Currently Reading Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right By Ann Coulter see related

Par For The Discourse

With the 2008 presidential election approaching, political debates in the news and throughout the blogosphere are growing ever more heated and vitriolic.  Unfortunately, it seems the modern media zeitgeist is characterized by a noticeable lack of intellectual rigor, where blind ignorance and unabashed hatred assume a position traditionally reserved for cogent argumentation and reasoned dialectic.  With this thought in mind, I would like to take the opportunity to raise our political discourse to a heretofore unknown level of sophistication:

ABORTION

Last year, South Dakota passed House Bill 1215, which banned the termination of pregnancies in nearly all cases, reigniting a decades old debate surrounding the procedure.  Now the controversy over abortion, or as I like to call it, BABY GENOCIDE, generally splits people into two camps- those who believe it’s cool to suck children’s brains out of their head with a straw, and those who think that human life might have some shred of value and dignity.  The members of the former group, the ones who support the embryonic Rwanda, like to refer to themselves as “pro-choice”.  Look, I’m pretty sure the only choice you have to make is whether or not you want to be a freaking murderer.  It’s really that simple.  These people think abortion is something to get excited about and they actually cheer every time a doctor crushes a baby’s skull- just look at these freaks celebrating kiddie massacre:







The latter group refers to themselves as “pro-life” and I am not too enamored by what I find on this side of the fence either.  You see, my biggest problem with the pro-life position is that it doesn’t do enough to punish women.  Here you have these worthless whores butchering their own offspring and we don’t even charge them with a crime!  Sure, you save the child’s life, which is good and all, but I’d really like to see more humiliation and trauma for the ladies who put themselves in this position as a consequence of their own terrible decisions.  That’s why I think that if a woman wants to have an abortion, she should be required to give birth to her child without an epidural and be forced to consciously strangle the life out of her newborn baby by deliberately winding the umbilical chord around its neck and watching as it slowly dies of asphyxiation.  That’ll teach that slut to use protection next time.

The pre-natal Darfur advocates also contend that banning baby murder will force women to seek dangerous back-alley abortions, claiming such illegal operations often lead to infection, hemorrhaging, and even death.  Well those sound like perfectly fair punishments for trying to liquidate your own kid.  It’s mind-boggling to me that we don’t lock up these women in jail for the rest of their lives to begin with. These women are blatantly guilty of attempted murder and don’t even get a slap on the wrist while hard-working men like Jeffrey Skilling of Enron receive double-digit sentences for simply developing creative new business practices.  Does that sound like justice to you?  I say that if a back-alley abortion allows a woman to get away with homicide with only a torn uterus as a penalty, she should consider herself the recipient of a pretty decent bargain.  Besides, to claim that the illegalization of abortion will leave women with no choice but to visit a seedy black market doctor is patently ridiculous- there are a number of simple and viable alternatives:







Another common quip is “Well what if the woman is raped?  Should she be forced to carry the rapist’s child in her body for nine months?”  In a word: Yes.  Now I know this going to ruffle some feathers among the Femi-nazi crowd out there, but let’s be honest here for a second- aren’t most women who get raped pretty much asking for it?  I mean, last time I checked, people don’t just come into your house and rape you- you have to do something to provoke it.  (And even if they do, remember- it’s your fault for not locking the doors.)  You see, the reason that all these women get assaulted nowadays is because they all prance around in these revealing little outfits.  If you don’t cover up properly, then you can’t really blame men for simply acting on their natural instincts.  Blame Darwin I guess (Assuming you believe in that Devilution stuff).  The bottom line is that if you’re a woman who insists on walking around in a tiny miniskirt and skimpy tanktop, you might as well be holding a sign that says ‘Hi, I would like to be forcibly penetrated’.  If all you women don’t want to get raped, put some clothes on!  

And- if that’s not enough proof- according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, two thirds of all rapes occur at night, mostly between the times of 6pm and Midnight.  Hmm, interesting statistic there- looks like the majority of women are raped when they are partying the night away out on the town.  Maybe so many women wouldn’t get raped if they would just stay at home where they belong.  After all, when was the last time you heard of a woman getting pounced on while she’s making a sandwich in the kitchen?  (Except by her husband of course, but that doesn’t count because it’s impossible for a husband to rape his wife.  I’ve never understood the logic of the feminists here- if you already own the car, why would you need permission to ride in it, you know what I mean?) The point here is that women who are raped need to carry their babies to term and keep them as a reminder of what they did wrong and why they deserved what happened to them.  I’m sure that after changing diapers for a couple of years they’ll be careful not to repeat the same mistake again.  So the conclusion here should be obvious: Baby-murdering is immoral and has to be completely outlawed.  Anyone who doesn’t believe that all life is sacred and worthy of respect is a big fat idiot and should be immediately executed.

