “town hall” event GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump expressed criticism of Obamacare, but professed support for the mandate provision of the law. “Look, we can’t have people dying in the streets,” he said. “Unless the law compels everyone to buy insurance there will be some who don’t have coverage. I want everyone to be covered. My plan will take care of everyone.”
Trump also argued that “by making the purchase of health insurance compulsory we will ensure the profitability of the industry. A requirement that people must buy insurance assures a larger revenue stream than if people may buy insurance. That’s simple economics.”
The candidate held that his approach “would be superior to Obamacare because we will closely monitor every aspect of the health care system to make sure all the prices are fair, that only the best therapies are permitted, and that no money is wasted on hopeless cases. It will be fantastic.”
That his “fantastic” plan seems suspiciously like Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders’ “single payer” plan didn’t seem to bother Trump who insisted “I’m not talking about a total government takeover. There will still be private insurers, private doctors and the like. But if government takes a bigger role on behalf of Americans it can dictate better prices by using either the ‘carrot’ or the ‘stick’ as seems appropriate.”
Clinton Says She Tries to Tell the Truth
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton was cornered in an interview on CBS this week when she was asked by Scott Pelley whether she could make a Jimmy Carter-like promise to never lie to the American people.
For her part, Hillary professed to be “working hard to try to tell the truth,” but admitted that “it hasn’t always been easy. There are times when the greater good requires that the truth be suppressed or that a fiction be concocted. Should we slavishly adhere to the truth at the cost of allowing political enemies to tear us down like Reagan did to President Carter? Wouldn’t the nation have been better off if Carter had been more flexible regarding the truth? If he had been, perhaps the nightmare years of the Reagan era could’ve been averted.”
“I think American voters are sophisticated enough to understand and appreciate the reasons why their president may need to lie to them for their own benefit,” she added. “They need a leader who will do whatever it takes to govern. If this means the president must cross ethical boundaries that would be considered sins or crimes in other circumstances we must hope that the person we elect is up to the task. Of those currently running I believe that I best embody the character and strength to undertake any dirty deeds that might be necessary.”
Pope Castigates American Capitalism
In his visit to the U.S.-Mexican border, Pope Francis took the occasion to criticize American capitalism for the suffering of the poor.
“In pursuit of profit the capitalists enslave working men and women, compelling them to exchange their precious time for money,” the Pope complained. “Though not literally in chains, those forced to labor for their survival are rousted from repose to travel on often difficult and dangerous roads to arrive at an employer’s place of exploitation. There they are given tiresome chores by cruel taskmasters. If they fail to perform satisfactorily they may be cast out into the streets.”
Francis contrasted this grim picture of life under capitalism with “the life of prayer and charity that God wants us all to have and which the Church has modeled for nearly 2,000 years. The Church has not only survived, but has grown and thrived on the gifts given by the faithful. It has demonstrated that profit is not required for a life of goodness and joy. America must put aside personal greed and open its doors to take in the poor of the world.”
The Pope chided efforts by politicians, like presidential candidate Donald Trump, to block migrants from entering the United States “in order to obtain their fair share of the abundance God has bestowed upon that land” calling such efforts “selfish and unchristian. It is God’s wish that those who have the ability to produce more than they need share the surplus with those who have less than they need. The fear that this would lead to universal impoverishment is overwrought. Jesus owned nothing. He survived on the generosity of friends and supporters. If such a lifestyle is good enough for the Son of God why is it not good enough for everyone on Earth?”
Satanic Sacrament of Abortion Nixed by Missouri Court
The New York-based Satanic Temple’s suit to overturn a Missouri informed consent law requiring that women seeking abortions in the state must first receive information about the procedure and its consequences 72 hours ahead of undergoing the surgery was dismissed by Cole County Circuit Judge Joe Beteem.
The plaintiff, identified only as “Mary Doe,” to protect her from the infamy that might attend her public exposure as a Satanist, argued that “the law is an unconstitutional infringement on my right to freely practice my religion. Worship of Satan requires that we periodically offer up human sacrifices. Abortions are the most feasible option for me to meet this religious obligation.”
It was Doe’s contention that “the sacrament of abortion deserves the same legal protection as the sacrament of communion does in the Catholic Church. If Catholics can eat the body and drink the blood of Jesus with the full cooperation of the law, then we must be allowed to sacrifice the unborn for the glory of our satanic master.”
