The Redtape Letters - Chapter 5

The Redtape Letters - Chapter 5

Global Warming

My dearest step-nephew once removed Screwball,

I apolog-gize ahead of t-time if I s-s-stutter a b-b-bit.  I j-j-just got b-back from MMMiami, wh-wh-where I was planning on a little itty bitty escape from the c-c-cold weather h-h-here in the n-n-northeast.  My step-cousin-in-law, a miserable little whelp whom I must visit from time to time to keep the family peace, figured that it would be fun to camp outside.  As it turned out, I nearly froze myself into an early grave as this supposedly tropical city dipped down to nearly 40 degrees.  It was the most miserable night of my earthly existence, and it took me the whole wretched plane-ride back to thaw out.  Do you know those lovely full-body scanners that we Liberals love so much, since we firmly believe that everybody's business is our business?  Well, I decided to forego the scanner in favor of a pat-down search.  I thought that getting hugged by a TSA agent might warm me up a bit.  But the agent that was assigned to me was cold as ice, just like m-m-miserable Mmmmmiami.  I swear, the whole bunch of those airport security people need a personality transplant.  We'll need to see if Obama-care would cover such essential surgery for some government employees.

In any event, I wanted to shift to the topic of global warming.  You see, global warming is the most delicious theory for Liberals that we have encountered in decades.  Why, you ask?  Since your brain is so small but mine is so large, let me explain.

First of all, it is wonderful because it spreads a feeling of widespread fear in the public.  It's great--just tell the people that sea level will rise a few feet, and everyone living within 100' of sea level will panic and ask for help.  And who is the only entity big enough to help them?  Why, it is Big Government!  It is US, my boy!  It is an axiom of secular liberalism--the more people live in fear, the more they will turn to the Government for help.  And we Liberals are the party of Government.

Secondly, global warming is beautiful because it gives the people something to worship.  As we've noted in prior letters, we frown on the whole notion of a Deity that requires anything of us (especially moral behavior).  However, we also recognize that people have an inherent desire to worship something.  Haven't you ever wondered why tens of thousands of people spend millions of dollars each year to watch their "idols" play professional sports?  No, of course you haven't wondered that--to "wonder" requires an active brain, and yours has been quite inert for many years.  But I digress.

You see, the whole concept of global warming encourages people to worship "Mother Earth", our dearly beloved yet beleaguered planet who is being raped and pillaged by the Republican purveyors of technology.  Isn't that great?  People can now worship an entity that fulfills their desire for religion while simultaneously supporting our Liberal desire for greater Governmental power.  I'd always privately thought that Al Gore was a bloated buffoon, but he's really stumbled into a winner.

I must say, I truly enjoy watching people worship mother earth.  Just last week, I saw a grocery store that planted a garden on their roof--yes, my boy, a garden!  Well, that struck me as quite hilarious, since I've never known rooftops to be particularly fertile.  When I inquired about the reason, the proprietor declared that it was a "green" store that was doing its part to reduce global emissions of carbon dioxide.  Oh yes, I thought, a rooftop garden is going to keep the sea levels from rising!  What a great joke!  I mean, you might as well tell a NASCAR driver to eat baked beans prior to racing, under the theory that his resultant flatulence will help propel the car to victory.  

But then I realized that this mindset, in our enlightened Liberal hands, can be of great assistance to us.  While we keep people busy planting rooftop gardens and buying overpriced hybrid vehicles, we gently lull them into thinking that only by heeding the dictates of Government is their any hope for the future.  Always remember--Liberals thrive when people depend on us.

My next letter shall focus on explaining why global warming is our ticket to exercising control over every aspect of individuals' lives.

Your affectionate step-uncle, 

Redtape

PS - I'm sorry for using the word "proprietor".  I know that is more syllables than you are used to experiencing.

The Redtape Letters - Chapter 4

The Redtape Letters - Chapter 4

Health Care, Part 2

My dear Screwball,

I apologize for the delay in writing.  You see, my life has taken a most unfortunate turn in recent weeks.  Do you remember your dear aunt Bertha--the one that was carrying on the ridiculous internet romance with a Canadian goofball named Guy?  Well, just last April, Bertha took the plunge, traveled to Saint John, and married the fellow.  Little did she know that her Canadian sweetheart had a chronic problem of body odor.  (Those sorts of problems are easily masked by the internet, you know.)  She fainted when she reached the altar during the wedding ceremony. Everyone thought it was because she was so smitten with joy; in fact, she was suffocated by his odoriferous emanations.  Not even a full bottle of Axe had been able to cover it up.

At any rate, Guy (or, as the Canadians are fond of pronouncing it, "Gee") recently came to spend some time at our house.  His doctors in Canada had deemed his problem purely "cosmetic" in its nature, and so the national health plan refused to cover the cost of his treatment.  So he came to America to be treated.  Screwball, I thus became the most unfortunately man on the planet!  The man is a human taser.  If you come within 20 feet of him, you will find yourself completely incapacitated by his foul fragrance.  He stayed with us for several weeks, and it took several more weeks to fumigate our household after he left.

