By John Semmens – Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News

In a speech to Argentinian youths, President Obama characterized the long-running battle between capitalism and communism as “an interesting intellectual argument that should have no bearing on public policy. Rather than get hung up on the supposed moral differences between these rival ideas we should focus on what works.”

“Whether an unequally shared abundance is superior to a universally shared poverty is not a settled issue,” the President asserted. “The United States has historically opted for free enterprise and individual rights, but can we really say that it has made its people happy? I just visited Cuba, which chose a different path. The people there seemed pretty happy to me. I did not see the kind of anger and dissatisfaction that has given rise to the type of clamor for a change in government that is currently dominating the US 2016 presidential campaign.”

“Under Communism, the Cuban people have been spared the constant pressure of trying to get ahead,” Obama continued. “Just knowing that there is no ‘getting ahead’ has liberated people to relax and enjoy simpler lives—watching baseball games and tinkering on their cool 1950s cars. If I could push a button and exchange America’s greedy self-centered way of life for Cuba’s public-spirited collectivism I’d be sorely tempted to do it.”

The President acknowledged that “Cuba’s treatment of dissenters seems a bit harsh, but let’s not lose sight of the fact that only a tiny minority of the population has been negatively affected. Heck, we have more people in our prisons than they do in Cuba. So, maybe our system is more oppressive than theirs.”

In related news, the two lovely floral dresses worn by First Lady Michelle Obama on the First Family’s recent visit to Cuba cost 23 times the average annual salary for Cuban workers. The First Lady professed herself “unbothered by this statistic since no Cuban worker would be required to buy such expensive attire. Those of us who must bear the burdens of governing must also look the part. I’m confident that the Cuban people understand this. Their president lives in a palace while many workers live in shacks. Each member of society has a role to play and receives the perks to which he or she is entitled.”

Obama Opens Taunting Offensive Against ISIS

The latest Islamic atrocity entailing the bombing of an airport and train station in Belgium has inspired US President Barack Obama to launch what is being called a “taunting offensive” against the Islamic State.

“We will beat them by saying ‘you are not strong, you are weak,’” Obama said. The President praised his own behavior as a model for all Americans to follow. “Rather than ranting in rage and threatening them with retaliation as the GOP candidates currently campaigning for president did, I mocked the terrorists by going to a baseball game with Cuban President Raul Castro and tangoing in Argentina.”

While others have expressed alarm that there are an estimated 400 jihadis ready to launch suicide attacks in Europe, President Obama professed to be “reassured by the mathematics. There are over 700 million Europeans. Even if each suicide bomber killed 100 they would barely make a dent while totally depleting their entire corps of attackers. Such impotence has got to be galling for the leaders of these enemies of civilization.”

In related news, Secretary of State John Kerry announced that his Department “will be financing a television drama series that depicts the inhumanity and futility of terrorism.” The TV show is targeted for teenage viewers residing in Afghanistan. “We’re going to counter the glamour of blowing oneself up for Allah with more socially uplifting themes like respect for gay rights, transgenderism, and wealth redistribution. It will show young people that they don’t have to die to reach paradise. They can build it right here on Earth.”

Administration Insists Nuns Must Fund Abortions

The Obama Administration’s Department of Health and Human Services is adamantly arguing in a case before the Supreme Court (Zubik v. Burwell) that there can be no exemption for the Little Sisters of the Poor from the Obamacare mandate requiring all health insurance to cover abortions. This is despite the fact that HHS has issued such exemptions to several non-religious organizations including ExxonMobil, Chevron, Visa Inc. and PepsiCo.

“It’s a basic question of respect for authority,” explained Secretary Sylvia Burwell. “The corporations we exempted acknowledged that the supreme authority lies with the government. The Little Sisters, in contrast, claim to answer to a higher authority. If we allow their claim to go unchallenged it will open a Pandora’s box of ills. People will be confused and feel themselves empowered to challenge government on other issues.”

Burwell contended that “we also maintain that the Little Sisters are at odds with Christian teaching on this matter. Jesus bade his followers to render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s. Well, control over health care is within the realm of ‘Caesar’s’ authority. Congress’ passage of the Affordable Care Act clearly moved this issue out of the jurisdiction of individual choice and into hands of the government collective. So, if Jesus is to be their guide, the Little Sisters have the duty to obey the law.”