Beteem ruled “Doe’s litigation is frivolous. The informed consent law, in itself, does not bar any woman from obtaining an abortion. It merely imposes a 72-hour waiting period and instructs abortion providers to make available some pamphlets. No woman is forced to read the pamphlets. There is no quiz she must pass. She can proceed to her abortion procedure in complete ignorance if she wishes to do so.”
Doe has vowed to appeal Beteem’s ruling, warning that “forcing women to wait 72 hours before paying homage to Satan is both oppressive and dangerous. Clearly, we are being treated differently on the basis of our religion. How can this not be unconstitutional? Further our good standing with our deity is imperiled. Satan’s wrath is a risk we should not be compelled to bear by intrusive and inhumane state meddling in our religious freedom.”
Democrat Wants New Restrictions on Viagra
Kentucky State Representative Mary Lou Marzian (D-Louisville) has introduced legislation (HB396) that would impose tighter restrictions on the availability of Viagra. If passed, the law would limit Viagra availability to married men who have their spouse’s written permission.
“Right now erectile dysfunction is a woman’s first line of defense against rape,” Marzian declared. “We should not tear down this barrier willy-nilly by allowing any man who can get a doctor to write him a prescription have this drug. Ideally, we should put something in the water that negates every man’s capability to get an erection. This would practically eliminate the crime of rape. By restricting access to drugs that treat erectile dysfunction in such a way that women decide who gets it we turn control over to the half of the population that must bear a disproportional share of the consequences of sexual intercourse.”
Marzian cast her bill as “a countermeasure to offset the burdens placed on women by laws restricting access to abortions. If we pass laws that infringe on a woman’s right to control her body, why shouldn’t we pass laws that similarly infringe on a man’s rights?”
The Representative also claimed her bill “will protect men from the bad consequences of their own animal urges. Men with ED are less likely to get sexually transmitted diseases. Men unable to sexually perform will have time for more worthy pursuits like earning more money to buy their wives nicer gifts or to pay higher taxes for more social services. Finally, the scourge of excessive population growth can be abated.”
A Satirical Look at Recent News
John Semmens is a retired economist who has written a weekly political satire for The Arizona Conservative since 2005. He says working on his satires is one of the ways he tries to honor the liberties our Founding Fathers tried to protect.
Please do us a favor. If you uses material created byThe Arizona Conservative, give us credit and DO NOT change the context. Thank you.
The Arizona chapter of Americans for Prosperity (AFP) congratulates Senator Debbie Lesko, Governor Doug Ducey, the Reason Foundation and other stakeholders on successfully pushing a pension reform package through the legislative process.
But AFP’s state director for Arizona, Tom Jenney, says:
Free-market reformers didn’t get everything we wanted from the package, and municipalities will be digging their way out of sunk debt costs for years to come, but the reforms will dramatically reduce the long-term risk to taxpayers from the existing public safety pension scheme. In the current game, politicians write blank checks to government employees, knowing that those bills will be paid by taxpayers far in the future, when the politicians are safely out of office. Going forward, new public safety employees will have significant “skin in the game,” since they will have to personally bear half the costs of any proposed increases in pension benefits.
PHOENIX – Governor Doug Ducey today signed bipartisan legislation that will preserve the state’s pension system for police and firefighters, lower the financial burden on public employers and bring needed predictability for hardworking, tax-paying Arizonans. Key elements of the plan require voter approval, and will go to the ballot on May 17.
“It’s been a long process, but the result is a bipartisan, well-informed and meaningful plan that will protect our taxpayers while providing a sustainable pension system for the women and men who risk their lives every day to keep us safe,” said Governor Ducey. “I’m grateful to Senator Debbie Lesko – who has been working closely with stakeholders and lawmakers to come up with a workable plan – as well as all the legislators who’ve stepped up to support it. Today, we are one step closer to setting our pension system on a path to financial stability while improving the way it serves our brave cops and firefighters.”
The pension reform package, sponsored by Senator Lesko in SB 1428 and SB 1429, makes several changes to the current Public Safety Personnel Retirement System, which has long been seen as financially-strained and unsustainable for members and taxpayers alike. Key reforms, which affect new hires only, include:
Requiring new public employees to serve until the age of 55 before being eligible for full pension benefits, which will reduce costs to states and cities (taxpayers) and improve the sustainability of the fund;
Placing a hard cap on pension benefits for new hires to crack down on “pension spiking” and ensure predictability and accountability for taxpayers;
Splitting the cost of pensions 50/50 between employers and new employees to bring the system more in-line with other state retirement plans, ensure both sides have skin in the game and reduce risks to taxpayers;
Providing new hires the option of a 100-percent defined contribution plan, similar to a 401K, which allows for increased flexibility and portability of the employee’s funds (e.g. if they move out-of-state);
Tie cost-of-living adjustments for retirees’ to the regional Consumer Price Index, with a cap of 2 percent. In order for this change to apply to current members of PSPRS, it will require voter approval on May 17.