STEM CELL RESEARCH

GAY MARRIAGE

First of all, I would just like to say that I wholeheartedly support gay marriage in its traditional understanding.  After all, the literal denotation of the term is simply “a joyous union between a man and a woman as husband and wife”.  And who doesn’t want that?  The problem is with the new meaning of the phrase, which apparently has something do with homosexuals. Gross.  The appropriation of the term ‘gay marriage’ by the secular progressive crowd is just another example of the burgeoning epidemic of lingual terrorism that runs rampant in our society.  You see, I’m a linguistic conservative- I believe that words have one meaning and one meaning only.  Much like cellular life on earth, they don’t evolve over time but rather remain completely static following their creation.  Or at least that’s how it’s supposed to work.  But here you have these freaking Lieberals trying to steal marriage and systematically destroy it by means of their unrelenting lexical vandalism.  It’s all part of the ongoing War on English.  But I digress. 

To return to the topic at hand, I really don’t see why people whine so much about gay marriage.  I mean, why do those people need to get married?  It is a proven fact that gays don’t form committed relationships but rather engage in rampant promiscuity, constantly jumping from one sexual partner to the next.  That’s why God created AIDS- to punish them for their disgusting acts of fornication.







But the biggest problem with gay marriage is that it prevents straight couples from enjoying their own union.  Marriage is like a nice country club- it has to be exclusive in order to be satisfying (Just imagine trying to explain to your caddy how the influx of blacks are destroying the property values in your neighborhood with one of those mischievous darkies hovering around the fairway). How can these homosexuals be so selfish as to demand rights that will interfere with the lives of so many other people?  Can’t they understand that they will destroy the sanctity of marriage?  Straight people like Jennifer Lopez and Britney Spears have worked very hard to preserve the sacred nature of marriage and these homos want to make light of the entire institution!  I mean, at least heterosexuals have a reason to marry one another- when they engage in familial relations, they produce viable offspring and are therefore single-handedly responsible for the propagation and continued existence of the human race.  By contrast, I’m pretty sure the only result of two dudes having sex is eternal damnation.

GAY ADOPTION

Another important issue concerning the gays is the issue of same-sex adoption.  Or, as it should be more appropriately labeled, sick and unnatural adoption.  So apparently some people hate America so much that they believe that homosexuals should not only be allowed to ruin the institution of marriage but that they should be able to adopt kids as well.  Look, if those people want to have kids, they should do it the old fashioned way.  (Oh wait, they can’t!  Hmm…I wonder if nature is trying to tell them something…).  Besides, even if you adopt children, you’re still not their real parents.  I mean, you’re more like a glorified babysitter.  So what’s the point?  And it’s clear that same-sex couples only want to adopt children so they can indoctrinate them into their gay liberal agenda and convert them into homosexuals in order to create a massive queer army bent on eradicating traditional family values and putting demoncrats like Hitlery Rotten Clinton into the White House. 

Because I am a compassionate conservative, however, I am not totally opposed to all forms of child rearing by gays.  In fact, I think with a kid around the gays might actually be forced to take periodic breaks from their busy life of spreading HIV and generally being an all-around abomination.  Basically, the solution I have developed is this: Gays should only be allowed to adopt gay children.  It makes perfect sense if you think about it.  Homosexuals get to pretend like they have a real family and they don’t even have to contaminate any innocent straight children with their immoral lifestyle in order to do so.  And I really think it’s better for those people to stick to their own kind anyways.  I mean, how can a homosexual couple raise a heterosexual child?  What if little Johnny comes home one day from football practice and says that he has a crush on a girl from school?  What advice could his pair of fathers possibly have for him?  “Well son, have you tried sodomy?  It worked for us!” You get the picture.  But if the kid has made the same choice to be gay, they can teach him all about being sensitive and talking with a lisp and whatever else homo-sick-xuals do.  So it works out perfectly.  Now you may be wondering, where are the gays going to get these homosexual children?  It’s very simple really.  Though it may be hard to believe, there are actually quite a large number of conservative republicans who would be willing to donate their own gay children in exchange for some non-defective ones.  The following diagram should help to clarify my plan:







So the gays will basically be preaching their agenda to the choir while the conservatives will be able to raise their children to be morally righteous human beings…you know, the kind that will grow up to hate children with two mommies or daddies.  Yuck.