But I digress.  

At the end of my previous letter, I said that health care is a right in the sense that "it is the right thing to do".  Now please don't misunderstand me.  I don't mean to suggest that providing health care is objectively "right".  To acknowledge such things as "right" and "wrong" is to go down the slippery slope of acknowledging a Supreme Being, and we must avoid that at all costs.  After all, if such a being were real, He would certainly put a damper on our profligate lifestyles.  No, my dear Screwball, there are no absolutes in this world--of that I am certain.  

When I say that it is the "right thing to do", I mean to say that it is good for our own self-interests.  For you see, once we make health care a right, we obligate the Government to provide it.  And once Government gets in the business of providing health care, we can extend our power without limit.  We shall achieve paradise on earth by extending the arms of Government regulation to places heretofore untouched.

Take, for example, that horrific dining establishment down the road--I believe it's called "The Deep-Fried Greaseball".  It's the place where all those wretched Republicans like to grab a burger and fries after a day at the Capital.  I hate that place for two reasons--first, it is greatly profitable; and second, people have fun there.  Those are two signs of success, and if there is one thing we Liberals hate, it is success.  (That is to say, we detest success achieved independent of the benevolent arm of Big Government.)

Well, once we are in the health care business, it will be a small matter to tax that grease pit into oblivion.  Think of the health costs that are imposed by that accursed establishment as it fills its customers arteries with death-inducing cholesterol!  It will be a small matter to impose a grease tax and siphon off the restaurants profits and place them where they belong--in the Government's coffers.

Also consider another social phenomenon that I abhor--sports.  Sports are loathsome because, by their very nature, they create winners and losers.  This is very detrimental to the tender psyche of young children.  This is not to suggest that we are all winners; your very being refutes that ridiculous concept.  However, it is to suggest that most people are losers and should not be propped up by the notion that they might have won a game.

But get this--sports cause a lot of injuries.  And that is our ticket to regulating them!  Since Government will have to pick up the tab for the injuries, Government will have the right to regulate the conduct of the activities themselves.  Think of the reduction in health care costs that could be achieved simply by requiring the NFL to play two-hand touch!

The bottom line, O Screwball, is that we Liberals want to exercise control over every dimension of our subjects' lives.  Health care enables us to do that.  And so does Global Warming, which we shall discuss in our next letter.

In the meantime, dream a little.  No person is too remote for the benevolent hand of Government to reach.

Your affectionate step-uncle once removed,

Redtape

The Redtape Letters - Chapter 3

The Redtape Letters - Chapter 3

Health Care

To my dear Screwball-

I regret to hear that you once again stumbled on the campaign trail.  You were out there talking about how health care is "a fundamental right for all Americans".  Then someone asked you a fairly simple question: "Where do you find this right in the constitution?"  And, as is your tendency when you encounter the unexpected, you utterly embarrassed yourself.  You turned red, mumbled a few unintelligible words, turned to your hapless aide, and pretended that you never heard the question.  The American people may be fools, but that means they are fairly adept at identifying fools as well.  You were exposed as a fool, my pathetic step-nephew; you must not let that happen again.

(As a side note, if your aide is as clueless as you are, you should probably fire him.  If he is a relative, I may be able to find a job for him in the Department of Health and Human Services.)

At any rate, let me tell you this up front--we all know that health care is not a "right" in the sense that our dreadful Republican adversaries like to discuss.  It is not something inherent to our existence; it is not something, as Miriam-Webster would put it, "that one may properly claim as due".  We never want to discuss rights in this sense.  That is because, if there truly are "rights" in this sense, they must be granted to us by Someone that is greater than us--by a "Creator", if you will.  And if there is someone greater than us, we sure don't want to talk about it.  We shall define our own existence; this notion of "God" simply puts a damper on our passions.

And anyway, we know intuitively that health care is not a "right".  Imagine, my dear Screwball, this horrific scenario: the entire world was struck with a series of nuclear bombs, and you and I alone survived.  Well, let's say that our health was fine and we began our lives together, alone on the planet.  You started gardening, and I started hunting.  Then let's say that you fell asleep in the garden one day and partially impaled yourself on a garden rake.  Let's say that you started bleeding and asked for help.  I, of course, would decline to help.  After all, it was by your own stupidity and negligence that you were hurt, and I can't stand the sight of blood.  Then let's say, for sake of argument, that you declared, "But health care is my fundamental right!"

If you did that, my boy, I would laugh in your face.  Your own idiocy would not compel me to provide health care to you.

What I am saying is this: When we declare that health care is a "right", we simply mean that it is the right thing to do.  Why is it the right thing to do?  That, my bumbling nephew, will be a topic for the next letter.

Your affectionate step-uncle once removed,

Redtape

The Redtape Letters - Chapter 2

The Redtape Letters - Chapter 2

Freedom

To my dear, deluded step-nephew Screwball-

I have just heard about the ill-advised debate between you and your vile Republican opponent.  You dolt!  Before you rush off to engage in such direct encounters with the enemy, I insist that you arm yourself with my great Liberal wisdom!

