The American Divorce Agreement.
This email, written by a “Millenial” is making the rounds. I think you will enjoy it as much as I did. Thanks to GP Reader Dan in NY for sending this to me!
American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists and Obama supporters, et al:
We have stuck together since the late 1950’s, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has run its course.
Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right so let’s just end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our own way.
Here is a model separation agreement:Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by landmass each taking a portion. That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that, it should be relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes.
We don’t like redistributive taxes so you can keep them. You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU. Since you hate guns and war, we’ll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA and the military.
You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore and Rosie O’Donnell (You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all three of them).
We’ll keep the capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies,Wal-Mart and Wall Street. You can have your beloved homeboys and illegal aliens. We’ll keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, greedy CEO’s and rednecks. We’ll keep the Bibles and give you NBC and Hollywood ..You can make nice with Iran and Palestine and we’ll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us. You can have the peaceniks and war protesters. When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we’ll help provide them security.
We’ll keep our Judeo-Christian values.. You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism and Shirley McClain. You can also have the U.N.. but we will no longer be paying the bill.
We’ll keep the SUVs, pickup trucks and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Subaru station wagon you can find.
You can give everyone healthcare if you can find any practicing doctors. We’ll continue to believe healthcare is a luxury and not a right. We’ll keep The Battle Hymn of the Republic and the National Anthem. I’m sure you’ll be happy to substitute Imagine, I’d Like to Teach the World to Sing, Kum Ba Ya, or We Are the World.
We’ll practice trickle down economics and you can give trickle up poverty your best shot. Since it often so offends you, we’ll keep our history, our name and our flag.
Anyone know a good divorce attorney??
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
53 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Some of those actually sound like decent trades. Of course we’d keep the liberal judges and ACLU, am I meant to see that as a threat? Rednecks and Sarah Palin going too? Less Bibles more contemporary entertainment (the latter not being brilliant, but the Bible was a snoozefest)? Sounds fun.
Above all, if this idiot is going too, I say don’t let the door hit you on the way out. No one will miss you.
Comment by Serenity — February 4, 2010 @ 8:04 am - February 4, 2010
to Serenity….
Lord knows you were done a disservice in your youth…… cause rather then let you sleep in on Sundays, had someone bothered to knock you up side the head with a Bible, you’d be singing a much different tune today.
Comment by Spartann — February 4, 2010 @ 8:20 am - February 4, 2010
I’m in. I just want to be clear that as a child of this divorce, I want to live with Conservative Dad, not whacked out lefty mom and her new boyfriend, the “spiritual healer” who lives on an Indian Reservation.
Comment by V the K — February 4, 2010 @ 8:31 am - February 4, 2010
And I want Dad to have sole custody. No visitation or anything.
Comment by V the K — February 4, 2010 @ 8:32 am - February 4, 2010
“We’ll continue to believe healthcare is a luxury”
Is this what you guys really believe?
Comment by Tano — February 4, 2010 @ 9:26 am - February 4, 2010
This article is not conservative. I would like a divorce from conservatives who want to abandon Jesus and His teachings as a moral framework. The conservatism in this article is about death and violence. For me, conservative is pro-life. I believe in the seamless garment, of the sanctity of life from conception until natural death:
http://www.americancatholic.org/Newsletters/CU/ac0798.asp
We don’t have to see health care as a luxury or a right–it’s a moral obligation put on us by God for those who have to help those who don’t have.
We don’t have to respond to threats with violence.
We can assimilate and welcome the undocumented worker–make the illegal legal by simply changing the law. Sodomy laws have been changed–why not immigration laws? Are gays the only group who gets to change unjust laws?
We can abolish the death penalty as ineffective. There is no situation where we can’t separate the wrongdoer from society to protect society–we don’t need to kill anyone.
We can cherish the unborn, whether gay or with Down’s syndrome or otherwise potentially unwanted. We can cherish the elderly until God calls them home and be happy to pay for every new day of their life.
I am tired of conservatism’s lack of compassion. I am glad that the Pope and other religious leaders such as Archbishop Schori and Archbishop Hanson offer a better vision.
Comment by Ashpenaz — February 4, 2010 @ 9:59 am - February 4, 2010
Um, the Alaskan moron, rednecks, the NRA, and “Judeo-Christian values” (which don’t exist, because the two faiths are VERY different) don’t contribute anything to society. I mean, what would they possibly be contributing? We won’t miss Wal-Mart, since none of us shop there anyway. Or have you missed that whenever Wal-Mart tries to enter a liberal community like Manhattan, we slam the door in their faces? Even in my Southern hometown, Target is the choice for progressives. Wal-Mart is trashy, and besides, it’s way out in the suburbs which, you know, why, god why would we want to go there?