RACIAL PROFILING

One of the smarter moves in this Post-9/11 era has been the adoption of racial profiling policies toward A-rabs, Mozlems, and other people of terrorist descent.  In recent years, airports around the country have started singling out the brownies for increased scrutiny and I wholeheartedly applaud their actions.  But of course the Al-Qaeda loving liberals object to this common sense security measure, arguing that all people should be subjected to equal inspection.  Sorry terrorist-huggers, but luckily for us America was not founded upon some idiotic notion that all people should receive equal treatment under the law. 

Besides, why should people be treated equally when they do not have an equal likelihood of committing acts of terrorism?  Loony liberals have us strip searching toddlers and doing cavity probes of seventy-year-old grandmothers in wheelchairs while some skinny little A-rab with a beard and turban named Jihad Al Jihad Al Jihad gets to scoot right on through because showing even the slightest suspicion of a man like him would be “racist” and an “infringement” on his precious civil rights.  Well excuse me, but if you wear the international uniform of a terrorist, then you should expect to be treated like one.  I don’t understand why these freaking A-rabs are always complaining.  I mean, if ridiculously good looking white people started blowing stuff up all the time, I would have absolutely no problem with being searched more thoroughly.  But that’s just it- white people are not committing terrorism.  I’m pretty sure every act of domestic terrorism in history has been perpetrated by one of these brown people.  Just look at these two A-rab terrorists:







In fact, white people pretty much never commit any crimes, ever.  When was the last time you heard of a white person causing a disturbance on a plane? (Except when they are valiantly overpowering evil-doing jihadists and stopping them dead in their tracks, United 93 style).  If you think about it, white people shouldn’t even have to go through security at all.  I mean, we are the master race- it’s the least they could do for us. (Although free peanuts would be nice too- yes, I’m talking to you Skybus).  It would certainly cut down on the long lines, which are so annoying!  Don’t get me wrong- I’m all for creating the strongest defense against terrorism as humanly possible- I just don’t think I should have to personally sacrifice anything in order to gain it.  It simply doesn’t make any sense to punish white people for something they had nothing to do with- the only logical conclusion is to place that burden upon those who share arbitrary demographic designations with the terrorists.  And if all you frickin’ A-rabs don’t want to be searched more often, maybe you should tell people who look EXACTLY LIKE YOU to stop bombing America.  Or better yet, you could just go back to your own country where you belong!  I’m sure you won’t have a problem with racial profiling in A-rabistan or whatever backwards sand dune you people come from.

IRAQ

Perhaps no issue is more contentious these days than the extremely successful and flawlessly executed war in Iraq.  A large number of republicans have joined the democrats in committing high treason against their own country by criticizing the President and the perfect way in which he has managed this beautiful war.  One reason for this misplaced criticism is the fact that the conflict has been swept into the culture of Political Correctness that is ruining our country and preventing people from seeing the truth.  Of course things were not always this way.  Back in World War II, for example, we knew those sneaky Japs were the enemy and we had the balls to say so.  Check out these sweet displays of time-honored American patriotism to see what I am talking about:







You can practically smell the slanty-eyed nips shaking in their boots.  But you can’t do the same thing today- if you state the obvious fact that we are at war with A-rabs, you will be crucified by the liberal media.  And that’s exactly why this war has such a low approval rating- we don’t know who we are fighting.  I want to see my neighbors brandishing their “A-rab Hunting Licenses” and communities showcasing xenophobic posters at their local multiplexes.  I mean, the American people aren’t mind-readers and can’t support a war all on their own.  The government needs to keep up its end of the bargain by pumping out a steady stream of propaganda to nudge us in the right direction.    

So there’s a litany of other topics I could discuss here- the troop surge, the proposed timetable, the insane amount of ass our troops are kicking…but these are all very complex topics, and I’ve never been much of a fan of nuance.  Like why be subtle when it’s so much easier to view things in black and white?  That’s why the truth about the war in Iraq comes down to this: We are good.  They are evil.  We like democracy and long walks on the beach.  They hate America and enjoy torturing kittens. So if you disagree with even an iota of this struggle, you are an unpatriotic traitor who probably cares more about terrorists than Americans.  I mean, you anti-war crybabies don’t even have an argument.  I’m so sick of these liberals saying crap like “But we’ve killed so many innocent people!”  Who cares?  They killed 3,000 of our civilians and we responded by killing 600,000 of theirs.  I think that’s perfectly fair.  Nothing spells retributive justice greater than the classic “200 eyes for an eye” policy.







