Party Donors Warn of 'Dire Consequences' for Those Who Let Obama Down

John Semmens: Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent A handful of Democratic members of Congress were warned by the Party's big donors to get in line behind President Obama's push for gun-control legislation lest they face “dire consequences.”“Money is the 'mother's milk' of political success,” said a leading Democratic financier under promise of anonymity. “Senators from GOP leaning states may think they'll face electoral defeat if they come out in favor of gun-control. We just want to remind them that they'll be taken off the campaign cash teat if they don't.”“They should also remember there are other ways the President can punish them,” he continued. “He can cut their shares of discretionary federal outlays. He can harass their constituents by sending swarms of officers to rigorously enforce irksome regulations. And in extreme cases, he can order the use of deadly force against anyone who threatens his beneficent administration to the people's needs.”One of the targets, Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA), rued what she called “heavy-handed tactics” and pleaded for “some sort of reasonable accommodation. I don't see why we can't be permitted to pose as defenders of the right to bear arms while being allowed to work covertly to support the President like we have on other issues.”Another, Senator Max Baucus (D-Mont), characterized the threat as “ill-considered. These Democratic donors are already well rewarded for their efforts. Each dollar donated to elect Democrats nets donors a hundred in return from federal subsidies paid out to their businesses and organizations. They need us to put money in their pockets. They ought to be able to stand a little posturing on our part to ensure our reelection.”Former President Clinton Doesn't Understand How Tax Cuts Help EconomyFormer President Bill Clinton castigated Republicans for their continued opposition to tax increases saying “they haven't been able to explain to my satisfaction how low taxes are supposed to help the economy.”“Since government is the genesis of most of the good in the world a stance that appears aimed at limiting its access to the resources it needs can only retard its role,” Clinton argued. “Cutting taxes in the hope that the aggregated selfish actions of private parties would somehow result in greater prosperity seems pretty farfetched to me.”In support of his case, Clinton cited the robust economic growth that occurred during his term in office. “We raised taxes while I was President and we saw 100 times as many people moved out of poverty as did during the tax-cutting Reagan Administration,” Clinton bragged. “That alone ought to prove the wisdom of transferring more of the nation's wealth to the public sector.”The record number of people receiving food stamps under the Obama Administration's expansion of government's share of the GDP didn't dent Clinton's confidence in the curative powers of big government. “The federal government's 25% share of GDP may be a historic high for America, but it is still far below what has been achieved in other countries,” he pointed out. “I would argue that if government could allocate 100% of the nation's resources economic growth and distributional equity would be maximized.”Government Has Obligation to Infringe on FreedomNew York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg defended his “nanny state” inclinations saying that “there are certain times we should infringe on your freedom.”“Freedom should not be taken for granted,” Bloomberg asserted. “I know that in America it has been built up into some sort of iconic vision for society, but government needs to ensure that it isn't abused. Too many people are frivolously using their freedom to engage in socially destructive behaviors. They may think that whether they smoke, eat poorly, or act in an undisciplined manner is their own affair. At the same time they expect society to come to their rescue with health insurance, disability benefits, and welfare payments.”“If we're going to have a fiscally viable social safety net government must intervene to reduce the risk to society of the consequences of ill-thought-out actions,” Bloomberg insisted. “We have the means to do this. We have comprehensive databases, surveillance, and a wide range of public agencies to accomplish our objectives.”Bloomberg acknowledged that his approach entails a massive invasion of privacy, but argued that “there is no way we can both preserve privacy and maximize collective well-being. People could be left to do as they please or they can be protected from the effects of their folly. Looking at the election results over the generations, I think it's pretty clear that more and more voters prefer security over freedom.”The Mayor said he envisioned “a day when the proper lifestyle choices would be so ingrained that coercive measures are no longer necessary. In the meantime, though, we should not shy away from stern enforcement of rules that move us closer to this ideal.”Lawmaker Explains Sending Photo of Genitals to Government ComputerMassachusetts Democratic State Representative John Fresolo complained that “people are misinterpreting the rationale behind what I did.” What he did was send a digital photo of his penis to a computer at the State House. A legislative aide who saw the photo lodged a complaint with the Ethics Committee.Fresolo maintained that he was “pilot-testing a new element for sexual offender databases. Right now, all we have on sex offenders is facial photographs. In cases where a rapist wears a mask the victim may not be able to identify her assailant. By providing another data point we could close more cases.”“Rather than ask someone else to post the first genital photo to the database I bravely exposed myself,” Fresolo said. “Now, instead of being lauded for putting aside personal modesty in order to promote the public welfare I'm being pilloried by my political enemies. Never has a public servant been so unjustly humiliated.”Continuation of Lavish Lifestyle During Sequestration DefendedPress Secretary Jay Carney rebuffed critics who have suggested that President Obama and his family ought to be “sharing the pain” brought on by the federal budget sequester.“The whole point of the 'pain' is to help induce people to support the tax increases the President has requested,” Carney explained. “The President already is on-board with tax increases. He doesn't need the added stimulus of pain to get on the right side of the issue.”As for the President's family members who are currently in the midst of their fourth taxpayer-funded vacation trip since the start of the year, Carney argued that “penalizing the First Family for fully enjoying the perks of office would accomplish nothing. Look, the President's family has only a limited time to squeeze every privilege they can get out of their status. Can anyone really blame them for going whole hog?”First Daughters, Sasha and Malia Obama, are currently vacationing on the ski slopes of Sun Valley, Idaho. Earlier this week, the First Daughters were on a spring break trip in the Bahamas.Obamacare Raises Costs & PaperworkHealth and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius dismissed criticism that Obamacare is leading to higher costs and more paperwork as “misplaced.”“Since the vast majority of visits to doctors are unnecessary and often result in more harm than good, if costs for medical care rise we should expect overall health to improve,” Sebelius projected. “I mean, unless you are a trauma victim, the chances of medical intervention helping you are slim. Higher costs for treatment of other alleged ailments will deter people from exposing themselves to the risk iatrogenic complications.”As for the estimated 111 million hours of increased paperwork spawned by the Affordable Health Care Act, Sebelius hailed it as a “jobs bill. This is millions of hours of paperwork that would not have existed without the legislation. These are relatively pleasant, indoor jobs sitting at a desk and shuffling papers or punching keys on a computer. People don't have to break a sweat building something or harvesting a crop, or whatever. These are the kind of jobs that most people wish they had.”Bank Seizure of Deposits Called “Wave of Future”The resolution of the bank crisis in Cyprus by seizing depositors money and forcibly converting it into equity shares in the banks was hailed as “an innovative way out of a plethora of bad investments by bank officials” by Jeroen Dijsselbloem, the Dutch chairman of the Eurozone.“Under the old rules, losses incurred by bad investments would fall upon the stockholders and officers of the bank,” Dijsselbloem said. “Stockholders would typically lose their money and officers their jobs—all because of an imbalance between deposits and assets. By mandating the conversion of a portion of deposits into new shares the stockholders and officers of the bank can be insulated from the consequences of their errors.”Dijsselbloem contended that “this solution is both humane and equitable. Those who have the ability to make large deposits in banks obviously have more money than they need. By requiring them to deploy this excess wealth for the benefit of others is a policy that places collective well-being ahead of individualistic greed.”A Satirical Look at Recent NewsPlease do us a favor.  If you use material created by The Arizona Conservative, give us credit, and do not change the context. Thank you.