Comment by Evan Hurst — February 4, 2010 @ 11:05 am - February 4, 2010
What is really touchingly sad about this post is Bruce’s naive belief that all these years of liberal-bashing might have earned him a place on the great conservative ark.
You just know though, that once the lawyers sit down to hammer out the details of this divorce, that one of the first items on the agenda for the right will be to dump ALL the gays and lesbians into Liberal-land. And that means you too, Bruce.
So maybe it is time to start making a bit nicer, eh?
Comment by Tano — February 4, 2010 @ 10:06 am - February 4, 2010
“one of the first items on the agenda for the right will be to dump ALL the gays and lesbians into Liberal-land.”
Yeah, right. You just keep telling yourself that, Tano.
Comment by pst314 — February 4, 2010 @ 10:45 am - February 4, 2010
“We’ll continue to believe healthcare is a luxury – Is this what you guys really believe?”
I think the writer was just at a loss for the right antonym for right/entitlement.
Comment by pst314 — February 4, 2010 @ 10:46 am - February 4, 2010
“I am tired of conservatism’s lack of compassion.”
So in order to be “compassionate” America must pay welfare benefits for the whole freaking world? Sheesh.
Comment by pst314 — February 4, 2010 @ 10:47 am - February 4, 2010
Lefties would never, never ever agree to such a divorce.
ACLU… Oprah, Michael Moore and Rosie O’Donnell… homeboys and illegal aliens… NBC and Hollywood… Iran and Palestine… peaceniks and war protesters… Scientology and the U.N… all those things are *parasites* on firearms, the cops, the NRA and the military, capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wal-Mart and Wall Street, hot Alaskan hockey moms, greedy CEO’s and rednecks, Judeo-Christian values, etc. Since when do parasites willingly divorce their hosts?
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — February 4, 2010 @ 10:55 am - February 4, 2010
Why would I want Islam? It’s pretty much just Christianity with a different prophet.
Why would I make nice with Iran? An oppressive regime that imposes its religious beliefs on everyone and punishes things like being gay or thinking for yourself? Sounds a lot like American conservative Christianity.
Why would I want Scientology? Brainwashing? Anti-science? Those are conservative values, of course. No silly, we’re the ones who like science. Remember? You’re the ones who think global warming is a vast conspiracy and that evolution was invented by the devil to turn people away from Jesus.
Have fun in your batshit insane, illiterate theocracy, teaching your children that Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs five thousand years ago. Of course, homosexuality would no doubt be illegal in your religion-based right wing world.
btw you guys do know that Ayn Rand was an atheist… right…?
Comment by Eshto — February 4, 2010 @ 11:01 am - February 4, 2010
P.S. For the record, I am tired of Leftism’s lack of compassion.
There is nothing remotely compassionate about punishing those who create jobs (thus killing jobs), or about using government force to rape the pocketbooks and lives of others, living off others parasitically which is the Left’s fundamental goal and program.
True compassion is in letting people be free and pursue happiness. Though no one is perfect, conservatives are closer to that than leftists. (Which is probably why conservatives give more to charity. Committed leftists want you to *think* they’re nice people, i.e. they preen and play at being nice people. Conservatives, though not perfect, are somewhat more likely to be nice people in their actions, i.e. in reality.)
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — February 4, 2010 @ 11:02 am - February 4, 2010
As if! Like the conservative freakshow is SOOOOO going to give you gay “patriots” a bunk on their bigoted ark. You’d be the floorshow, babycakes. You’d be walking the plank the minute they spotted a pod of Orcas.
Bon voyage. Enjoy your new home in Palindia — if they let you in. And remember, you won’t be missed.
Comment by Auntie Dogma — February 4, 2010 @ 11:11 am - February 4, 2010
This post is nice.
It shows many on the right actually believe their hyperbolic puke.
Its proof many on the moonbat right truly have gone insane. Instead of dealing with their insanity and realizing that there are others with a different world view then their own, they want to divorce themselves from reality.
Bruce, there is no need to take any landmass. All you need to do is check yourself into the asylum. There you can work on your hate issues and understand you don’t have to divorce yourself from society to find happiness. Its OK to have a neighbor who thinks different than you.