After all, there’s no sense in wasting a good punishment simply because it’s too big to fit the crime.  Our policies are a good ol’ fashioned example of lex talionis in action, sir.  Besides, you also need to take into account the exchange rate between America and Iraq.  In the same way that one American dollar is worth a couple hundred dinars or whatever weak-ass currency they have over there, one American life is similarly worth like a few hundred Iraqi lives.  So if you think about, the net number of Iraqi civilian deaths is actually lower than the number of American deaths.  Plus it’s not like those people are actually human.  They’re terrorist insurgents for Christ’s sake!  They’re like advanced animals, really.  They don’t have souls like we do.  I mean, do you people not understand that they are BROWN?  Brown people don’t believe in love or happiness.  They never smile or laugh or hug their children.  Behind their cold lifeless eyes lies an eternal thirst for violence and death. In place of a heart, they possess within them only a dark abyss of ever-expanding hatred…hatred for our freedom.

IMMIGRATION

As I speak, Congress is working hard to pass comprehensive immigration reform legislation.  The proposed bill S. 1348, also known as Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007 or by its full name The Shortest and Most Concisely Titled Bill Involving Secure Borders In Conjunction With Economic Opportunity Culminating In An Act Of Immigration Reform In The Two Thousandth And Seventh Year Of Our Lord Act, would provide amnesty to the nearly 12 million illegal aliens who have invaded America.  Personally, illegal immigration is a difficult issue for me to tackle- as a conservative republican, I feel torn between my xenophobic desire to keep all colored foreigners out of America and my unwavering devotion to help corporations systematically exploit the poor for the benefit of cheaper labor costs.  It is, admittedly, quite a conundrum, but what really grinds my gears is these frickin’ bleeding-heart liberals who want to give these I-llegals a free ride by giving them a pathway to citizenship.  So let me get this straight: if a person breaks the law, they should be rewarded for it?  Wow, that makes sense.  Maybe we should just give trophies to people who rob banks.  (Oh, that analogy does makes sense, kind sir). 

Although it’s a tricky issue, the immigration debate basically comes down to this:  These people are criminals.  They don’t have a right to be here.  They disrespected America by crossing into this country illegally, which proves that they don’t love this great nation.  Even if you disagree with our immigration policies, not following laws is simply inexcusable.  Like the other day I tried to board a bus on Cleveland Avenue and this friggin’ black woman was sitting right there in the front.  I said, “Look here negro, your people are supposed to sit in the back of the bus.  This section is Whites Only.  Even if you disagree with it, a law is a law and it must be obeyed no matter what”.  She refused to move, but luckily the bus driver was a good law abiding citizen like me and he called the police, who made sure that the insubordinate woman was put in jail where she belongs.







But like I was saying, these Mexicans are vile bloodsucking leaches- they don’t speak English, they steal our jobs, they crowd our schools, they use social services that they don’t pay taxes for, they destroy our culture, they rape our women, and they support Al Qaeda.  (If that last one seems rather farfetched to you, remember that Mexicans are brown and that is basically the first step to becoming a terrorist).  It’s just a slap in the face to all of the people who immigrated to this country legally.  Those people spend thousands of dollars of their own hard earned money in order to gain citizenship legally.  Meanwhile, these Mexicans simply leave their entire family and everything they’ve ever known and spend a few days walking through a blistering hot desert staving off heat stroke and dehydration while simultaneously avoiding federal border patrol agents who are trained to shoot illegals on sight, and then they end up getting all the same benefits without any work!  It’s just completely unfair.  And is it really so difficult to just round up all 12 million of these people and ship them back to Mexico?  They could just build a giant Home Depot and say it is offering nachos and bad cologne at no cost.  You’d get about 8 million of them right then and there.  Congress, it’s time to get serious and kick these freeloaders out of our country. (Edit: The Senate gave in to my demands and did not approve this awful bill- Congratulations, you guys finally managed to do something right for once.  Now it’s time to start legislating a little “noche cristalina” to get rid of all those damn Taco Bells and Chipotles.)

