How to Frame a Politically Correct Thanksgiving Blessing

During this brief respite during which we are reminded to “give thanks” for the blessings in our lives, I was curious as to how such blessings might be appropriately framed within the context of our increasingly politically correct world. In the old days (just a few years ago), it was easy … you just thanked God.

Much to the undoubted dismay of many progressive thinkers, even President Clinton used to invoke God. During his mea culpa concerning the Monica Lewinski scandal, President Clinton said, "This has gone on too long, cost too much and hurt too many innocent people. Now, this matter is between me, the two people I love most -- my wife and our daughter -- and our God. I must put it right, and I am prepared to do whatever it takes to do so."

One can only guess that the name of God might have been spoken on a number of occasions during the actual affair itself, but that is separate from the issue at hand. Besides, by today’s standards, President Clinton is probably viewed as a conservative … so his beliefs shouldn’t really count.

Heaven forbid we thank God for anything today (… oops, old habits are hard to break). To do so would risk the ire of the ACLU and similarly predisposed intellectual giants (who surprisingly can’t seem to entertain even the possibility of a superior being or life force). With a liberal agenda that is increasingly stripping away the individual freedoms that apparently stand in the way of establishing a more benign and amorphous society, giving up God is a small price to pay.

After all, what did the framers of the Constitution know anyway? They probably weren’t thinking clearly when they drafted the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof …” Hey, it was just their first Amendment. They probably hadn’t quite gotten the “hang” of it. I’m sure they really meant to include the phrase with which we have all become so familiar … “There shall be a separation of church and state” … which, by the way, does not appear anywhere in the Constitution.

In any case, here’s my pass at a politically correct Thanksgiving blessing:

Dear Me (note: it is more appropriate PC to reference “self” rather than the Almighty),

Thank Me for My work ethic, or lack thereof, and for the bounty it brought to Me and My family unit or individual household … or for that bounty which was delivered through the hard work of others and redistributed to Me and My family unit or individual household by My government. If such rewards were derived as a result of My direct contribution to the betterment of society, thank Me for my efforts. If such rewards were derived through the redistribution of wealth created by the tireless efforts others, thank Me for having the willingness not to contribute in a meaningful way … thereby unselfishly creating the opportunity to fulfill the charitable desires of others. Thank Me also for submissively acquiescing to the relinquishment of My individual freedom of choice, as well as the freedom of choice of others, to support an evolving society in which a small and reasonably inexperienced minority of individuals make choices for us. Thank Me for My health, which may soon be protected as directed by others; for the patience to wait long periods of time to see a physician; and for My understanding in the event that I am told that I do not merit the available care. Thank Me for embracing the peace and safety of My country while condemning its past efforts to ensure that such unbridled expectations are met, and similarly, while lauding public apologies made to other countries whose peace and safety was also enhanced by such actions. And, dear Me … thank Me for accepting political correctness, surrendering my beliefs to more vocal minorities, and allowing decisions to be made that will tax the economic and emotional wherewithal of generations to come … long after I’m gone.

Amen and/or Awomen.

*****

Sorry! I just can’t do this, so …

Happy Thanksgiving and God bless!

Copyright © 2009, Dr. T.J. O’Hara

How to Avoid a $9 Trillion Deficit

In fiscal year 2008, the federal government recorded a total budget deficit of $455 billion, which was $293 billion more than the deficit incurred in 2007. While this increase occurred with a Democratic-controlled House of Representatives and Senate, all right-minded people (… or should that be all left-minded people?) know that George W. Bush was solely responsible for this deficit. Thank God that President Obama arrived on the scene to save our economy “from the brink” (or should I have said, “Thank goodness” since it’s politically incorrect to “thank God” for anything anymore). Luckily, he also has Vice President Biden at his side to monitor the well-thought out economic stimulus program since “Nobody messes with Joe!” As a result, we cut the deficit to about $1.8 trillion.

What? You’re telling me that $1.8 trillion is nearly four times MORE debt? You’re kidding, right? Hmmmm … the next thing you’re going to tell me is the $9 trillion deficit that’s being projected for 10 years from now is even bigger! How much is $9 trillion any way?

Let’s see: If I earned something in excess of minimum wage … let’s say $9.00 per hour … and worked 40 hours per week, I’d make $18,720 per year. At that rate, assuming I started working at birth, I’d only have to live to be about 481 million years old to pay off the debt (not including interest). Okay, that seems a bit extreme … even with improved healthcare.

What if I was a union worker or got an immediate raise “because of my promise” (in the spirit of Nobel) and was paid $9,000,000 per hour? Then, I’d only have to live to be 481 years old and work 1 million hours. I guess I’d really have to like my job!

It looks like establishing a $9 trillion deficit might be worth more than a casual conversation. I mean … we’re talking $9,000,000,000,000. That’s 9 followed by 12 zeroes. So, if I were President, what would I do? Is there an alternative? The good news is, under my plan, we can reduce the projected deficit, eliminate unemployment and, in fact create a single class of “rich” people.

“Too good to be true,” you say? Consider that the last census (2007) said there are 281,421,906 citizens in the United States and that the average household size is 2.59 people. That means there are approximately 115,830,120 households in our country. As President, I would declare a “state of emergency” and ordain the need for an immediate Economic Stimulus Program (“ESP” for short) to save us from the situation I “inherited.” Using ESP, I would decree each household to be a government agency unto itself (thereby eliminating unemployment), and I would have Congress provide $250,000 to each and every household (thereby eliminating poverty). All for a cost of only $27,164,276,640,927.

But wait … you say $27 trillion and change is more than $9 trillion? You may be right. I was never particularly good at math (which is why I won’t release my college transcripts), but it doesn’t matter! You see: with a household income of $250,000, everybody is “rich” by definition … and nobody likes the rich! Going back to the days of a 70% tax on those bastards, the government recovers $19,014,993,648,649. That means the real cost to the government is only $8,149,282,992,278 after we collect the taxes ... and that, my friends, is less that $9 trillion.

Eureka! I’ve done it. I’ve reduced the debt, eliminated unemployment and poverty, and made every single American household “rich.” Quick … somebody give me the Nobel Prize for Economics.

The really cool aspect of this is that no one has to work for a living other than a small group of IRS employees (to collect the taxes) and the Congressional leadership and me so that our country has people to attend state functions with the political hierarchy of less fortunate countries. In return for our diligent efforts on behalf of our citizens, we would of course be exempt from taxes, mandated flu shots, and public option plans for healthcare, retirement, etc.

Over time, the cost of ESP will go down. As our Nation’s demographics shift when Baby Boomers are replaced by less numerically prolific generations, there will be fewer households to fund. With everyone will being “rich,” the expense associated with public education can be reduced or eliminated since there will be less motivation to learn anything. Law enforcement costs should also go down because there will be little reason to rob, steal, mug, burglarize, etc. Even healthcare cost should decline as the stress of having to earn a living will have been eradicated, and citizens will have more time to relax and gain a disproportionate “balance” in their lives.

This is all good news because I really didn’t know how to sustain the program over time when I first thought of it. If it weren’t for the demographic shift and all of the future cost savings that make ESP “deficit neutral,” I would have had to defer the start of this program until the end of my term, so any adverse consequences would become the problem of my successor. Then again, if for any reason my program doesn’t work, maybe we can just throw a TARP over it.

2009 (C) Dr. T.J. O'Hara