“Pension reform has been a crucial issue in Arizona for several years, and it’s become a huge passion project for me over the last year in particular,” said Sen. Lesko. “So, to see it pass through the Legislature with the bipartisan support of not only lawmakers, but also a broad coalition of stakeholders who once stood on opposite sides of the issue, is a huge victory. I’m thankful to my fellow legislators, for the police and firefighters who’ve worked tirelessly and collaboratively on this smart and sustainable solution, and for Governor Ducey’s vocal support along the way.”
I have been a registered Republican since I turned 18, a long, long time ago.
That will change if Senate Republicans do not defeat President Obama’s nomination to replace the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who died over the weekend.
If the Republicans do not defeat his nominee, I will be a registered “Independent” before the sun goes down.
President Obama is not willing or capable of nominating anyone remotely close to being a centrist or a strict constructionist. He is a hardcore leftist and will make every effort to strong-arm his kind of radical justice to tip the balance of the Court.
Furthermore, you can place a bet on this: before this year is over (perhaps soon), Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg will retire. And then President Obama will nominate a much younger person, who could be a fixture on the court for 30 or 40 years, to replace her. He will not leave it to chance for a potential Republican successor to the White House to nominate someone who isn’t cut out of the same ACLU mold as Justice Ginsburg.
And if you do the right thing, GOP Senators, and defeat Obama’s nomination, then do it again and defeat his subsequent nominee(s).
GOP, you are fighting for your life here. Do the right thing. I doubt that I am the only longtime Republican who will throw in the towel on you if you do not take a strong stand and defeat the wrong kind of nominees to the Supreme Court.
America has lost one of its greatest defenders of freedom. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has tragically died at age 79 — leaving leftists salivating for a complete capture of the Supreme Court.
And if the Supreme Court swings to the Left, your freedom will go with it.
A district judge in Texas said he thinks there will be no action on a nominee to replace Scalia, but that is naïve thinking.
Of course President Obama and his fellow travelers will do everything they can to seize this opportunity to put judicial activists in complete control of America’s judicial system, from the very top on down.
Our only hope is to convince U.S. Senator Lindsay Graham and other Senate Republicans to vote down any nominee Obama presents. These people have let us down before and confirmed two nominees. They should not make it a third.
There is absolutely no doubt that Obama will try to strong-arm a radical nominee through the confirmation process. He will try to intimidate squishy Republicans into doing his bidding. Obama will not nominate anyone close to moderate. He detests the U.S. Constitution, and he sees a clear path to re-writing it now.
We citizens must arise and make our voices heard to every Republican in the U.S. Senate to assure the first nominee is defeated. And then the second, and any others, as well.
By John Semmens –Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News
Raids by French authorities have resulted in the confiscation of hundreds of war-grade weapons from numerous mosques throughout the country. The raids were inspired by the November 13th Islamic terrorist attack that killed 130 people in Paris.
The raids were denounced as discriminatory by Imam Aliki Kilyu. “We would never see the government raiding churches and confiscating crucifixes,” he complained. “By singling out the holy places of Muslims for their intrusions these kafirs have disrespected the beliefs of Islam.”
Kilyu rebuffed contentions that crucifixes and weapons cannot be compared. “Christians are the ones who believe in turning the other cheek. The crucifix is a symbol of their god sacrificing himself for this tenet of faith. Muslims are commanded by Allah to fight for Islam. Weapons are the instruments by which Muslims carry out this religious obligation. Government confiscation tramples on Muslims’ freedom to freely practice their faith.”
The Imam cited the revelation of seized recordings of chants glorifying martyrs who give their lives to slay unbelievers as “proof that the authorities knowingly violated one of the most sacred tenets of our faith. The West likes to hold itself up as a regime of tolerance for diversity, but when it comes to Islam their hypocrisy is on display for all to see.”