EVOLUTION VS. INTELLIGENT DESIGN

Not too long ago, Kansas declared its allegiance with Satan by reincorporating the theory of evolution into its high school science curriculum.  Apparently the inerrant Word of God is no longer good enough for the hippie liberals of the sunflower state- I’m surprised they haven’t changed their state motto from “Ad Astra Per Aspera” to “In Darwin We Trust”.  (By the way Kansas, I believe House Bill 2140 made ENGLISH the official language of your state- you may want to introduce that piece of legislation to the moron that decided to write your motto in Mexican).  The case of Kansas sets a dangerous precedent for this great nation.  I don’t have any problem with schools teaching our children that Evolution is one theory regarding the origin of life that people who hate Jesus subscribe to in order to divert attention from the fact that they will never be saved-  I just don’t understand why it’s the only theory that is taught.  I mean, how can people be so sure that evolution is true?  Were you fancy scientists actually there to see fish grow legs to become lizards or whatever you evil-utionists (No, Microsoft Word, I didn’t mean evolutionists, but thanks for making apparent your pro-monkey agenda) believe in?  Do you fagnostics and gaytheists have any video evidence of monkeys losing their fur and becoming human?  I didn’t think so.  Until you build a time machine to return to the Mesozoic era and prove your claims, evolution should be taught as theory rather than fact.  And don’t try to use any of that fossil talk to bolster your case- we all know that the Devil put dinosaur bones in the ground to confuse us. 

What’s even more unbelievable, however, is the way that left-wingers want to exclude any alternative theories about how life began.  Aren’t you liberals the ones who are always whining about the lack of intellectual diversity in education?  That’s all we believers in intelligent design are asking for- why can’t you simply teach both theories?  And this doesn’t just apply to evolution- I think we need greater intellectual diversity in many areas.  Sure, some people may believe that all races are equal, but why can’t we also teach the widely held belief that the white race is inherently superior to all other races?  We all know the popular theory is that the Egyptians built the pyramids, but shouldn’t we also discuss the idea that these creations are so complex and beyond the technological capacity of human beings that they could only have been created by aliens?  And yes, most “scientists” believe that the sun is the center of the solar system rather than the earth, but including the former theory at the expense of the latter leads our educational system dangerously close to developing a heliocentric bias.







I mean, c’mon- are you really going to listen to a dirty sinner like Galileo, who fathered three children out of wedlock with that skank Marina Gamba?  The same thing applies to Darwin- he was born in Shropshire, England, which proves without a shadow of a doubt that he is positively Un-American.  Teaching his theory without a balancing counterpoint would be tantamount to instructing our children to hate America.  And our troops.  Shame on you, people of Kansas.  Shame on You.

SEX EDUCATION

With the Dumb-ocrats in charge of Congress, it is simply inevitable that most legislation will lack any semblance of intelligence or rational thought- these people are way too busy taking hits from their bongs and worshipping the grave of General Mao to bother with something as pesky as “logic”.  But every once in a while, they manage to do something that is so mind-numbingly idiotic that it even leaves me speechless.  According to a recent Fox News article (Fair and Balanced), the Demoncrats are aiming to cut federal funding for Abstinence Only education programs!  The morality-haters cite a study conducted last month, which found that teens who participate in abstinence only programs are just as likely to engage in sexual activity as those who participate in comprehensive sex education.  Unfortunately, those who take this study as conclusive evidence that these programs are ineffective are sorely mistaken, for they are missing one key fact- teenagers who engage in pre-marital sex deserve to get STD’s and die.  Here are the facts: teens who participate in abstinence only education programs and take their advice to heart go on to lead happy and healthy lives while those who deny the truth of their message get AIDS and slowly wither away until death.  Therefore, abstinence only programs are actually extremely effective in eliminating immoral and undesirable individuals from the ranks of society.  You see, one of the biggest problems with comprehensive sex education is that it leads to teenagers using protection, which will prevent them from contracting STD’s and living a miserable life of agony/itchy-burning sensations.  It’s almost as if proponents of contraception don’t want teenagers to die at all!  How is God supposed to enact divine justice and punish these terrible sinners for their crimes when prophylactic barriers preempt the transmission of diseases in the first place?  It just doesn’t make sense. 

