Obama Minimizes Differences Between Communism and Capitalism

By John Semmens – Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent NewsIn 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 ISISThe 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 AbortionsThe 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 DemandThe 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 ObamaLast 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 NewsJohn 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.