The Home Depot Liberates The US Free Market From The Hands Of Private Enterprise Profit Dependency!

Swaying to the sleepy jazz guitar based sounds of NPR loosing a fight to it's current, and more Tourettes-prone rival, Fox News, I received an email that shocked myself, and the country as a whole. As I rushed immediately out of my bipartisan bed, put on my liberty boxers, and made my way to the freedom thrown where I sat occupied dropping a democracy deuce, I made the call and confirmed what seemed impossible and yet obviously inevitable. Congress had passed legislation that single-handedly allowed 'The Home Depot' to bail out the American free-market system of economics!Now, it's been a long road. For those of you that have suffered through a Fox News-like amnesia, I'll go ahead and stumble through it with you for just a moment.

It all began after the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, or as most of the American populace knows it, the 'Holy Crap Did We Just Spend 700 Billion Dollars To Bail Out A Bunch Of Rich Assholes' Act... of 2008. What this piece of legislation did was appoint the United States Department of the Treasury the authority to establish and manage the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), which in turn led to the US buying up to $700 billion of troubled bank assets to avoid bankrupting the countries biggest financial institutions. Such an event would've crippled the American economy enough to compare it to a kid who can't swim well, has a large rock tied to his ankle, but decides that soggy twinkies floating in the middle of a moldy lake is worth the risk. The legislation itself was born out of response to the 2008 mortgage crisis, where millions of people were hoodwinked into buying homes they couldn't afford by banks that knew they couldn't afford them, but handed out the bad loans to make outstanding profits in the short term. It was at this point where the outcry against large government began. People immediately blamed the new President of the United States, Barack Obama, for the piece of legislation, citing his affiliation with the American Socialist Party as a problem. Still the bigger problem, and thank God for American leaders and citizens alike being intelligent enough to recognize and do something about it in a typical unbiased and productive fashion, was clearly the dependency of the American economy on private bank profits.

Austan Goolsbee, yes the man's name is actually Goolsbee, was taking a lot of heat in that time as he chaired Obama's Council of Economic Advisers. In an interview in May 2009, when asked about the governments plan to address the issue, Mr. Goolsbee replied "We have an idea we're working on that would not detriment the banks, [which we own], and holds the American people's best interest at heart." The genius economic foresight of the Obama administration, as well as the coming together of liberals and conservatives incited by these economic hardships, is arguably the single strongest hand in the power play the federal government would put on the banks that had nearly crippled the United States.

The federal government then went on what history would call the "Ghost Hand" campaign where the government instituted an 'absolute zero' in terms of regulation on the banks who had received $700 billion in relief from the American people. They did this believing that at heart the heads of these institutions were greedy bastards... and they were right. We've all heard of the massive foreclosures that ensued where literally millions of people were put out of their homes. The banks had instituted a robo-sign policy where most of the foreclosure documents were hardly reviewed before being signed off, approving the foreclosures of millions of homes and in turn millions of people were thrown on the street. The Obama plan took like a gull to the wind as our capitalist system worked it's charm. With zen-like wisdom... they did absolutely nothing.

"The greatest asset of the free market is that people have always and will always decide what's important to the market.", said Austan Goolsbee when asked his take on strengths of the market in a press conference this afternoon, after 'The Home Depot Bailout' was signed into law by President Obama. "Americans did what we've always done. We chose what was important in our market."

And that we did! As families by the millions were thrown onto the street by a rigged bank-profit based system, people took to their local Home Depots and incited what is now being called 'The Brown Box Hike'. As I'm sure you already know, Home Depot sells Large Moving Boxes (LMB's) measuring 4.5 Cubic Ft. for $1.37 each. At those prices, homeless Americans took to their local Home Depots and purchased LBMs by the millions, building shanty towns all over the country with them. The Home Depot in turn saw a rise in revenue approximated around $178 billion in the first six months of the 'robo-sign foreclosures'. In turn the Home Depot stock, (HD), soared from it's tenure at $31.40 a share up 2,140 points to $2171.40 a share. The Home Depot, in order to capitalize on this new instant demand, built and opened new sites in record time and hired three-quarters of the countries unemployed workers in 2010, dropping the national unemployment rate from 9.6% to under 3%! Still, there was a stir amongst officials about Americans being back at work. Fearful lawmakers cringed at the idea of the new work force inciting a perpetual drop and rise of the markets as they followed their materialistic American dream back to the mortgages they'd been forced out of. But Goolsbee held tight to his plan despite panic in the ranks, for he had prepared for the raw power of a previously ill-equipped weapon in American economics. The power of the American trend!