Another problem with comprehensive education programs is that they basically teach kids how to have sex.  I mean, here you have these teachers giving detailed instructions about which parts go into which holes, and then they scratch their heads when the rate of sexual activity among teenagers skyrockets.  Of course kids are going to get curious if you start showing them pictures and diagrams of nakey people!  It’s just like those awful DARE classes kids take in elementary school.  They give them information about every drug and tell them all the cool things that happen when you experiment with them.  I learned more about drugs just by going to school than I did from all my impressionable years in the tough ghettos of white middle-class suburbia.  Is it really such a surprise that young Billy wants to freebase under the monkey bars when Officer Doobie-master describes it as “seriously the most intense high you can ever experience”?  If you really want to stop teenagers from having sex, you should just stop talking about it altogether.  Instead of referring to parts of anatomy with alluring words like “vagina,” how about substituting them with more realistic terms like “caverns of despair”?  In fact, I think the word ‘sexual intercourse’ and all facsimiles should just be completely excised from the English language.  After all, can teenagers truly “have sex” when those words don’t even exist? (It’s quite a philosophical conundrum).  But I should stress that I’m not against all forms of comprehensive sex education.  I just believe in including a different set of information in addition to promoting abstinence.  The following diagram illustrates the differences quite nicely:







Simple and true.  What more do you need?

THE MOZLEM-IZATION OF AMERICA

For some reason, the Mozlem Invasion is not typically considered an important political issue in America but its unexposed status is precisely what makes it so dangerous!  These Izlamics are clearly seizing control of our nation, staging a slow but calculated coup right before our very eyes, yet most Americans are too busy watching crappy television shows like Desperate Housewives to even notice their advances.  Luckily, there are a still a few vigilant individuals out there who have yet to be phased by Hollywood’s smoke screen and who recognize a serious threat when they see one.  One such hero is Congressman Virgil Goode, a good ol’ fashioned conservative Republican who has served the great state Virginia for over ten years.  Several months ago, Representative Goode spoke the truth on a very important topic and (unsurprisingly) received a lot of criticism from the mainstream liberal media for his comments. 

You see, during the midterm election of 2006, a grave and terrifying event occurred that seemed to slip under the radar of most Americans- a Mozlem was elected into congress!  Yes, sadly it’s true- the members of Minnesota’s fifth district, apparently America’s newest terrorist cell, somehow rigged the election in favor of Keith Ellison, an African-“American” and former state representative who converted from Catholicism to the Mozlemic religion while attending Wayne State University in Detroit.  (This just goes to show the danger of experimenting with new things in college).  And to add insult to injury, Mr. Ellison had the audacity to use a copy of the Koran rather than the Bible during his swearing-in reenactment ceremony, flying in the face of a tradition that has remained unbroken since George Washington.  It was an even worse transgression of custom than when that scoundrel Jackie Robinson decided to shatter a similarly unbroken tradition that had existed from the inception of baseball.  How could Mr. Ellison possibly have the gall to do something like that?  The Bible forms the very foundation of government in America- that’s why the constitution cities biblical passages so frequently and stresses the importance of a religious test for public office.  Placing one’s hand on a Bible is an extraordinarily important and sacred ritual that renders one accountable to the highest office of justice.  Just think of the illegal activities that Richard Nixon or George W. Bush might have engaged in had they not taken an oath over the Good Book.  And because Keith Ellison is not Christian and therefore not bound by anything contained in the holy documents of the Christian religion, it makes perfect sense to use the Bible in his proceedings.  After all, we’re not talking about an insignificant event like the actual swearing in ceremony, which is performed en masse and without the use of a scriptural aid- we’re talking about the official re-enactment ceremony, which has no legal standing and functions essentially as a glorified photo-op.  It’s very serious business.  Or so you would think. 

Unfortunately, many do not see the problem with Ellison’s actions and have not spoken up about it.  But that’s where the aforementioned Representative Goode comes in.  On December 6^th, 2006, Goode issued the following letter to John Cruickshank, chair of the Charlottesville chapter of the Sierra Club:

Dear Mr. Cruickshank:

Thank you for your recent communication. When I raise my hand to take the oath on Swearing In Day, I will have the Bible in my other hand. I do not subscribe to using the Koran in any way. The Muslim Representative from Minnesota was elected by the voters of that district and if American citizens don’t wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran. We need to stop illegal immigration totally and reduce legal immigration and end the diversity visas policy pushed hard by President Clinton and allowing many persons from the Middle East to come to this country. I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies that I believe are necessary to preserve the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America and to prevent our resources from being swamped.

The Ten Commandments and “In God We Trust” are on the wall in my office. A Muslim student came by the office and asked why I did not have anything on my wall about the Koran. My response was clear, “As long as I have the honor of representing the citizens of the 5th District of Virginia in the United States House of Representatives, The Koran is not going to be on the wall of my office.” Thank you again for your email and thoughts.

