Yesterday, while the nation celebrated Memorial Day with barbecues, heavy drinking and American flags made in China, Senator John McCain (R-AZ) quietly sneaked into Syria from Turkey where he met with the Free Syrian Army's Supreme Military Council leader Gen. Salem Idris.
Although Sen. McCain has no authority to provide the heavy weaponry, no-fly zone or airstrikes on Assad's well-equipped regime that the rebels desire, this did not stop the old warrior from inserting himself into the conflict.
"You have to remember," said an unnamed aide, "that the Senator spent most of the Vietnam war demolishing Navy planes only to watch his comrades fight it from a hospital bed in a North Vietnamese prison camp. He loves war. He just wishes he had actually had the chance to fight in one."
That Senator McCain enjoys the concept of war is well known, as he famously stated that the United States military could stay in Iraq for "maybe a hundred years" and that "would be fine with me" while President Obama was keeping his promise to withdraw American forces.
"Okay, the Senator was a bit off on Iraq and Afghanistan," the aide continued, "what with assuring Americans that we would have an easy victory in Iraq and that withdrawal from Afghanistan would be a huge mistake, but his heart is in the right place. He loves the military, as POW/MIA families can tell you. See, he doesn't play golf, okay? He plays war, and he's pretty damn good at it. Anyway, it's just his way of making sure we will have a reason to celebrate Memorial Day for decades to come."
©2013 Kona Lowell
Tuesday, May 28, 2013
Tuesday, May 21, 2013
Republicans Are Dangerous to Your Health
Washington, DC. The FDA is proposing today that Republicans come with warning labels, due to the inherent danger they pose the public.
"We have seen a decrease in tobacco-related deaths due to our graphic labeling of cigarettes," said Margaret Hamburg, FDA Commissioner, "and we strongly believe that Republicans should come with similar warnings. A tattoo that reads 'I'M GOING TO KILL YOU' clearly legible on the forehead of all elected officials of the Republican party would be a good first step."
The FDA has reached this conclusion due to the policies, beliefs and statements of GOP members that, like radon leaking into a basement, pose a serious health risk to the unaware.
"Whether it's cutting funding for NOAA and thus crippling our ability to deal with severe weather or refusing to deal with climate science itself, which they claim is fraudulent, people are going to die if they keep electing these dangerous people," the Commissioner added.
"I think a warning label is a good idea, but may not be enough," said Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), "I mean these guys want to abolish OSHA, which will result in increased workplace deaths. So far we've been able to stop them from repealing The Child Labor Law, but if they retake the Senate, all bets are off."
"Hell yes, they're dangerous to our health," said firebrand congressman Alan Grayson (D-FL), "they want to repeal Obamacare and take away health insurance from 30,000,000 Americans. What would you call that?"
Further proposed labeling will include warnings regarding food stamp cuts, perpetual war, women's health, medical research, stand your ground laws, wanting every maniac to have a gun and a propensity for nonchalant, smiling evil.
©2013 Kona Lowell
"We have seen a decrease in tobacco-related deaths due to our graphic labeling of cigarettes," said Margaret Hamburg, FDA Commissioner, "and we strongly believe that Republicans should come with similar warnings. A tattoo that reads 'I'M GOING TO KILL YOU' clearly legible on the forehead of all elected officials of the Republican party would be a good first step."
The FDA has reached this conclusion due to the policies, beliefs and statements of GOP members that, like radon leaking into a basement, pose a serious health risk to the unaware.
"Whether it's cutting funding for NOAA and thus crippling our ability to deal with severe weather or refusing to deal with climate science itself, which they claim is fraudulent, people are going to die if they keep electing these dangerous people," the Commissioner added.
"I think a warning label is a good idea, but may not be enough," said Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), "I mean these guys want to abolish OSHA, which will result in increased workplace deaths. So far we've been able to stop them from repealing The Child Labor Law, but if they retake the Senate, all bets are off."
"Hell yes, they're dangerous to our health," said firebrand congressman Alan Grayson (D-FL), "they want to repeal Obamacare and take away health insurance from 30,000,000 Americans. What would you call that?"