Despite people being able, via HD employment, to afford their mortgages, shanty towns had become the new substitute for city life! A more compact, reasonably spacious, and yet decently accommodating LMB from Home Depot was just as good as a flat in New York City ever was! I wouldn't have to tell you the perks, but here's a couple pleasant reminders! Less traffic, not a single person had bought a car in almost a year, (not much need for one in such tight quarters.) And the conservative battle cry rang more than ever as the people literally "LIVED WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THEIR MEANS!" People were excited to work again and no one wanted to return to the old tales of high rises and big city flats. People were all about the shanty! Here Goolsbee instituted the final part of his plan.

The banks, by September 2010, had thrown everyone out of their homes so they can resell and not loose money from defaulted mortgage payments. But now that no one wanted a mortgage, the banks were useless and broke, as were the bank's new owners the American government. So Goolsbee swept to quick action and propositioned that The Home Depot buy the American government's assets and bail out the American free market system of economics! Today, they did just that! We are no longer dependent on those greedy bankers! We can now depend on the nice orange aprons at The Home Depot! And as I awoke in my bipartisan bed of plastic Home Depot bags, and made my way to my freedom thrown, (a Medium Moving Box (MMB) measuring 3 cubic feet, (only $.47 with the employee discount!)),I did so in my liberty boxers made from white colored HD plastic bags to drop my democratic deuce when the call was made and it was confirmed. The American dream was back on track, and America can prosper as it's now rid of it's dependency on profiting private enterprises! And in every 4.5 cubic feet of moving box across the country, a truly free market and an American dream lives on!

This truth that our free market can now operate truly as a free market, where every American can fail or succeed equally depending on their private assets and talents, unlimited by a rigged system made to benefit those who can never fail, that brings us today's Less Than Modest Proposal.

There Ain't No Party Like A T Party 'Cause A T Party Don't Stop!

If you live in Boston, around the Boston area, or have ever taken a single step in the New England region, you probably have a very close connection to the movement that is sweeping the nation currently. Yes you've probably heard all the crazy stories from the base ball bat cleaning practices to the rampant witchcraft being performed, but all of it is made possible only by America's new darling, a party we here in Boston know and love the most, the T Party! The events orchestrated by this concentration of mental and often unintelligible people that society has coined "T Baggers", are equally as bizarre as the T Baggers themselves. Now, everyone knows where the name comes from, especially if you take up residence here in Boston, and you frequent the harbor where "Tea Bagging" was first conceived! But this movement is taking across to cities and metro systems all over the country! Yes, the T party has been seeing it's rhetoric coming almost systematically in and out of the mouths of American political pundits and news casters since it's inception, when a bunch of displeased Americans were "sick of the same old practices and looking for a new way to please themselves."

I caught up with a spokesman for the original T Party here in Boston, Rudey Beaver, at the Semi-Outdoor Boston Jockstrap Rally (SOB JR) last Thursday at the Hynes Convention Center to discuss the T Party movement and it's almost perpetually progressing influence. "We're a people brought together by the ideals of the original 'T Baggers', men like Jefferson, Washington, and Adams", said Mr. Beaver. "Bottom line, we stand for less government. We don't want to be restricted by administrations that have lost touch with the American people." And most of the American populace would agree, restriction is definitely not on the tea bagging docket. But what exactly is the T Party? What do they do? What do they stand for and how do they manifest their opinions? Mr. Beaver had some food for thought on the lot of inquiry. "The T Party is a movement named and recognized for it's iconic events. These events, here in Boston, usually take place on the T where T Baggers, after long hours of pre-assembly, convene on the T and exercise their American right to free speech and assembly." When asked what other criticisms of the current local, state, and federal government the T Party may have, Mr. Beaver seemed a tad ill at ease with the line of questioning. "The T Party is concerned with American freedom, sir", he said when I asked what makes up the party's political platform. "We are fiscal and social conservatives gathered to make a stand for what we believe in. Any question anyone may ask about our core beliefs can be answered with a quick glance at our 'Contract By America'." The 'Contract By America' is a document quite few people have seen really. Written in half red pen, half 'Mac-and-cheese' colored pencil, it outlines the beliefs of the T Party down to 10 simple agenda items the T Party demands all representatives of government at any level follow. Unfortunately the bright yellowish nature of most of the document's font, coupled with a large coffee stain at the upper third of the document, deemed it illegible for my purposes of examination.