“If modern-day Christians aren’t going to obey the law, they should be prepared to bear the consequences that the early Christians endured for breaking Rome’s laws,” the Secretary added. “We won’t crucify them or throw them to the lions, but we will take away their earthly assets both to fund the health services we have decreed as essential and to teach them and others a lesson about obedience to duly constituted authority.”

In related news, the Oklahoma Supreme Court threw out a petition that would have placed a measure outlawing abortion in the state on November’s ballot. “The United States Supreme Court has already ruled that a woman has a constitutional right to an abortion,” ACLU of Oklahoma Executive Director Ryan Kiesel said. “This cannot be overturned by any state no matter how many voters might wish otherwise.”

Democrats Refute Law of Supply and Demand

The economically illiterate battle for the Democratic presidential nomination continued this past week with both candidates pledging to repeal the “out-dated law of supply and demand.”

Hillary vowed to enact a $12 per hour minimum wage if she wins her way to the White House later this year. “Republican insistence that raising the cost of employing workers will cause fewer workers to be employed is nonsense,” she declared. “If a business needs workers it has to pay whatever it takes to ensure it has enough employees to operate.”

“The idea that a mere price increase would deter a purchase is ludicrous,” she insisted. “I’ve never let a price increase stop me from buying something I need. To argue that others, especially hardheaded business owners, would makes no sense. There’s simply no evidence to persuade me otherwise.”

Rival Democratic presidential contender Sen. Bernie Sanders jumped on what he called “the flaw in Secretary Clinton’s argument. I mean, she’s on the right track, but why stop at $12 an hour? Why not go all the way to $15 an hour? I’ll tell you why. This is her payback to Wall Street.”

Kevin Aslanian, Executive Director of Coalition of California Welfare Rights Organizations, averred that “they’re both wrong on a very fundamental level. Both have bought into the notion that people ought to be forced to work to support themselves. This crushes freedom by herding everyone into wage-slavery. Why should a person be compelled to give up any of his or her precious time in order to survive? It’s not necessary. The government has the money to take care of everyone. And if that money runs out they can always print more.”

Aslanian conceded that “both may feel that they can’t afford to come out as forcefully against wage-slavery as they should. After all, a majority of voters still have jobs. But we look forward to the day when the tide is reversed and the majority are supported by the government. We’ll elect a president and congress that will abolish the need to work for all. Then everyone will have all their time to themselves and be truly free.”

In related news, Clinton promised to enact policies that “would put a lot of coal companies out of business and liberate workers from jobs that are dirty, difficult and dangerous.”

Clintons Slam Obama

Last week, former President Bill urged voters to “escape from the awful legacy of the last eight years by electing Hillary.” This week Chelsea Clinton blasted “the crushing costs of Obamacare” and hinted that her mother “would take executive action to amend the law that established this medical monstrosity.”

Observers of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign may perceive an incongruity between her contention that “electing me will solidify the gains achieved by one of America’s great presidents” and the less complimentary remarks of her immediate family members. Nonetheless, Democratic National Committee Chair Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (Fla) tried to reassure everyone that “there is no contradiction here. The ‘awful legacy’ has been the continued Republican resistance to the Democratic Party’s agenda over the last eight years.”

“Secondly, Chelsea is a political novice and should not be criticized too harshly for her word choice,” Wasserman-Schultz suggested. “Sure, health insurance under Obamacare is expensive, but it covers so much more than the older insurance plans covered and shifts more of the burden onto to the younger and healthier segment of our population. This is simple social justice. There should be no doubt in any voter’s mind that electing Hillary will extend and expand the transformations made by President Obama.”

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 use 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

The two Democratic contenders for the Party’s 2016 presidential nomination fended off the possibility that states should have any leeway in limiting abortions carried out within their borders.