Comment by gillie — February 4, 2010 @ 11:17 am - February 4, 2010
And even if they allow the gay wingnuts to stay in the newly formed conservative nation where everything is spelled like it sounds, who will they date? There’s only like 12 of them who are so hardcore that they’d want to go there. So I hope they’re compatible with each other, because otherwise, there will be NO fish in the sea.
Comment by Evan Hurst — February 4, 2010 @ 11:21 am - February 4, 2010
And, all the moonbats fly out of the woodwork in their frothing, spittle-flecked frenzy. Good post, Bruce! 🙂
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — February 4, 2010 @ 11:22 am - February 4, 2010
Yes reading the posts from the liars like Tano, the fools like gillie, and the folks who have no clue is quite entertaining
Comment by The_Livewire — February 4, 2010 @ 11:33 am - February 4, 2010
Wait, so V to the K, if your theory is correct, that liberal states destroy commerce, why is it that most blue states pay far more into the federal government than they get back in benefits, while Alabama and Tennessee and Georgia and South Carolina, and many other red states, are essentially welfare states?
Alabama wouldn’t have ROADS if the liberals of New York didn’t subsidize their existence.
And yes, Wal-Mart does destroy small business. This is not debatable, so I’m not going to waste my precious life arguing it. You, presumably, have access to the liberal-created Google, so you can find the information for yourself.
Comment by Evan Hurst — February 4, 2010 @ 12:36 pm - February 4, 2010
We won’t miss Wal-Mart, since none of us shop there anyway
So all the poor that liberals care about will have to either lower their standard of living, or live in conservative land because you want to eliminate cheap goods?
And for Ashpenaz the point is there is a difference between voluntarily helping your neighbor, and using force and the threat of jail to force your neighbor to help a 3rd neighbor. That is not “compassion”
I don’t want to live in either place.
But I do wish we could just divide up the world and let everyone live the way they want, instead of trying to force the people around them to live a certain way. But I think even that won’t work, because some country will want to convert all the others to their right way.
Comment by plutosdad — February 4, 2010 @ 11:41 am - February 4, 2010
“So all the poor that liberals care about will have to either lower their standard of living, or live in conservative land because you want to eliminate cheap goods?”
The brightest people in the country would be in liberal land. I’m sure we would find some way to work things out, and we’ll do it without conscioning child slavery in Bangladesh in order to get 5 cheap-ass tchotchkes for a dollar.
It’s notable that when Wal-Mart comes into a small community, it usually destroys the small business there.
Comment by Evan Hurst — February 4, 2010 @ 11:56 am - February 4, 2010
It’s notable that when liberals take over a state, they destroy *all* business there.
I note the gross receipts tax just passed in Oregon is going to kill small businesses, but Wal-Mart can shrug it off. Cui bono?
Comment by V the K — February 4, 2010 @ 11:59 am - February 4, 2010
I take that back… not all businesses suffer under liberal governance. Pawn shops, repo men, and abortion clinics thrive.
Comment by V the K — February 4, 2010 @ 12:02 pm - February 4, 2010
It’s notable that when Wal-Mart comes into a small community, they bring the people affordable goods, which is why the people *voluntarily* shop at Wal-Mart.
Evan seems to believe that poor people ought to be forced to pay high prices for goods. Which, of course, keeps the people poor. Which is how leftists want them. Leftists want people to be poor, degraded and dependent on government.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — February 4, 2010 @ 12:04 pm - February 4, 2010
No walmart doesn’t destroy small business, any more than cheap foreign labor destroys american jobs. It may cause certain small businesses to go away or force them to change, and new small businesses will rise up to provide goods and services that walmart does not offer. that’s how it always is. Now if there are government laws (like tax breaks, etc) that favor walmart over another, those have to go. Most monopoly is due to government intervention, not competition.
Yeah also let’s not let people in Bangladesh get jobs unless they are high paying and fulfillng. They’d be happier doing nothing living off of charity until you come up with the “right” sort of jobs. Or slaving away because we can’t allow modern technology to be used on their farms.
The brightest people in the country would be in liberal land. I’m sure we would find some way to work things out,
Ah, yes the technocratic elite will save us with their techno-magic. Forget human behavior we can rise above it.
Throughout history our bettors have been telling us “the old guys who thought they were better than you were wrong, but WE are here to save you from yourselves as well as them”
But the new bettors were not any better than the old. And they never will be.
Comment by plutosdad — February 4, 2010 @ 12:20 pm - February 4, 2010
How about instead we take some leading con activists and beat some lib activists over the heads with them (or vice versa). Frankly I’m not impressed with many of either group and find both to be irritating. And for the record both Wal-Mart & Target are fine with me.