As if to reassure non-Muslims, Kilyu promised that “the path to peace is clearly spelled out in the Quran. Once the world is conquered for the faith of Allah everyone can live in peace under the laws laid down by the Prophet. Refusal of the infidels to submit compels we Muslim faithful to continue the fight. The blood is on their hands.”
In related news, Imam Oussama El-Saadi declared Denmark’s efforts to prevent Muslim men from acquiring child brides “an intolerable invasion of religious freedom. Older men choosing young girls to be their wives is part of our culture. The Prophet (may peace be upon him) was wed to his favorite wife when she was only six years old. That Muslim men would seek to emulate the behavior of the perfect man should not be impeded by sacrilegious infidel interference. What the West doesn’t understand is that it is better for a girl to be owned by one man than to be available for rape by many men, as is also the custom in our culture.”
Obama Admin Pushes to Disarm Seniors
Utilizing his executive authority, President Obama has instructed the Social Security Administration to crack down on elderly firearms ownership. Acting Commissioner Carolyn Colvin explained that “this population cohort is marked by disproportionate incidences of subnormal intelligence, mental illness, incompetency, poor health, and disease. Are such people the kind we want to entrust with guns?”
Colvin tried to characterize the move as “basically a humanitarian one. People prone to dementia because of age may harm themselves or others. Taking weapons out of their hands will spare the nation a lot of heartbreak.” She also cited the success of a similar program that has been underway at the Veterans’ Administration for several years.
“It’s not a violation of the Second Amendment because it’s a health issue, not a right to bear arms issue,” Colvin contended. “There’s no way these physically decrepit individuals are going to be part of a well-regulated militia. So, they have no constitutional right to bear arms. On the other hand, the government has a constitutional obligation to promote the general welfare. Barring these individuals from committing mayhem with guns they don’t need fulfills this obligation.”
In related news, a Pennsylvania Democratic candidate for Congress vows to ban semi-automatic weapons if elected, claiming that “using such a weapon in self-defense is unsporting. Too often it creates an imbalance in firepower between an assailant and the intended victim. Since most robberies entail a transfer from richer to poorer it is socially unjust for the haves to be allowed to out gun the have-nots.”
NARAL Irked by Doritos Ad
The National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) expressed its disgust with a Doritos commercial aired during the Super Bowl. In the ad an unborn baby being viewed on an ultrasound acrobatically responds to the proximity of the corn chip.
NARAL found this ad “an offensive anthropomorphisation of fetal tissue. By falsely attributing human-like responses to uterine contents the ad undermines the public perception that abortion is merely a medical procedure necessary to protecting women’s health.”
“Even worse, the ad bolsters anti-choice elements who in state after state have attempted to mandate that mothers-to-be must view ultrasound images before being allowed to opt for an abortion,” NARAL complained. “Seeing an image that looks like a baby introduces an added complication to the decision to terminate a pregnancy. That the manufacturers of Doritos would so blithely wade into this controversy for the crass purpose of selling an unhealthy product is shameful.”
Sanders Says Making Everything Free Is Key to Efficient Government
In response to fears that his expansive plans for government will be prohibitively expensive, Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (S-Vt) argued that “abolishing money will go a long way toward making government more efficient.”
“If people would only stop to consider how time-consuming it is to have to keep track of the flow of money they’d understand the tremendous efficiencies that will be achieved once we do away with it,” Sanders imagined. “For the individual, all the headaches entailed in managing money—having it on hand, balancing a checkbook, paying bills—will be eliminated. If you need something you’ll just go to a store and pick it up or order it over the phone for delivery. The government will cover all the costs.”
“For businesses, cashiers, accountants, and financiers will all be unnecessary, as will security,” Sanders continued. “All any business will have to do is move the merchandise delivered to them by the government to locations where customers can pick out what they want. Since profits will also be abolished businesses won’t have to file taxes or pay dividends to investors. Government will be the only investor and it’s strictly non-profit.”
“For government, the IRS will be disbanded, as will the Treasury,” Sanders promised. “All resources will be allocated by skilled experts who determine how much of each item is required to meet society’s needs. Wasteful expenditures on unneeded frills will be a thing of the past. Each and every person will get exactly what he needs, no more, no less. Instead of people going to work because they have to, they’ll go to work because they want to contribute their fair share to the collective well-being of all.”