In a statement eerily similar to the Supreme Court’s 1857 Dred Scott decision, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton argued that “fetuses are creatures of an inferior order. They are not persons under the law or Constitution. Consequently, the imputation of their imaginary so-called right to life cannot displace the very real right of the mother to the liberty to not be encumbered with the burdens of pregnancy and child care that anti-choice fanatics would seek to impose on her.”

“The right established by the Court in its historic Roe vs. Wade decision would be meaningless if state legislatures are allowed to chip away at them,” Clinton added. “Mandatory ultrasounds, 72-hour waiting periods, and prohibition of late term abortions are all infringements on a woman’s fundamental right against being forced to bear a child.”

Sen. Bernie Sanders (S-Vt) concurred with Clinton’s stance and lamented that “the resurrection of the discredited claim that powers not delegated to the federal government by the Constitution are reserved to the states would be used for such a disgraceful objective. Minority women are disproportionate beneficiaries of the right to an abortion. How are attempts to limit these rights not seen as racist?”

Sanders vowed to “appoint Supreme Court Justices that will protect and broaden the rights granted by Roe vs. Wade beyond the artificial birth threshold. Merely surviving the journey down the birth canal is no great accomplishment. It must not be used as an argument for bestowing a whole roster of rights and privileges to the entity that emerges if the mother opposes the continued existence of this entity.”

In related news, Governor Earl Ray Tomblin (D-WV) vetoed a bill banning dismemberment abortions. “The Supreme Court has determined that every woman has a Constitutional right to an abortion,” Tomblin declared. “Opposition to a procedure that fulfills this right is an attempt to impose a restriction. The contention that the pain of being torn limb from limb somehow validates such a restriction usurps this fundamental right.”

DOJ Considering Prosecuting “Climate Deniers”

The U.S. Department of Justice is exploring ways of “bringing climate change deniers to justice,” said Attorney General Loretta Lynch in Senate testimony. “Global climate change represents the most severe threat to humanity that has ever existed. It is imperative that we be united in the struggle against this menace. Yet, there are elements of society that undermine this necessary unity by casting doubt in people’s minds. We must put a stop to that.”

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) urged the DOJ “to use all the tools at its disposal, including civil forfeiture and criminal sanctions, against these abettors of planetary disaster. We need to send a stern message that doubters will not have free rein to mislead and confuse the American public with their erroneous and nonconforming opinions.”

Using the government’s action against tobacco manufacturers as a model, Whitehouse demanded “a vigorous prosecution of these despoilers of Mother Earth. We are far beyond the stage where mere warning labels will suffice. The pain of financial destitution and imprisonment must be meted out to the producers, consumers, and defenders of the fossil fuel industry and its products.”

Lynch thanked the Senator for his “passionate advocacy for the planet and willingness to embrace the harsh measures that will be necessary to win this battle,” but also reminded that “there is only so much we can do in the time remaining before the next administration takes office in 2017. If we are to save the planet it is imperative that a Democrat succeed President Obama in office. The risk that a Republican president might undo the progress we’ve made by using a ‘freedom of speech’ excuse in order to shield deniers would be a setback that cannot be tolerated.”

In other DOJ news, Lynch rebuffed suggestions that a criminal referral from the FBI on Hillary Clinton’s email infractions would compel her to prosecute the former Secretary of State. “The decision on whether to take action against anyone is a matter of pure discretion,” she asserted. “Simple violation of a criminal statute is not dispositive. If, in our judgment, justice would be better served by ignoring the infraction we are fully authorized to decline to carry the case forward.”

Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (Fla) confirmed that “I have been assured by both President Obama and Attorney General Lynch that there will be no prosecution for any crimes Secretary Clinton may have committed in the course of her service in the Administration or on the campaign trail.”

Obama Denies Responsibility for Divisiveness

President Barack Obama denied responsibility for any role he might have had in the disagreements roiling the American population during the current election campaign.

“Look, the voters elected me as their president,” he pointed out. “I was the one with the mandate to lead. It is those who have resisted acquiescence in my leadership who are the source of the divisiveness afflicting the country. Is it the parent who lays down the law that is at fault? Or is is the unruly child who defies the parent that should be held responsible for the disruption and disobedience?”