Though Mr. Beaver was short for time to elaborate on these issues, I was able to schedule a meeting with T Party head political strategist Clara DeTurtoga. When asked about the fiscal legislations supported by the T Party, Mrs. DeTurtoga replied "Our organization supports fiscal conservatism. That means less spending which in turns means permanent and increasing tax cuts." When asked about the obvious effects lowering taxes would have on increased government borrowing, Mrs. DeTurtoga replied "Well if we just stopped spending so much, we wouldn't have to borrow." When asked about the services that would be affected by the loss of funds and how the failing of the banking system without the bail-out would have meant the failing of the American economic system altogether, Mrs. DeTurtoga seemed confused and began to speak to her assistants in pig-latin before she excused herself from the meeting citing a scheduling conflict. While I was unable to seek out conference with any other T Party representatives, I was still able to meet with a couple T Baggers themselves!

Stacy and Owen Park are a married couple native to the Boston area and currently residing in Back Bay. I was able to ask them about their political views outside of a T stop where a T Party demonstration would be taking place later that night. "The current President and his entire administration along with the elites of the democratic party is what's wrong with the American system of governance today.", said Mr. Park as he held close to his scarlet foam 'T' finger. "This 'T' finger and this movement is a living statement saying 'We're here and we have a voice, and you can't stop us... until 12:30am when the T closes down... But that's ok because we'll be here tomorrow... maybe... if we can get a sitter.." Mrs. Park had equally strong sentiments on the T Party events. "I feel these events best explain what we're going for in a political sense. Freedom. Freedom is the be all end all for us. And if we can't have it, then we're going to party on the T until we can have it." Still it's these events along with their awkward political ideals that put this movement in jeopardy of loosing the quick relevance it's received in the American socio-political scene. There seems to be a big disconnect with the ideals being preached by the T Party and the T Parties themselves. "It is our right granted to us by the greatest men in our country's history.", said Mrs. Park before her and her husband made their way underground. "The right to speak our minds in assembly!"

And assemble they do! Anyone who has ever been caught trying to get home after a long friday night or tuesday night or sometimes even monday night will probably encounter the T Party on their way home. It may be a less than quaint and inescapable bout of words where the sober individual will not understand what the party stands for, or maybe just a T Bagger regurgitating his or her 'political ideals' all over your shoes. Here in Boston, the locals have coined a term to describe the encounters with the T Bagging populace. "Scrotumnizing", said Boston native and Suffolk Prof. of Sociology Dr. Ezra Brooks when asked about the term, "Is the act of coming across a T Bagger and finding his or her inability to communicate their political agenda to be the most potent asset to the interaction as a whole." Mr. Brooks, who claims to be amongst the casualties of last Tuesday's October 19th T Party, had this to say on the encounter: "It was horrible. I've never been so thoroughly confused. It was like they were angry drunk children who had no understandable point to make and yet felt the need to voice a loud and unintelligent opinion rather than propose an idea that makes any kind of sense. I exited the train 12 stops early and had to walk home for about an hour in the cold just to get away from it, but I couldn't escape the smell of sweaty... Well.. You know... The air was filled with the musky smell from sweaty T Party-ers, so much so that I could taste it in my mouth.. The..You know.."