One idea Sanders said he is mulling over is a “universal draft, not just for men, not just for young people, but for everyone. Right now our society suffers from poor allocation of human resources. A lot of people are stuck in jobs for which they are unsuited. If everyone were subject to a draft that would allow the government to ensure that each person is assigned to the tasks that would best serve society. No one would be unemployed. No one would be left in doubt about how he could best be used for the common good. All would be assigned a role on the national team that the head coach (me) and assistant coaches in my cabinet choose for them.”
In related news, Wall Street and the Federal Reserve are looking to hasten the removal of cash from our economy. In a closed-door meeting the abolition of cash was urged as a method for strengthening the government’s control over the economy. “Lack of faith in the economy has spurred a huge hoarding of cash,” admitted one meeting participant. “That’s blocking the implementation of the negative interest rates that experts agree are necessary to stimulate spending. If cash were eliminated everyone’s bank account could be effectively ‘taxed’ by negative rates. This would induce people to spend their money before it loses value. A side benefit is that this would also ease pressure on banks and allow them to wiggle out of the bind that reckless lending has gotten them into.”
Democrats Want Tax-Funded Lawyers for Illegals
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev) has introduced legislation that would fund lawyers who assist illegal aliens to avoid deportation.
“Look, these immigrants have undertaken lengthy and sometimes dangerous journeys to get here,” Reid said. “It would be a shame to see all of that effort go to waste just because they’ve entered the country illegally. There are a variety of stratagems that lawyers can use to help these people evade that fate. But lawyers won’t work for free and these immigrants are too poor to pay their fees. My bill will put the financial burden where it belongs—on the taxpayers of America.”
“The US Constitution directs the government to secure the blessings of liberty to our posterity,” Reid pointed out. “Since native-born Americans aren’t reproducing at a rate sufficient to ensure a robust posterity the importation of immigrants willing and able to take on this role is imperative if we are to survive as a nation. Any assistance we can render to enable immigrants to move about the country and fill vacancies left by natives seems a prudent course for advancing this survival.”
In related news, Reid raised the specter of a brokered Democratic Convention to choose the Party’s presidential nominee. “Neither of the two leading candidates is an attractive option,” Reid admitted. “Sanders is almost as old as me and I’m pretty worn out. If we choose him it could poison the well that has landed the Party big money from the financial industry. On the flip side Hillary’s got a boatload of potential legal problems. Sure, President Obama could preemptively pardon her, but that’s a dicey move from a PR standpoint. Making a deal that settles on a fresh face may be the way to go. Besides, it could be both profitable and fun.”
A Satirical Look at Recent News
John Semmens is a retired economist who has written a weekly political satire for The Arizona Conservative since 2005. He says working on his satires is one of the ways he tries to honor the liberties our Founding Fathers tried to protect.
Please do us a favor. If you uses material created by The Arizona Conservative, give us credit and DO NOT change the context. Thank you.
By John Semmens –Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News
A recent discovery that former Secretaries of State Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice may have received a handful of classified emails on their private computers prompted Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to claim she’s been exonerated.
“The vast right-wing conspiracy trying to derail my campaign has been rebutted by this new evidence,” Hillary contended. “Singling me out when the use of private computers for transmitting classified government communications was standard practice reveals the baseless hypocrisy of their charges.”
Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif) says “Clinton’s ‘everybody did it’ argument is a gross distortion of reality. It’s akin to a notorious drunk driver with numerous moving violations endangering the lives of many asserting that she is no different from the law-breaker once cited for overstaying at a parking meter. Clinton’s unsecured private server was explicitly intended to hide her communications from scrutiny. More than a thousand classified documents were found on it. Several were more sensitive than ‘top secret.’ Clearly, she intentionally flouted the law and, as a result, needlessly endangered national security.”
Clinton rejected Issa’s stance as “a bean-counter’s approach to justice. Either having classified material on a private computer is right or it is wrong. If it is right, the number of times it occurs is irrelevant. If it is wrong, then all—including former Republican Secretaries of State—need to face the same charges.”
Ironically, the candidate concluded her attempted exculpatory argument by pledging to make cybersecurity a top priority in her administration as president. “The Hell I’ve had to go through over emails I thought were securely deleted was a tough, but important lesson,” she maintained. “No government official of cabinet rank or above should have to fear that his or her secrets can’t be kept secret. Therefore, I am promising the American people that if they elect me to rule them I will protect these public servants from intrusions on their privacy and will use any means necessary to do so.”