The President blamed “talk radio for inciting the opposition and rebellion that have encouraged too many Americans to actively criticize and resist the progressive changes the majority of Americans want. Access to the public airways is something that the Federal Communications Commission could’ve done a better job at controlling. Clearly, the daily castigation of my policies and person by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and others is an abuse of a privilege that would be better exercised by seeking ways to help the government carry out the actions needed to advance the collective welfare of all Americans.”

Obama cited the GOP presidential candidates’ rhetoric as “proof of how dissident elements are wrecking our community. We repeatedly hear the phrase ‘repeal and replace’ when we should be hearing ‘extend and expand’ when the GOP candidates are talking about the advances made under my administration. They are the ones dividing the country. Perhaps I should’ve been less lenient and taken stronger steps to dampen overt expressions of discontent, disagreement, and disobedience. Maybe that’s a lesson the next president can learn from.”

Signs that the next president may have learned this lesson were exhibited when Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton labeled criticism of the Obama Administration’s achievements “un-American trafficking in prejudice and paranoia. At this point in our history it is important that all those who would seek to lead this great nation be on the same page with the progress already made over the last seven years. Will voters endorse a candidate who will continue on this path or will they be duped into electing a GOP wrecker? That is the big question this year’s election must answer.”

Sanders Says Castro “More Good than Bad”

In this week’s Democratic presidential debate Sen. Bernie Sanders (S-Vt) defended his past praise of Castro’s Cuban dictatorship.

“A lot of critics, especially those on the right, overlook the positive things Fidel Castro did for the Cuban people,” Sanders said. “Under Castro’s leadership the Cuban people got education and universal health care. I think this compares very favorably with what the American people got over the same time period.”

Sanders acknowledged that “the Castro regime may not have been democratic as we normally use that term, but for most people the material gains achieved by the regime were probably worth more than the theoretical benefits of free speech that they didn’t have. The number of people imprisoned or executed for opposing the government was tiny compared to the number who benefited from the free education and free health care.”

An example of the health care advantages in Cuba, according to Sanders, are the ubiquitous bread lines. “Apologists for capitalistic excesses frequently use the prevalence of bread lines to mock socialistic economies,” Sanders recounted. “What they want everyone to ignore is the fact that bread is loaded with gluten. Restricting people’s access to bread improves their health.”

The Senator pointed to the enthusiasm generated by his campaign as evidence that “the American people would gladly exchange the intangible rights protected by the Bill of Rights for the tangible benefits of free college and free health care. Freedom of speech doesn’t guarantee you a good job. Freedom of religion doesn’t put food on your table. Why should mindless adoration of these 200-year-old artifacts take precedence over the more meaningful rights a Sanders Administration will bestow upon every man, woman, and child?”

In related news, the Cuban regime advised President Obama “to bring his checkbook with him when he comes to our country next week. We are gratified that he has renounced the 50 years of oppression the United States has imposed on Cuba. Now it is time to make reparations for the deprivation these imperialistic policies imposed upon our nation.”

Hillary Proposes DOE SWAT Team

As a counter to poor performance by America’s public schools, Democratic presidential contender Hillary Clinton proposed to set up a Department of Education “SWAT” Team that would be dispatched to crackdown on errant educators.

“The problem with our system of public schools is that false doctrines and anti-government attitudes are allowed to exist without consequence,” Clinton complained. “An ill-advised autonomy for teachers and local schools has served to shield purveyors of anti-social doctrines from the discipline needed to ensure proper inculcation of collective values. Under my plan the Secretary of Education will be empowered to send a special weapons and tactics team to suppress any deviant excursions from the accepted common core curriculum.”

According to the candidate, the special weapons and tactics will include “the power to terminate any offending teacher regardless of any contractual impediments. Tenure should not protect a teacher who contradicts the progressive agenda. Likewise, local control will be overridden whenever it conflicts with the objectives set by the DOE.”

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 use 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

The US State Department announced that it will be deferring further analysis of the security implications of former Secretary Clinton’s unauthorized and illegal transfer of classified documents onto her private, unsecured computer until after this November’s elections.