These movements, whether you agree or disagree with them in any way, are a clear and present response to the lack of satisfaction with our current and past governance. While it is always an act of patriotism to respect and defend the rights of others and to use your rights to voice your own worries and concerns, it is also a civic responsibility to do so responsibly and to fully understand what it is that we are saying in the event that we do say it. It is this desperate attempt to relinquish our anger with our governance, albeit in the form of angry belligerent protesters with insane claims, or in the form of crazy blame games and unmindful political movements birthed strictly from the lack of reason afforded to anger that brings us today's Less Than Modest Proposal.

How Punching Massachusettes Children Can Save You Hundreds Of Dollars At Cash Registers Statewide!

On November 2nd, all registered Mass voters have a civil responsibility to hit the ballot boxes and vote not only for the men and women who have invested several weeks and millions of dollars in America's most reliable and glorified name calling contest, but also for state statutes that will line the public policies of our state. One statute specifically has pressed plenty of reasonable dissent in the usual 'monkeys-throwing-shit-at-each-other' traditions that make up our election seasons. You may have heard of it. It may have showered itself into conversations on the T, or in the university halls much like pinata candy green cards at an anchor babies' birthday party. But if you're like millions of voters across the country, odds are you don't give a damn, and you still can't believe House is playing grab ass with Cuddy, that lucky pimp-limping bastard! Regardless, the fajita hot statute this Mass autumn is the highly contested Question 3 AKA the 3% Sales Tax Relief Act AKA the Initiative to Roll Back Sales Tax AKA the Take A Child's Lunch Money Right Now Act. The proposed law, supported by almost Republican Gubernatorial Candidate Christy Mihos and sponsored by The Alliance To Roll Back Taxes, offers an amendment to the state sales tax currently at 6.25% down to 3% in the event that Mass voters rally in it's favor.

It's difficult to deny an effort to pay less cash registers statewide. So why would anyone offer anything but appraisal to such a proposition? Why would anyone, in their own Right mind, offer anything but support for a state statute that would clearly put money back in the pockets of millions of Mass residents and visitors alike? Why would anyone, anyone at all, maybe even... I don't know.. a small child.. maybe even specifically a small child.. Maybe some kind of genetic issues... Maybe his dad was kinda small too, and he doesn't get much in terms of first pick in the after school dodgeball game.. Maybe people call him short and poke him in his little tiny-person face, and he's decided he's going to study his physiologically underprivileged ass off, (be damned that flawed educational system that will make him pay tens of thousands dollars to do so!!), to get back at all of those tall good looking kids all the popular girls in the fifth grade have crushes on.. Yeah.. Why would the wimp kid slump into Napoleonic fetal position under his nuclear winter fearing desk at the idea of such a law?! Could it be, as the Gates Foundation warns on their article: 'Top Ten Fast Facts About Post-Secondary Education', conveniently located on their website, (www.gatesfoundation.org), because "The average cost of tuition and fees at a public four-year college in 2009-10 was $7,020 – a 235-percent increase since 1980-81.", (numbers which many studies strongly suggest are not in line with inflation)?Or could it be that the current cost of post-secondary schooling in conjunction with the fiscal effects officials say the ratification of the 'Question 3' law would impose on elementary and secondary school budgets would mean that tiny Johnny boy better get real used to rejection? I wouldn't know personally, because I'm attractive. Still, for some hardly intelligible reason, plenty of people across the state, especially teachers and public education officials, are standing up against the proposition in an effort to stop a supposed $2.5 billion reduction in local aid for the state.

Critics of the proposed law argue that the kind of loss observed by a "yes" vote would deplete all public services enough to give us nightmares of FEMA showing up fashionably late to our "Oh Lord Please Help Us We're In Dire Need!" Mardi Gras party . The indiscernible verbal ass kickings on the subject appear to come down to a fundamental disagreement in the country, radiating in every election this fall. Taxes. In Massachusetts, a historical reference is never lost during these debates, as proved by the vice president of the Massachusetts Package Store Association Ron Maloney when claiming that the recent tax on alcohol in the state has already contributed to a large drop in his store's sales, suggesting that without implementing the law Question 3 proposes, the situation may become dire. "Forty to nearly fifty percent of what you pay for a bottle of alcohol is tax. I remember some guys throwing some tea into the harbor over just such an issue", said the gentleman in an interview with Metro West Daily News Correspondent Brittany Danielson. And he's damned right! I too remember some guys who threw some tea into the harbor over not being able to get shit-faced at tax free prices! Who wants to think about paying taxes to big government when they're out getting plastered and trolling for BU undergrads who may be confused and intrigued by the thought of experimentation?!

Still the opposition stands stronger than the hold Rush Limbaugh's ass has on Michael Steele's pursing lips. While the concern is entirely composed of the depletion of all state funded public services, the greatest concern on the side of the naysayers seems to be the proposition's effect on the public school systems of Mass. It is specifically this argument that I find as difficult to keep down as a drunken late night menu order after a trip to the Allston bar scene and a night with a Craigslist "masseuse".

Strong and true patriotic Americans, such as the Boston Herald Editorial Staff in their October 7th Editorial 'Yes on Question 3', are standing up in defense of this proposition saying: "Sometimes a proposition is known by the enemies it makes - and lining up against the tax rollback are all the usual suspects." God bless them for standing up against the radical left wing elementary, middle, and high school students who want to kick-start their American dream with a valid and adequately funded public education system! These parasitic little mini-persons hardly understand the real America composed of what patriots like Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck have so rightly named 'The Folks'! Seriously.. They actually hardly understand 'The Folks'... In their ill deserved defense, a lot of them just got over their object permanence dilemma. And in all fairness.. 'The Folks' hardly understand 'The Folks'... 'The Folks' seem harder to recognize and locate than diversity in the history of US presidents... Though there is that one guy... But he's a socialist.... Regardless, the Boston Herald Editorial Staff is making a strong patriotic point! As such, you know the radical left wing media is going to claim their 'disconnect' from the American voter. So let's go straight to the source and access the thoughts of voting supporters for some feedback!

Reporter and editor Nancy Reardon, in an article made available on Wickedlocal.com entitled 'Sales Tax Cut Ballot Question Is Causing A Stir', spoke to Sandra Plasical, 18, a student at Quincy College and a supporter of the law Question 3 proposes. She was quoted on the policy as saying, "It benefits people who aren't financially stable and people who are financially stable probably don't care." And she's right. The most financially stable people in this country are elementary and secondary school pupils! For the most part they don't even pay taxes! They can't even reach the counter where the registers are! Why would they care about a tax decrease, (other thanall the points previously outlined)? Even further in the same article, Reardon questioned Quincy resident Dan Cotter, 30. The sir had this to say on the matter: ""It's a tough economy, and I think that Massachusetts already has a pretty high sales tax". And that's a damned good point Mr. Cotter! Massachusetts, with a 6.25% sales tax, as Reardon adequately points out, "Falls in the middle nationwide". It is in this regard that we as Bay State citizens need to heed the wise words of Lil Jon & The Eastside Boyz and "Get Low", (feel free to disregard their slightly less relevant policies on "Windows","Walls", and the target route of "sweat").

Yes the consensus seems to be that we should "Get Low"-er, as Question 3 proposes, than the state of Alabama which currently employs a 4% sales tax, (though the state also employs additional local taxes which can "Get Low" to the tune of a combined total sales tax of 12%, (as provided by the Alabama Department of Revenue)). Or maybe we should try and compete with the lowest state taxes in the country, states like Alaska, Montana, New Hampshire, Oregon, and O'Donnell's seemingly 'wicked' Delaware, all of which employ a 0% state sales tax! Further research revealed small discrepancies to the argument unfortunately as Alaska, Oregon, and New Hampshire municipalities often levy up to 7.5%, 8%, and 9% sales taxes respectively. But don't let the facts stand in your way! Fox News doesn't, and they make a killing!

The most important fact is that the passing of Question 3 will put on average $688 a year back into the pocket of every Massachusetts resident, according to www.Bollotpedia.org. So what's the big deal? Who cares if we have to cut school programs and maybe even close a couple dozen schools to get our thousands of tiny increments that, though worthless in and of themselves, will amount to about $700 dollars at the end of the year? It's these tough decisions that are testing the values of our country's ill informed and yet highly entertained voters. And it's this argument on the effects of the proposition on public school funds that brings us to todays Less Than Modest Proposal.