In related news, Hillary outlined her litmus test for future Supreme Court appointments in her upcoming administration. “Anyone I nominate will have to embrace progressive values,” she told attendees at a New Hampshire rally. “This includes a commitment to support a woman’s unconstrained right to an abortion, full recognition of gay marriage, and the enforcement of the rights of everyone to choose their own gender identity and receive the universal acceptance and accommodation to which they are entitled by law.”
DC to Pay Criminals to Refrain from Crime
Washington, DC Councilman Kenyan McDuffie proposed and the City Council unanimously adopted a measure that will pay criminals to refrain from committing crimes. Under the plan, residents with a sufficiently impressive rap-sheet will be paid up to $9,000 in cash per year for each year they aren’t convicted of a crime.
“This is not some lame-brained scheme that any smart aleck can game,” McDuffie boasted. “Only those who can document their criminal behavior will be eligible for the stipend. By paying the ‘worst-of-the-worst’ members of our community to cool it we will have a greater impact than if we put more cops on the street.”
The move met with an enthusiastic reception on the streets. A local community leader known only by his street moniker: “The Big Banger,” averred that “we are always looking for ways to expand our cash flow. I think most of my guys have the reps to qualify for the payouts. Those few that don’t could still crack a few heads or boost some merchandise if that’s what it takes to get in on this.”
Apprised of “Banger’s” comments, McDuffie said he was encouraged. “I’m confident that if we partner with the people who really control the streets we can transform the social structure of our City. We’ve already got feelers out to both the Clinton and Sanders’ campaigns to see if either will commit to this new way of restoring order to our society. It would be great to have a broader impact than just in DC.”
In related news, some DC welfare moms are unhappy with the free accommodations the City is providing. Due to a shortage of public housing 730 families are being housed in area hotels. The amenities include prepared meals, cable TV, internet WiFi access, and maid service. Tiera Williams complains that the two-room suite they gave her is “too small, there aren’t enough choices of food, the TV is only basic cable, and the maid wakes me up too early. The paying customers at the hotel get room service with a bigger menu and pay-per-view TV. Giving us less is discrimination. I thought Obama was supposed to transform America. Or do I have to wait for Sanders before everything is free for all.”
ISIS Recruits Assert “Combat Immunity” Defense
Five Minnesota men currently facing charges of criminal conspiracy after being caught preparing to go to Syria to fight for the Islamic State are demanding that charges be dismissed.
Moosli Krahp, attorney for the five, stipulated that “the Islamic State has engaged in acts the rest of the world holds to be atrocious. However, these terror tactics are forced upon them by the superior firepower of their enemies. The West and its puppet allies can strike from the air. Civilians may be killed, but are quickly labeled ‘collateral damage.’ Well, the beheadings, torture, and similar actions carried out by the Islamic State are a necessary part asymmetric warfare. They are sanctioned by the government of the Islamic State and the soldiers who carry them out are not criminals. They are lawful combatants under the Geneva Conventions.”
“If the actual troops of the Islamic State are lawful combatants, then these five men, none of whom has yet to engage in combat, are merely future combatants, at best,” Krahp said. “Their apprehension inside the United States before they have had the opportunity to participate in the alleged atrocities is premature.”
Minnesota prosecutor Lars Hammarskjold rejected Krahp’s arguments, but added “even if we were to entertain the notion that these men are bonafide Islamic State combatants, they were caught outside of enemy lines and out of uniform. Under the Geneva Conventions that would make them spies subject to summary execution.”
In related news, legislation that would bar terrorists from receiving food stamps was introduced by Rep. Bruce Poliquin (R-Maine). Poliquin’s bill isn’t expected to succeed in becoming law. President Obama has already promised to veto it if it reaches his desk. “The type of discrimination this legislation would institutionalize is an insult to our obligation to ensure the blessings of liberty are secured for all of our people,” the President declared.
Former President Carter Endorses Trump
Former Democratic President Jimmy Carter says his favorite GOP candidate for president is Donald Trump. He explained the surprising endorsement by pointing out “Trump is completely malleable. I don’t think he has any fixed positions. From my perspective this is more preferable than a far right wing ideologue like Ted Cruz.”
“Cruz would clearly be an enemy of the progressive policies Obama has implemented,” Carter continued. “He’d try to undo them and would shut down the government if he felt it necessary to achieve his goals. With Trump I think we could be confident that wouldn’t happen. Trump has been a good friend of the Democratic Party over the years. I think he would work with Democrats to try to improve upon and extend the gains already made.”