Sincerely yours,
Virgil H. Goode, Jr.
70 East Court Street
Suite 215
Rocky Mount, Virginia 24151

Finally a voice of reason in this nation of crazy foreigner-loving liberals! (Just one minor criticism, Mr. Goode: I'm pretty sure it's spelled "Mozlems" not "Muslims"- I think those people get pretty offended when you get it wrong, so you should probably correct it before some crazy radical tries to chop your head off or something).  It’s so true- if we don’t do something about all this immigration nonsense, pretty soon every elected official in this country will be a Mozlem and they’ll succeed in overthrowing our government and installing a radical fundamentalist theocracy, unlike the very secular government preferred by leaders like President Bush.  Today we have one Mozlem in our Congress, so it logically follows that tomorrow we will undoubtedly have a nation governed by Shariah Law.  It’s only a matter of time before pepperoni becomes a controlled substance and American women are forced to wear burqas!  I especially like Goode’s point that the presence of Mozlems will destroy the traditional values and beliefs of America.  In response to this threat to the purity of the American culture and our way of life, I have proposed a new piece of legislation, which should solve some of the problems we’ve been having:

Washington Law for the Protection of American Values and American Belief,
June 28^th, 2007

Moved by the understanding that purity of American Values is the essential condition for the continued existence of the American people, and inspired by the inflexible determination to ensure the existence of the United States for all time, Congress has unanimously adopted the following Law, which is promulgated herewith:

Article 1.

1) Marriages between Mozlems and subjects of the nation of America or related blood are forbidden. Marriages nevertheless concluded are invalid, even if concluded abroad to circumvent this law.

2) Annulment proceedings can be initiated only by the State Prosecutor.

Article 2.

Extramarital intercourse between Mozlems and subjects of the nation of America or related blood is forbidden.

Article 3.

Mozlems may not employ in their households female subjects of the nation of America or related blood who are under 45 years old.

Article 4.

1) Mozlems are forbidden to fly the American flag or to display American colors. They are, on the other hand, permitted to display the Mozlem colors. The exercise of this right is protected by the State.

Article 5.

(1) Any person who violates the prohibition under §1 will be punished by a prison sentence with hard labor.

(2) A male who violates the prohibition under § 2 will be punished with a prison sentence with or without hard labor.

(3) Any person violating the provisions under § 3 or §4 will be punished with a prison sentence of up to one year and a fine, or with one or the other of these penalties.

Article 6.

1) A Mozlem cannot be a citizen of America.  He cannot exercise the right to vote; he cannot hold public office.

2) Mozlem officials will be retired as of December 31, 2007.  In the event that such officials served at the front in the war in Iraq either for America or her allies, they shall receive as pension, until they reach the age limit, the full salary last received, on the basis of which their pension would have been computed.  They shall not, however, be promoted according to their seniority in rank.

That should keep those uppity Mozlems down for a while.  Unfortunately, I’m not sure if such legislation will be sufficient to preserve our traditional American way of life.  In addition, I believe all Mozlems should be required to wear special identification at all times so we know exactly who they are and what they’re up to.  Something like this should work pretty well:







This stylish and decorative identification should be enough to quell the Mozlem surge, but just to be on the safe side, we should probably just round all of them up and lock them in internment camps for a while.  Hey, it worked in World War II.  Just look how fun much these dirty Japs are having on their extended vacation:







Ah, camp.  Such a good time.

HURRICANE KATRINA

It has been almost two years since Hurricane Katrina ravaged much of the north-central Gulf Coast, wreaking massive destruction in the states of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama.  But for some reason, liberals simply can’t let bygones be bygones and insist on yapping on about how terribly the government botched its response to the disaster.  C’mon, it’s all water under the bridge- yes, that water just so happened to continue over a series of failed levees to drown an entire city, but I don’t see why we have to keep talking about it.  What’s worse is that the criticism leveled against the government and its actions are completely unfounded.  Many have stated that President Bush failed miserably in bringing aid and relief to the victims of Hurricane Katrina in a timely manner.  But what if his objective was to help no one at all?  Would it not then be accurate to state that President Bush succeeded admirably in not bringing aid and relief to the Katrina victims? 