Comment by John — February 4, 2010 @ 12:35 pm - February 4, 2010
Precisely.
It is NO ACCIDENT that the Democrats are the party of big corporate bailouts.
Actually, the stupidest people in the country would be in liberal land. That’s the point of the proposed divorce.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — February 4, 2010 @ 12:36 pm - February 4, 2010
Because the people in blue states elect quasi-socialist wealth redistributers to Congress like Babara Boxer, Dianne Feinstein, Patty Murray, Chuck Schumer, Ted Kennedy and Dick Durbin then they whine when their taxes are redistributed to states that aren’t that stupid.
Comment by V the K — February 4, 2010 @ 12:49 pm - February 4, 2010
“We won’t miss Wal-Mart, since none of us shop there anyway. Or have you missed that whenever Wal-Mart tries to enter a liberal community like Manhattan, we slam the door in their faces? Even in my Southern hometown, Target is the choice for progressives. Wal-Mart is trashy, and besides, it’s way out in the suburbs which, you know, why, god why would we want to go there?”
Evan Hurst, with this comment you’ve revealed your liberal elitist non-compassionate leftist soul. According to you and others like you, the Walmart customers and employees are beneath you. Hardly human. Alas for them!
How nice for you in your cloistered tiny Manhattan apartment.
Comment by Man — February 4, 2010 @ 1:07 pm - February 4, 2010
Wow! Where did you attract all the “f-ing retards”? Now to catch up:
Comment by ThatGayConservative — February 4, 2010 @ 1:15 pm - February 4, 2010
Crap. My points remain valid.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — February 4, 2010 @ 1:15 pm - February 4, 2010
And what’s really “not debatable” is the fact that Wal-Mart has done FAR more for low-income Americans than the liberal left has.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — February 4, 2010 @ 1:18 pm - February 4, 2010
I am committed to working it out. After all, we’re family.
Comment by Jane — February 4, 2010 @ 2:00 pm - February 4, 2010
I think nested quotes are a ‘global conspiracy’ for TGC’s posting 😉
Comment by The_Livewire — February 4, 2010 @ 2:01 pm - February 4, 2010
Within 10 minutes of my house, there’s 2 Walmarts, 2 Targets, a BJ’s Wholesale Club, a Costco, 3 indoor shopping malls and God only knows how many Mom and Pop stores…. the only businesses that go outta business around here , are the ones that don’t deserve to stay in business….
I don’t want to separate from my liberal brethren, I wanna stand along side your lame asses and make you wish I had divorced you…..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7qfnsFxN4s
Comment by Spartann — February 4, 2010 @ 2:06 pm - February 4, 2010
Just to add a touch of dark humor–I bet many of us have seen gays swinging from a rope, especially on Breath Play Day down at the Stonewall rally.
Comment by Ashpenaz — February 4, 2010 @ 2:08 pm - February 4, 2010
I’m glad to see someone else has put these thoughts into words. I’ve felt for a while now that America needs a divorce. It’ll be great to see (Il)Liberal-land prove the wisdom of ‘be careful what you wish for’.
As to the newly-minted, rabid lefty posters. Welcome. The guys here are sure to make mince-meat out of you. Or not. After all, we’re all just stoopid kkkonservatives.
Comment by Brendan In Philly — February 4, 2010 @ 3:37 pm - February 4, 2010
Even in my Southern hometown, Target is the choice for progressives
wow , i totally missed that one.
You know by admitting that you admit you are a pawn of an evil corporate marketing scheme? You realize target marketting was the one that said “instead of lowering prices we’ll sell the same cheap crap but make people think we are upscale” I know this because OfficeMax hired away many top Target marketing people, and they are trying that exact same marketing scheme now.
Funny, “I hate one huge corporate big box conglomerate, but I support this other one”
Comment by plutosdad — February 4, 2010 @ 4:02 pm - February 4, 2010
Alabama wouldn’t have ROADS if the liberals of New York didn’t subsidize their existence.
Even Hayek thought some services were necessary. Few argue otherwise. Though the Swedes get by with private roads. Why are you arguing against straw men? No one is seriously advocating any of the positions you claim we all have.
Comment by plutosdad — February 4, 2010 @ 4:06 pm - February 4, 2010
LOL. It is like an insane DailyKos convention here today!
Welcome to our new communist readers!!