Further proposed labeling will include warnings regarding food stamp cuts, perpetual war, women's health, medical research, stand your ground laws, wanting every maniac to have a gun and a propensity for nonchalant, smiling evil.
©2013 Kona Lowell
Monday, May 6, 2013
The Case Against Background Checks
Last month the Senate wisely rejected Senators Manchin and Toomey's amendment that would have expanded background checks on all firearm sales. Although the vote was clearly along party lines, four Democratic Senators — Mark Pryor (Ark.), Max Baucus (Mont.), Heidi Heitkamp (N.D.) and Mark Begich (Alaska) — all heroically joined with Republicans to defeat this un-American and dangerously discriminatory legislation.
Discriminatory you ask? Absolutely! This legislation would have targeted three specific groups of people, all of which are already underrepresented in Congress and openly discriminated against in daily life: the dangerously mentally ill, the criminal and the terrorist.
Imagine, if you will, that you are a person with severe mental illness and a tendency towards extreme violence and the many voices in your head are demanding that you immediately purchase an AR-15 and 2,000 rounds of ammunition. Now you have to tell those voices, one of which is of course God, that, sorry, you just can't do it. This would lead to severe depression and feelings of inadequacy and shame. If we care about the homicidally mentally ill, do we really want to further upset and frustrate them? I think not.
Then there is the criminal. It's hard enough to be a criminal, but it's terribly hard to be a really good criminal without a gun of some sort. Try robbing a bank with a hammer. Not easy. And even the average convicted wife-beater deserves some sort of protection. There are some tough wives out there! And anyway, which is better? Getting beaten up time after time or just getting it over with quickly?
That leaves the terrorist, the most misunderstood of the three groups. Imagine coming all the way to this country to stock up on state-of-the-art weaponry and being told "No." Talk about inhospitality! I wouldn't come back, would you? Of course not! And just imagine if the Tsarnaev brothers were unable to arm themselves with hundreds of rounds of ammo and several high-powered weapons. We wouldn't have had such exciting TV coverage of their standoff with the police. It would have been over in a minute. Then what would the media talk about? Women's health? Please.
Americans owe the NRA, Wayne LaPierre and the Republican party a very large "thank you" for sticking up for the God-given rights of the dangerously insane, the criminal and the terrorist. The Democrats, who pretend to care about the rights of all, would not do this, except for the four previously noted. I think we've all had enough hypocrisy.
©2013 Kona Lowell
Discriminatory you ask? Absolutely! This legislation would have targeted three specific groups of people, all of which are already underrepresented in Congress and openly discriminated against in daily life: the dangerously mentally ill, the criminal and the terrorist.
Imagine, if you will, that you are a person with severe mental illness and a tendency towards extreme violence and the many voices in your head are demanding that you immediately purchase an AR-15 and 2,000 rounds of ammunition. Now you have to tell those voices, one of which is of course God, that, sorry, you just can't do it. This would lead to severe depression and feelings of inadequacy and shame. If we care about the homicidally mentally ill, do we really want to further upset and frustrate them? I think not.
Then there is the criminal. It's hard enough to be a criminal, but it's terribly hard to be a really good criminal without a gun of some sort. Try robbing a bank with a hammer. Not easy. And even the average convicted wife-beater deserves some sort of protection. There are some tough wives out there! And anyway, which is better? Getting beaten up time after time or just getting it over with quickly?
That leaves the terrorist, the most misunderstood of the three groups. Imagine coming all the way to this country to stock up on state-of-the-art weaponry and being told "No." Talk about inhospitality! I wouldn't come back, would you? Of course not! And just imagine if the Tsarnaev brothers were unable to arm themselves with hundreds of rounds of ammo and several high-powered weapons. We wouldn't have had such exciting TV coverage of their standoff with the police. It would have been over in a minute. Then what would the media talk about? Women's health? Please.
Americans owe the NRA, Wayne LaPierre and the Republican party a very large "thank you" for sticking up for the God-given rights of the dangerously insane, the criminal and the terrorist. The Democrats, who pretend to care about the rights of all, would not do this, except for the four previously noted. I think we've all had enough hypocrisy.
©2013 Kona Lowell
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)