I’m sure some of you may be confused at this point, so let me spell it out for you.  You see, Ronald Reagan, the greatest President in the history of our nation, once said, “The nine most frightening words in the English language are ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help’”  (In case you’re wondering, the nine least frightening words in the English language are ‘Brownie, you are doing a heck of a job’).  Sure, it might seem tremendously cruel and inhumane to deny assistance to suffering human beings, but President Bush was merely teaching the victims good old-fashioned self-reliance.  It’s time people learned that they can’t depend on the government to fix their problems.  Had the victims of Hurricane Katrina not been under the liberal-induced delusion that some bloated and inefficient agency like FEMA would be there to swoop in and save the day, they would have possessed the conservative wherewithal to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps- assuming their boots had not been swept away in the same feces-infested deluge that decimated their house and the rest of their possessions, of course. 

Besides, it’s not like President Bush is responsible for the Hurricane.  Liberals act like he concocted this natural disaster in some secret government laboratory and unleashed it upon the populace of the east coast because of his deep-seeded hatred for black people.  That is patently ridiculous- everyone knows Hurricane Katrina was a punishment from God for the decadence and depravity of New Orleans.  (Hey, we all know how you people get those beads on Mardi Gras!).  I mean, that’s one city that could stand to have its mouth rinsed out a few times, you know what I mean? 

But the most important thing to remember is that Hurricane Katrina was actually a blessing in disguise.  I understand that this may appear counter-intuitive, so this fact is probably best explained in economic terms.

The following diagram represents our economy prior to Hurricane Katrina:







Keep in mind that Aggregate Demand equals the sum of consumption, investment, government spending, and net exports, represented by the equation AD = C + I + G + (x-m).

Now when Hurricane Katrina hit, federal agencies like FEMA were forced to squander millions of dollars on aid and reconstruction to help the so-called “victims” of the disaster, which led to a huge increase in government spending.  Adhering to the equation listed above, an increase in government spending (G) leads to an increase in aggregate demand (AD), as shown below:







This increase in aggregate demand in turn requires a shift in potential GDP and price in order to restore economic equilibrium:







As the diagram above shows, the shift in aggregate demand results in an increase in potential GDP, meaning the maximum amount of real GDP that can be produced through available resources is now much greater.  In other words, the devastation of Hurricane Katrina actually caused our economy to grow!  Far from being a tragic occurrence, this natural disaster created new jobs and more opportunities for companies to increase profits.  Sure, it kind of sucked for the people who died and for the displaced survivors who watched as their entire lives were reduced to rubble before their very eyes, but you have to remember that there is so much economic benefit to be derived from human suffering!  I know this is difficult, especially for idiotic bleeding-heart liberals, but it helps if you think of human beings as commodities of labor to be exploited and discarded at will.  It’s truly a shame that more people do not realize just how wonderful this hurricane was.

I must confess, however, that I believe I have failed in my attempt at heightened political discourse.  I guess I just don’t have what it takes.  I must defer, therefore, to someone who possesses the intellectual acumen necessary for such a weighty endeavor.  Noted scholar Rush Limbaugh succinctly summarized the Katrina debacle when he eloquently uttered the following words on the September 12^th, 2005 edition of his radio talk show program:

“I mean, why didn't these morons leave New Orleans before the hurricane? I'll tell you why: because they wanted to rape and loot! That's just the way some people are! And if they're black--if the rapists and looters are black--it's not George Bush's fault! We've had these problems ever since the Emancipation Proclamation. Once the whites leave town, all you've got is overwhelming lawlessness. That's not racism, Mr. Snerdley; it's a proven, demonstrable fact. Have you even seen a ghetto in Greenwich, Connecticut? I rest my case.”

Wow.  Some people go their entire lives without experiencing this kind of brilliance.  This is exactly the level of sophistication that I had intended to achieve but failed miserably to properly convey.  In Mr. Limbaugh we find that rare individual who transcends the scholastic putrescence that has so thoroughly undermined the quality of our collective dialogue; a man who stands in stark contrast to the endless parade of disingenuous provocateurs that traffic in partisan propaganda and meaningless sound bites; a hero who defies the temptation to allow ad hominem attacks and mindless hyperbole to serve as a substitution for objective inquiry and substantive thought; an icon who eschews the tendency to deliver content that is immediately gratifying but ultimately vacuous- the informational equivalent of a Big Mac.  I can only dream to one day achieve the subtlety, nuance, and balance he so deftly demonstrates on a daily basis.  So thank you Mr. Limbaugh for elevating our political discourse to the absolute pinnacle of refinement - may the darkness of the world continue to be vanquished by the light of your wisdom.

Oh, and I totally agree with you about those worthless negroes.  You know, sometimes I think we should never have set those people free.

Alright, that about does it for this one folks.  Stay tuned for my next entry, coming soon in 2012!