Department of State spokesman John Kirby explained that “the upcoming elections are contentious and confusing enough already. Adding additional complicated material at this time will overtax voters’ attention spans and divert them away from the themes candidates are trying to communicate. This could affect the outcome in ways that might be very detrimental to the greater good.”

Kirby also added an efficiency argument to the case for delay. “Conducting such an analysis would be a tedious undertaking,” he alleged. “It’s quite possible that the election outcome would render the effort unnecessary. I mean, if voters decide to put Mrs. Clinton in the White House we’re pretty confident that the analysis wouldn’t be wanted. So rather than spending taxpayer money on an investigation that could well be canceled, we feel it is more fiscally prudent to avoid a possibly unneeded expenditure.”

Obama Says “Economy Is Pretty Darned Great”

President Obama hailed the February jobs report as evidence that “the economy is pretty darn great.” The report estimated that more than 240,000 new jobs were created. Of those jobs, nearly 80% were minimum-wage.

While some critics were disappointed that such a large percentage of the jobs were at the lower end of the pay scale, the President was more upbeat. “This is precisely the sector we wanted to expand,” Obama said. “The greater the number of people working for minimum wage, the greater will be the pressure on Congress to raise the minimum wage.”

The President’s gloating didn’t stop there, though. He also tabbed the increasing ranks of low-wage workers as “a big plus for the Democratic Party. Aside from those subsisting on welfare, low-wage workers are the most reliably Democratic voters. The greater the proportion of our population that occupies these cohorts of our society, the more entrenched progressive politics and policies will become.”

In related news, the President praised Obamacare as “my gift to an ailing nation” at a rally in Milwaukee this week. “Thanks to me, more people are insured than ever.” Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson contested Obama’s claims saying that “millions of Americans were thrown off health plans that they liked and forced into Obamacare plans that simultaneously raised premiums and reduced coverage. The President’s ‘gift’ could be more aptly characterized as a punch to the gut funded by a raid on Americans’ bank accounts.”

Obama Administration Declines to Condemn Islamist Massacre of Christians

Presidential Press Secretary Josh Earnest told media representatives that “the Administration will not declare ISIL’s practice of slaughtering Christians an act of genocide. From a technical perspective, genocide is the effort to exterminate a race or ethnic group. Most of the Christian victims have the same ethnic heritage as the killers. So we’re not seeing the killings as having the requisite motivation to qualify as genocide, per se.”

“On top of this, there is a genuine question of religious freedom that needs to be taken into account,” Earnest added. “According to Islamic faith, Muslims have an obligation to fight for the spread of the religion. The Quran instructs them to slay those who refuse to convert to Islam. Therefore, a blanket condemnation of acts carried out in the pursuance of the faith would trample on Muslims’ Constitutional and, indeed, human right to freely practice their religion.”

Earnest made a plea for “Americans to be more open-minded about beliefs that are different from theirs. I would hope that we could be more sophisticated and forgiving than the Christian crusaders who invaded Muslim lands 800 years ago. They were untrue to Jesus’ admonition to turn the other cheek. We ought not follow their errant example. We need to be better than that.”

Hillary Paid a Salary by Campaign

Federal campaign finance records reveal that presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has been drawing a salary from campaign funds. To-date, the amounts paid have exceeded $250,000 since April of 2015.

Campaign manager Robbie Mook defended the payments as “a bargain. Normally, Hillary would receive $250,000 for a single speech. That the campaign has gotten hundreds of speeches from the candidate for the price of one has to be the greatest return on contributors’ investment ever seen from a candidate.”

“Campaigning is hard work,” Mook continued. “She’s put in more hours on it than she ever did as Secretary of State. Surely, she merits the pittance she has been compensated thus far.”

In related news, the Federal Election Commission has charged Sen. Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign with violating campaign finance laws. In a letter sent to the candidate the FEC cited over 3,000 “excessive, prohibited and impermissible contributions.” FRC Chairman Matthew Petersen dismissed contentions that others, including current President Barack Obama and rival Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton engaged in similar violations, labeling it “irrelevant. Two wrongs don’t make a right. We’ve got to draw a line somewhere, sometime. We’re drawing it here and now.”

