Wednesday, October 15, 2008

The Fred Program of Re-Education

There are men in American politics, financial circles and media who are in dire need of re-education. These men have positions of great authority, some have been in authority for decades, but they persist in exercising their authority in ways that vary from the merely selfish to the deeply immoral. Much of their behavior is deeply anathema to the American ideal, often to the very American system that they profess to love and serve. They will continue their mischievous, destructive ways after the coming election if they are allowed, and they should be stopped.

The filth and corruption that they spew has contaminated our body politic to the degree that a genuinely decent family man like Barack Obama, a genuinely intelligent, thoughtful politician whose career displays little or no self interest, can be shamelessly denigrated with an endless stream of outright lies, and this can be done not only with impunity, but also with the cooperation of major media outlets, who dishonestly broadcast that both sides are guilty. This shit has got to stop.

The Candidates.

I am talking about men like morbidly obese “values” expert and gambling aficionado, William Bennett; cherubic faux academic and draft-dodger, the oddly named Newt Gingrich; darkly threatening draft-dodger and terror monger, Dick Cheney; draft-dodging punk/bully, Bill O’Reilly; draft-dodging and stock frauding, weirdly disoriented President of the United States, George W. