Another Interview with Senator (Bill) Bushton
Here in our studio overlooking the Potomac, we are fortunate to have with us today Senator William Bushton who kindly consented to have, in his own words, a "down to earth Trump style" interview. The Senator, as we all know, is running for President and has expressed hope that, through this interview, the voters will know where he stands on several complicated foreign and domestic policies, now being considered by foggy bottom. These policies, if enacted, will have far reaching affects on the Nation and on the American people.
Shall we begin, Senator? I see you're wearing a purple tie. Is combining the color of the red and blue ties, that other candidates wore during the Republican Debates (in which you weren't invited, by the way), is your idea of making a symbolic statement?
I'm glad you caught that. Yes, I am wearing a purple tie to show that I am neither in the red or blue faction that is tearing our great country apart. You know, of course, that mixing the colors blue and red, you get purple. This will show that I am not at the extreme nor liberal end of the spectrum of the conservative party. I am running as an Independent. That is the main reason I wasn't invited. Nor will I waste any of the American people's precious time discussing about you know who.
Are you referring to Donald Trump?
I said I wasn't going to discuss that!
Fair enough. Let's get to the meat of the problems facing our nation. What do you think about this treaty with Iran concerning their atomic program and it's military implications, and are you for it or against it?
First, let me explain simply what the treaty basically is: it is a promissory note that the signer, Iran, will halt all activities in the making of atomic weapons. In exchange they get their own money back that is presently tied up in foreign banks. Also, nations will lift their embargo and begin trading with Iran, meaning we will be buying lots of their oil so we can store it underground for arm conflicts we will have with them in the future. In exchange for the oil, they will get paper credits so they can use these credits to arm themselves with the latest conventional weapons so they can defend themselves against an enemy who would like to see Iran destroyed.
You mean Israel and the United States.?
No, no, not us. I'm talking about ISIS. They're the Hatfields to the Iranian McCoys. We give them the means and let them duke it out among themselves. It's a private family matter and we shouldn't interfere. That is why I'm all for the treaty. It's a win-win situation for our nation's businessmen and weapons manufacturers. We get lots of their cheap oil while having set up, and arm, another foe against ISIS, and we kick the atomic can down the road for another ten years. What can be better?
But how can we trust them, even with inspections and drone monitoring, aren't they able to somehow get around that?
You don't get it, do you? Nobody who is anybody seriously gives a crap about wither they cheat or not. And they probably won't. It's not in their interest. Them building an atomic weapon is only smokescreens, all that stuff about time tables, and inspection charts, I mean, stop, and think about it. China have atomic bombs, Israel have an unknown amount, all the European nations have it, Russia's got hundreds, and even those really, REALLY crazy North Koreans have it... so why are we so concern if Iran have just one itty bitty bomb, or even several? We've got thousands. You think Iran is more dangerous than North Korea? The only nation that is really concern is the nation of Israel, and its leader, Netanyahu. Old Ben is really concern, and so would I be, if I was sitting where he is.
Why?
Because if the treaty is signed, then the Jewish nation will suddenly be the potential sacrificial lamb, and Old Ben knows it.
In what way?
Look, there's no way we have a legitimate excuse to go to war with Iran unless it attacks Israel. And the only way Iran will attack Israel is with an atomic weapon secretly bought from North Korea from the money we freed up. This should practically wipe Israel out with the first attack. It is a small country, after all. They hate Israel. Don't you see? It's beyond politics, it's beyond reason, it's personal. Any which way, Israel will get it first.
Of course, we will be enraged when it happens...and we will definitely avenge them by blowing Iran off the map. We will, also, have the bonus of having wiped out our paper debt for all that oil we bought from them. Iran will be no more......but what good is that to Israel? They'd be completely wiped out from the first get go, hundreds of thousand will die, their properties render useless for ages from radiation poisoning. In other words, in signing this treaty, we are gambling with Israel's lives and properties...not ours. That is why Israel is frantically trying to halt the deal. Old Ben want us to go to war with Iran, not sign a treaty.
You make it sound so simple, but let's move on. If you're elected president, what would be your solution to the problem of inequality in the distribution of our nation's wealth.
Would you accept the premise that the poor will always be with us?
That is a cliche in poor taste, especially in a country as rich as ours.
Cliché or not, we have reached a point in our society that we cannot afford NOT to have people living below the poverty line. There is no problem with the distribution of wealth. The country is rich because of rich people. If we begin taxing rich people, like you are hinting, then we won't have rich people. Who, then will donate huge amounts to save children in Africa from malaria? Who will contribute to keeping Public Television alive? Who will sponsor charities to help the homeless? Who will buy U.S. treasury notes by the billions? I mean, I could go on and on.....
And what happens if you raise the living standards of the poor to that of the working middle class? They would form more unions, and unions are mainly there to protect slackers. You get expanded government because government would have to hire more unemployed people because it's the only way they know how to distribute the wealth.
And if you think we have immigrant problems now, think of all those poor people who have now graduated to the middle class and don't want to work in the fields anymore. Our agriculture will suffer. We will have to import even more migrants because somebodies got to pick the tomatoes and harvest the grapes. You know, of course, most poor people don't vote, which is a blessing. But the more they become middle class, the more they would want to go to the polls because they think that is what is expected of them.
And what is wrong with that?
Nothing, if they knew what they were doing. Most of them don't know what they're voting for to begin with. Poor people climbing up to the middle class doesn't mean they got smarter. How many do you think really read the voting pamphlets detailing the propositions? What really happens is that rich people will have to spend their hard earn cash on sound bites to make sure that people will vote intelligently: voting intelligently means to vote what is good for rich people so the country can stay rich and prosperous. Luckily, poor people in the middle class can be swayed so easily with hate propaganda. Hate is good. You can get people riled up to your cause with just a sprinkle of hate. Still. rich people are forced to spend a huge amount of money to make sure that the new middle class do the right thing. Makes all those T.V. and cable people happy...and very rich.
I hate to say this, senator, but, in all due respect, I don't think you have the least notion of what you're talking about.
I thought you said you wanted the truth?
All right then, how do you feel about gun control?
I always carry one.
No comments:
Post a Comment