"Let them eat cake..." becomes "Go buy a new, fuel-efficient vehicle -- that you probably can't afford because of the difficulties in securing credit -- to replace the old, less-efficient vehicle that you can't afford because of your looming unemployment, rising taxes and artificially-inflated currency, all thanks to my Enlightened Economic Policies, you Peasant!"
Oh, and have fewer children, you Horndog! It's becoming clearer with each passing day what Barack the First wants Americans to do -- i.e. suffer in silence while he goes on vacation and makes plans to spend money that doesn't exist even in someone's dreams --and then thank him for it. Or at least have the good grace not to be a whiny bitch. After all, Barack Obama wasn't elected to fill your gas tank, Asshole; he was elected to ensure that the destructive elements of American society could be fully-funded before the money ran out.
That means that you, the Citizen, have to be stripped of your wealth, choices and freedoms, and have no right to question me on anything, and if you don't like it, too bad; I'm off to Hawaii -- again -- on your dime, Sucker, and there isn't anything you can do about it for another year, at least.
Obama had better get himself a food-taster, because every time he opens his mouth and puts his complete lack of economic acumen on display -- not to mention his total lack of empathy -- he's one step closer to getting himself killed (and no, we don't advocate that here at the Asylum), much like Louis XVI.
The Emperor hath spoken about higher gas prices.
Marie Antoinette, it must be noted, never said what she's been accused of. Instead, it's probably the invention of the pro-revolutionary media of the day, much like Obama's electoral victory in the Fall of 2008 was likewise mostly manufactured by today's pro-revolutionary media.
Unlike Marie Antoinette, though, Obama will not lose his head to a rampaging mob, and if he did, the only consequences would be yet another national holiday paying homage to another lackluster non-entity or long-out-of-fashion ideal added to the calendar, so maybe that's not such a bad idea, until you realize that would mean President Joe Biden.
Really, can you remember anyone in the same position being that out-of-touch with reality, or that arrogant with no record to be arrogant about? That dismissive of the concerns of the people he's supposed to be governing? That determined to do something 'great' in the eyes of History that it blinds him to the needs and circumstances of The Present, no matter how many it kills?
Nero? Mussolini? Napoleon? Your guess is as good as mine. How about we make a competition out of it?
Send me your suggestions for the most Out-of-touch, Arrogant and Pig-Headed 'Leaders' in World History. The Winner -- the person who chooses the Historical Figure which most accurately portrays Emperor Barry I -- will get an all-expenses-paid trip to his/her local Applebee's or TGIF -- so long as those expenses don't include actually paying for the meal -- in other words, you're getting bus fare, since Obama is making certain that you can't afford to both drive and eat in the same day.
Discuss!
2 comments:
That's a good question. I'm gonna poll it to see what I get.
I already know that most of those whose political affiliation is "Obama" will probably say "GWB". Maybe I won't poll after all.
Personally, off the top of my head, I choose Mao Zedong. He was the dude who came up with China's "Great Leap Forward" in which he wanted to compete with his neighbor's in the production of steel and other interests. He chose industry over agriculture, and that resulted in a famine, killing about 20 million people.
You might wanna confirm that, but I think it's accurate.
Mao at least had that Little Red Book that he followed. Obama treats our guiding document, the Constitution, like a handkerchief. Though to be fair, so has almost every American politician of the last 50 years.
It's often been said that Communism killed approximately 100 million people during the years of the Cold War, so 20 million in Mao's column might not be that far off the mark.
And that would have come in the wake of the nearly 20-40 million Chinese thought to have died in the Second World War at the hands of the Japanese, Chinese Warlords, the Kuomintang, starvation, disease, etc., no less.
Post a Comment