Islamic Values on the March Around the Globe

The Punjab Province of Pakistan’s efforts to criminalize violence against women was denounced as un-Islamic by the Council of Islamic Ideology. “The Quran explicitly grants men control over their women,” Muhammad Khan Sherani, head of the Council pointed out. “The secular authorities have no right to impede the laws given to us by Allah.”

Fazlur Rehman, the chief of one of Pakistan’s largest religious parties, the Jamiat-i-Ulema Islam, concurred. “This law makes every man insecure. If a husband is barred from beating his wife, if a father is prohibited from killing a wayward daughter we will descend into the same moral corruption that taints the West where females are permitted to walk the streets half naked and torment men.”

In Saudi Arabia, Dr. Abd Al-Aziz Fawzan Al-Fawzan, Professor of Islamic Law, defended the molestation and rape of women by Muslims in Germany, saying that “if a woman gets raped walking in public alone, then she, herself, is at fault. She is only seducing men by her presence. She should have stayed home like a Muslim woman.”

In Sweden, a TV crew from the Australian 60 Minutes TV program trying to make a video depicting the hardships suffered by migrants from the Middle East in the Stockholm suburb of Rinkeby was assaulted by the subjects of their video after local police withdrew so as not to provoke the refugees. Officer Olav Dunderskalle blandly explained “it’s a ‘no-go zone’ for police. We told the TV people they enter at their own risk.”

In Denmark, Imam Abu Bilal Ismail has stirred some controversy by calling for “the stoning of adulterers and the killing of apostates.” State authorities are in a dither, uncertain of what to do. Deputy Minister of Justice Kanker Sohr professed himself to be “paralyzed with doubt. Is this just a philosophical principle or is it meant to be carried into action? On the one hand, we don’t want to stifle religious beliefs. On the other hand, can we afford to be caught asleep while violence is plotted against our citizens? I wish there were a clue as to what Muslim intentions really portend.”

In Russia, a nanny beheaded a four year old girl left in her care and paraded the severed head around near a transit station for nearly a half hour shouting Allahu Akbar before authorities arrested her. Arresting officer Ivan Andropov admitted to being stunned and puzzled by the incident. “At first I thought this can’t be real,” he said. “Murderers don’t advertise their guilt so obviously. But sadly, it was real. The woman claimed Allah told her to commit this crime. My question is whether she or Allah is the one who is insane.”

In France, Middle Eastern refugees attacked police who tried to move them out of their squalid, ramshackle tents into more commodious quarters. Rioter Idu Apu charged police and the French government with “trying to impose western lifestyles on us. Cleanliness is their fetish, not ours. We have a right to live as we did in our old country. To compel us to do otherwise is terrorism, pure and simple.”

Finally, in the United States, U.S. District Judge Tanya Walton Pratt ruled that the Indiana state government’s attempt to block Syrian refugees from coming to live in the state was unconstitutional. “President Obama is the supreme authority for this nation’s foreign policy,” Pratt wrote. “No state has the right to oppose his actions.”

Rubio Blames Trump for Vulgar Campaign

Currently in third place in the delegate count for the GOP presidential nomination, Sen. Marco Rubio lashed out at front runner Donald Trump, blaming him for “the descent into vulgarity that has characterized this race.”

“He called me a ‘loser’ and a ‘choke artist,’” Rubio complained. “I had to strike back and humiliate him in some way. Challenging the size of his penis was the obvious irrefutable barb. He can boast all he wants about his prowess with women, but if he doesn’t drop trow and show the world, everyone will know I am right about his wee willy.”

The Senator upped the ante by offering to fully bare himself at the next debate to show he is not bluffing. “I’ve been at plenty of foam parties and have been able to compare myself with hundreds of other guys,” he bragged. “I’m confident that Trump will be the lesser man in any head-to-head competition with me.”

In related news, GOP establishment stiff, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney inadvertently bolstered Trump’s candidacy by denouncing him as “outside the mainstream of the Republican Party. The American people need a GOP that puts aside partisan confrontation and works across-the-aisle with Democrats for the good of the country. Trump is not the man to lead our Party is this noble endeavor.”

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 use material created by The Arizona Conservative, give us credit and DO NOT change the context. Thank you.