Trump expressed his gratification “that a man who has held the office has made a wise choice” and suggested that “I’d be willing to consider former President Carter as a possible running mate. Putting someone with actual experience in the on-deck circle could make for a powerful combination. And the former president, unlike some in this race, is a natural born citizen.”
Carter said he was “flattered to be considered by Mr. Trump, but he needs to understand, my view is merely that he is the least objectionable of the Republicans. I will, of course, support the Democratic Party’s nominee.”
Perhaps a more significant boost to Trump’s candidacy came via a survey indicating that 14% of federal employees say they will quit if he is elected president. Trump Campaign Manager Corey Lewandowski applauded the finding: “While other candidates have to wrack their brains looking for ways to make government more efficient, Donald has already inspired a significant number of bureaucrats to declare they will ‘self-deport’ from the federal payroll once he’s president. I’d say this gives Donald a leg up over the competition.”
Hillary Defends Huge Speaking Fees
Under a constant barrage of criticism from Democratic presidential rival Sen. Bernie Sanders for her cozy relationship with Wall Street, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton contended that she was just being polite in accepting $200,000 per hour for speeches she gave at Wall Street’s request.
“Look, this is what they offered me,” she explained. “Was I supposed to have bargained for lower rates? If I had, would Senator Sanders now be accusing me of favoritism toward those firms? Let’s not forget, in some instances I got even bigger speaking fees from universities. How could I, in good conscience, take less from the bankers than I took from the students?”
“As much as Bernie hates Wall Street shouldn’t he be congratulating me from imposing a ‘tax’ on them and liberating that money from their greedy hands so the Clinton Foundation could put it to more socially beneficial purposes?” Hillary speculated. I mean, how much money has he liberated from these corporate pirates?”
Meanwhile, despite Sanders’ political demand that the government force every employer to pay every employee no less than $15 per hour, low level members of his staff receive only $12 per hour. Sanders sees no hypocrisy. “I’m well within my rights,” he insisted. “Currently, there is no law that says I must pay them more. Besides, my beef is with the commercial segment of our society. A businessman’s selfish desire to maximize profits is not protected under our Constitution. My right as a candidate for office to minimize my campaign expenses is.”
In related news, Clinton called an unlikely series of winning coin flips in all six Iowa caucus precincts that showed an equal number of votes for her and Sanders “proof that God wants me to be president.” The mathematical odds of such an outcome: one in 64.
Obama Pitches Muslim TV Shows
Appalled by the over-representation of Muslims as terrorists in national security themed TV shows, President Obama called for broadcasters to air a more varied array of programs featuring Muslim characters.
“One idea I came up with is a family comedy,” the President said. “There’s this daughter who refuses to marry the nephew her father has chosen for her. So, the father and nephew shoot her and dump the body in a river. But she comes back as a ghost or zombie and haunts them with a series of weekly pranks. In one episode the daughter disguises herself as salesperson in a supermarket and tricks her brother into eating a fried pork rind by telling him it’s dry-roasted goat intestine. The father finds out and cuts the boy’s tongue out as a punishment. The daughter returns and reveals herself. The father tries to kill her, but she’s already dead, so he can’t. Hilarity ensues.”
“Another idea I had is modeled on ‘The Bachelor,’” Obama exclaimed. “Each week a young Muslim man will be asked to choose between a ten-year-old girl, boy, or donkey. He will be allowed to ask questions, grope the options, and use a ‘lifeline’ to the imam of his choice. After he makes his selection, the newly wed couple will be escorted to a small tent on the stage to consummate the marriage while the studio audience cheers them on.”
“These are just a couple of ideas off the top of my head,” Obama admitted. “I’m sure if Hollywood were to put its mind to it we could come up with more.”
In related news, the President blamed “inexcusable political rhetoric for giving Americans a distorted impression of Muslims” and “are largely responsible for violent retaliation like we saw in San Bernardino last year. We need to end the cycle of violence by passing House Resolution 569 and outlaw, once and for all, the unnecessary and offensive disparagement of the Islamic faith in our country.”
A Satirical Look at Recent News
John Semmens is a retired economist who has written a weekly political satire for The Arizona Conservative since 2005. He says working on his satires is one of the ways he tries to honor the liberties our Founding Fathers tried to protect.
Please do us a favor. If you uses material created by The Arizona Conservative, give us credit and DO NOT change the context. Thank you.
Donald Trump’s bid to become president received a boost from an unexpected source when racist loon Al Sharpton promised to leave the country should Trump be elected.