Hey America, Freedom here.
I just want to thank you all for an amazing run! We ruled the world from 1776 - 2010!
Throughout history, I'd looked for a place to reside without shame, and I finally found it in America.
Sure, pieces of me have lived elsewhere, but never like this.
We were Ross and Rachel.
We were Luke and Laura.
We were Dagny Taggart and John Galt!
Look at all we accomplished!
We created unprecedented prosperity.
Because of me, responsible individuals of America's middle-class only had to worry about which parent would pick the kids up from soccer practice.
Clean water was a given.
Food on the table was easily obtained.
For those who fell on hard times, private charity was plentiful.
I hope, in the near future, when you're enjoying a nice lukewarm bowl of imitation gruel at the American gulag, you'll think fondly of me. Please, not so much that you neglect to gaze at the overhanging picture of Supreme Leader Obama for the amount of time as required by law. (Of course you won't be able to discuss me with your fellow workers of the state, but you can recall with joy the days in which you were able to eat foods pleasurable to your taste buds during specific times of the day at which you were hungry.)
It's a shame that in the evolution of America, individuals without the ability or desire to achieve greatness looked at persons who had obtained prosperity on a grand scale and said, "I want exactly what he or she has, but I don't really want to partake in a lot of work. How can we make that happen?" Now that the majority of people in America are of that mindset, candidates promising to prop up undeserving underachievers are being elected by the thousands.
Of course, I, Freedom, understand that the resulting policies will only bring down the achievers, by way of government force, until there is absolutely no wealth with which to spread.
Being self-aware; I, Freedom, understand that I am no longer looked at as virtuous by citizens of the USA and will therefore go quietly into the night sky. I bring too much uncertainty.
Soon it will be as if I was never part of America. Those who still acknowledge my historical presence will claim my only contribution was heartache for the noble. History books will continue to falsely claim that my involvement in the USA caused nothing but misery because selfish crooks took advantage of my presence in order to cheat the common man out of their god given right to five luxury automobiles and a garage spacious enough to fit all those fancy cars.
Hey, remember the time I allowed Microsoft and Apple to go after one another with reckless abandon, thus creating unprecedented technology that makes lives better for millions of people around the world!?
Like you humans wax poetically about the college years; there will always be a special place in my heart for those days.
But I digress...
Please, don't feel sorry for me.
With the history of the world being oppression at the hands of demented ruling classes, I never thought I could be a strong presence for two years, much less two-hundred.
Now that my run is over, I must say it puzzles me why people look at the reason behind the unusual success of the greatest nation mankind has ever built and then turn away from me in disgust.
But I suppose it's better to have loved and lost, than never to have loved at all.
You had me.
Many of you appreciated my virtue.
With me it was up to you.
The majority of you now think I had a hand in the fact that a lobster dinner is only realistic four times a week instead of the ideal seven.
Though I admit the imperfection of humans makes me vulnerable, I am supremely confident in declaring that I have no equal.
Freedom out.
Why Would Conservatives Move to the Center?
Whenever a member of the elite media interviews a conservative, they usually ask why the right-wing hate monger can't move their political viewpoints toward the center.
Conservatives understand that left-wing policies damage the country. Therefore, by moving toward the center, they would be agreeing to only partially damage the country in exchange for meaningless political harmony.
Let's say Democrats proposed each citizen be punched in the face five times per year, but conservatives rightly objected, saying we should never slug an American in the face for any reason. Then the Democrats say, "Okay, our desire is to punch people in the face five times per year while conservatives favor a policy that calls for the faces of our citizenry to remain unscathed; how about we compromise and punch everyone in the face thrice yearly." Unless Republicans agree to this revised proposal, they're labeled as the party of "No."
"All they do is say no to face punching. They're even trying to scare the American people into believing that the absorption of multiple fists to the face will produce pain and suffering," the MSNBC anchor declares with outrage.
Because Democrats now wield an exorbitant amount of power, the Republican Party is usually labeled as the party of "no" despite the fact that Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and President Obama refuse to even negotiate with them.
Of course they'll pretend to strive for bipartisanship by throwing out bogus compromises that fail to address fundamental problems.
"Republicans favor no punches to the faces of the American people. We Democrats favor no less than five right or left crosses to the jaw of every citizen," Nancy Pelosi says while stumping for the 3,000 page Face-Alteration Benefiting the Future of America bill. "So how about we compromise by punching everyone in the face five times and then dabbing the resulting wounds with an adequate amount of taxpayer provided hydrogen peroxide?"
At the "face-punching" roundtable, hosted by President Barack Obama, he proudly declares his intention to appoint a bipartisan commission to study the potential benefit of applying gauze to any cuts resulting from the implementation of his controversial proposal.
So the next time you hear a member of the elite media admonish conservatives for their refusal to agree with everything proposed by President Obama, remember that it's your face they're trying to keep pretty.
And while the face-punching legislation analogy is a little far-fetched, such a bill would do far less damage than Obama's healthcare "triumph", which will undoubtedly lead to millions and millions of Americans being denied treatment by the same government sworn to protect their liberty.
I know I wouldn't be the only one standing in line to take my share of punches to the face if it meant recently-passed Obama-care would never see the light of day.
Conservatives understand that left-wing policies damage the country. Therefore, by moving toward the center, they would be agreeing to only partially damage the country in exchange for meaningless political harmony.
Let's say Democrats proposed each citizen be punched in the face five times per year, but conservatives rightly objected, saying we should never slug an American in the face for any reason. Then the Democrats say, "Okay, our desire is to punch people in the face five times per year while conservatives favor a policy that calls for the faces of our citizenry to remain unscathed; how about we compromise and punch everyone in the face thrice yearly." Unless Republicans agree to this revised proposal, they're labeled as the party of "No."
"All they do is say no to face punching. They're even trying to scare the American people into believing that the absorption of multiple fists to the face will produce pain and suffering," the MSNBC anchor declares with outrage.
Because Democrats now wield an exorbitant amount of power, the Republican Party is usually labeled as the party of "no" despite the fact that Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and President Obama refuse to even negotiate with them.
Of course they'll pretend to strive for bipartisanship by throwing out bogus compromises that fail to address fundamental problems.
"Republicans favor no punches to the faces of the American people. We Democrats favor no less than five right or left crosses to the jaw of every citizen," Nancy Pelosi says while stumping for the 3,000 page Face-Alteration Benefiting the Future of America bill. "So how about we compromise by punching everyone in the face five times and then dabbing the resulting wounds with an adequate amount of taxpayer provided hydrogen peroxide?"
At the "face-punching" roundtable, hosted by President Barack Obama, he proudly declares his intention to appoint a bipartisan commission to study the potential benefit of applying gauze to any cuts resulting from the implementation of his controversial proposal.
So the next time you hear a member of the elite media admonish conservatives for their refusal to agree with everything proposed by President Obama, remember that it's your face they're trying to keep pretty.
And while the face-punching legislation analogy is a little far-fetched, such a bill would do far less damage than Obama's healthcare "triumph", which will undoubtedly lead to millions and millions of Americans being denied treatment by the same government sworn to protect their liberty.
I know I wouldn't be the only one standing in line to take my share of punches to the face if it meant recently-passed Obama-care would never see the light of day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)