Comment by Bruce (GayPatriot) — February 4, 2010 @ 4:35 pm - February 4, 2010
Wait, so V to the K, if your theory is correct, that liberal states destroy commerce, why is it that most blue states pay far more into the federal government than they get back in benefits, while Alabama and Tennessee and Georgia and South Carolina, and many other red states, are essentially welfare states?
Because, since it costs twice as much to live in NYC as it does in Alabama, people have to make more money to survive; however, since the “progressive” income tax goes only on income amount, not actual purchasing power, these people are taxed proportionately more.
In short, it’s another demonstration of the law of unintended consequences — or, put differently, how liberals’ inability to think anything through prior to doing it or to learn from the past ends up circling around to bite them in the rear.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — February 4, 2010 @ 5:19 pm - February 4, 2010
The brightest people in the country would be in liberal land. I’m sure we would find some way to work things out, and we’ll do it without conscioning child slavery in Bangladesh in order to get 5 cheap-ass tchotchkes for a dollar.
Absolutely. Just look at Zimbabwe. Full of people like Evan who hate big business, who blame white people for everything, who practice mass redistribution of property, and are also led by a narcissistic black tyrant who believes that jacking taxes to the stratosphere and printing money is a good idea.
I have no doubt that “Obamaland” would be just as successful.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — February 4, 2010 @ 5:26 pm - February 4, 2010
Myers-Briggs INTJ types lean strongly Republican, independent, and conservative, and are 37% likely to have an IQ in the top 2%. Put that in your pipe and smoke it, evan, auntie, et al.
http://libertycorner.blogspot.com/2004/03/iq-and-personality.html
http://personalitycafe.com/myers-briggs-forum/5889-personality-type-political-affiliation.html
Comment by Brendan In Philly — February 4, 2010 @ 5:57 pm - February 4, 2010
I always wonder: If New York and New Jersey are so damn great, why do they keep moving down here and Charleston and Savanah and Brevard and Corpus (insert Howard Dean YAAARRGH!!) and other places with low-no taxes?
Comment by ThatGayConservative — February 4, 2010 @ 7:42 pm - February 4, 2010
I wonder, given how apoplectic libs got over insane claims of government spying, if Evan has any comment on “liberal-created Google” partnering with NSA.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — February 4, 2010 @ 8:13 pm - February 4, 2010
I guess Evan scuttled back under his rock when he saw how easily his pat, left-wing cliches were shot down.
Comment by V the K — February 4, 2010 @ 8:52 pm - February 4, 2010
I LOVE that this post made all the liberals’ heads explode. Nothing is quite as funny as a sputtering progressive/liberal.
Comment by Margo — February 4, 2010 @ 9:47 pm - February 4, 2010
I would rephrase that as “We’ll continue to believe healthcare is an individual responsibility and not an entitlement.” Better?
Comment by V the K — February 5, 2010 @ 10:05 am - February 5, 2010
[…] thought of this woman when I reviewed some of the comments to Bruce’s recent post on The American Divorce Agreement which had been caught in our spam filter. They displayed the same type of prejudice as did that […]
Pingback by GayPatriot » Readers Who See the World Through their Prejudices — February 5, 2010 @ 7:03 pm - February 5, 2010
Myers-Briggs INTJ types lean strongly Republican, independent, and conservative, and are 37% likely to have an IQ in the top 2%. Put that in your pipe and smoke it, evan, auntie, et al.
As an INTJ myself, I feel compelled to note that you’re getting that from sample size of 21, which is so hopelessly small that no conclusions can be reached from it.
Comment by Serenity — February 6, 2010 @ 8:53 am - February 6, 2010
Serenity, the top 4 included Republican, Not political, Middle-of-the-road, and Conservative. This made up 15/21 of the sample size. Even with the margin of error due to such a small sample size, one can conclude at least that INTJ’s generally are not liberal democrats.
Comment by Brendan in Philly — February 6, 2010 @ 2:30 pm - February 6, 2010
Serenity, the top 4 included Republican, Not political, Middle-of-the-road, and Conservative. This made up 15/21 of the sample size. Even with the margin of error due to such a small sample size, one can conclude at least that INTJ’s generally are not liberal democrats.
INTJs make up a total of 1.5% of the population. Assuming all participants were American and the population of the United States to be about 300 million, this means 21 out of approximately 4.5 million INTJs in the country were queried.
That’s approximately 0.00004% of the population. I’m not even going to bother calculating a margin of error on that, but I’ve little doubt it would be large enough that there’s more noise than data in this test.
This is just anecdotal evidence, and worthless in a larger sense.
Comment by Serenity — February 7, 2010 @ 10:14 am - February 7, 2010