In that debate, your fiendish foe started to wax eloquently about "freedom".  He spewed out lofty platitudes concerning the importance of removing the shackles of government so that people are free to pursue their dreams of success.  It is the same Republican tripe that we heard a generation ago under the leadership of Ronald McDonald...er, Reagan.

That was when you made your mistake.  Without thinking, you declared, "But if we give people freedom, they might fail!"  You bonehead--you are dangerous when you think, but you are absolutely dreadful when you don't think!

Of course, you are right--freedom inevitably leads to failure for many people.  The problem is, we can't say that!  Moreover, the people that fail will most likely be the people that we want to have voting for us.  So we must not offend them.

The correct thing to say is this: "We liberals believe in freedom, too!"  And that is the absolute truth.  The difference is how we liberals define freedom.  For us, true freedom is freedom from consequences.  For you see, our hearts' desire is to allow people to behave however they want to, shielded by big government from the consequences of their actions.

For example, we want people to be able to sleep and party their way through higher education, yet still be granted a degree that honors their self esteem.  We want people to relax if they don't have a job--they don't need to be ambitious, for Big Government shall protect and provide.  If people live promiscuously, as those in Hollywood love to glamorize, well...we can thank the Supreme Court for establishing a "constitutional" basis for dealing with the consequences of that lifestyle.  You see, Screwball, we shall stay in power for many eons if we can just convince the masses that they need us to shield them from their own behavior.

In our enlightened view, the only action that should have a consequence is success.  Those that are successful should face a grave consequence--taxation.

So, my dear Screwball, don't make the mistake of condemning freedom.  Americans love freedom, so you must love it as well!  You simply must re-define it.  We shall deal further with such verbal nuances in future letters.

Your affectionate step-uncle,
Redtape

The Redtape Letters - Chapter 1

The Redtape Letters - Chapter 1

Compassion

[Editor's note: The Redtape Letters represent correspondence between an old Liberal Lion named Redtape, and his step-nephew once removed named Screwball. Uncle Redtape has decided to take his young step-nephew under his wing and offer helpful advice for being a great liberal and successful candidate.]


To my dear step-nephew once removed, Young Screwball,

It thrills my heart to see that you have thrown your hat into the ring! It will be a great joy if we see a member of our family get elected to Congress. What a high calling it is! I mean, where else can one be paid tens of thousands of dollars to talk to fawning reporters, kiss babies, and vote on bills that one hasn't read?

However, I feel it necessary to give you some instruction regarding the nature of True Liberalism. If you are to be a great liberal in Congress, there are a few things you must keep in mind. Today's letter will focus on the topic of Compassion. It is importantto tell people over and over and over again that Liberals are compassionate, and that Republicans are not. What do I mean by "compassionate"? I mean that WE CARE. And how do we show that we care?

We take money from filthy rich uncompassionate Republicans and give it to the people that we really care about. (For when we say "We care", we really mean that "we care with people that adore us and agree with us".)

That is the beauty of politics. You can be caring without spending a red cent! All you have to do is shed a few tears in front of the camera and plead with "the American people" that you deeply care about others. In doing so, feel free to make up numbers. Say that the government needs money for the "billions of homeless" and the "gazillions of starving children". Say that if we just raised taxes on the top 1% by just a teeny weeny little bit, we could eradicate hunger in our nation. If anyone objects, simply make your voice quiver and say, "But don't you care about the children?"

Let me tell you a few things to avoid.

First of all, don't let your opponent talk about what you do PERSONALLY. I've heard it said that the vile Republican is quite generous with his own money. So don't let that come up, since you--as I well know--give naught but a single bag of raggedy clothes to Goodwill once a year. As far as we Liberals are concerned, the only kind of giving that counts is the giving that other people see. So give lots of taxpayer money to government programs for the world to see. If you do so, you will be in office a long time.

Second of all, don't talk about that awful relic of political days gone by called the "Constitution". Your opponent may raise some pesky question like "What is the Constitutional basis for this government program?" Don't answer it! Simply say, "My opponent is trying to dodge the issue, and that's because he just wants to see babies starve to death." Make your opponent choose between defending a principle and supplying needy people. Republicans often crumble when faced with this dilemma.

Third, do not EVER get into a discussion of whether such programs have worked in the past. Again, your pathetic opponent may say something like, "Why should we throw money at another government program when all the other ones have already failed?" The answer to this question is: "As you can tell, my opponent simply doesn't care!"

The great Liberal Principle is that we are to be judged by intentions, not by our actions. As long as we want people to be happy and wealthy, it really doesn't matter whether our programs are successful or not. What counts is that we care more than anyone else.

The holy grail of our pursuits, of course, is to develop a system whereby more than half the population is dependent upon a government handout to survive. If we can pull that off, then we will be a party that is perpetually in power. If we can take money from 10% of the people and distribute it to the poorest 55-60%, then why would a majority ever want to vote us out?

But I ramble. I have so much to share with you, my dear Screwball. I will write more in the coming months.

Your affectionate step-uncle once removed,

Redtape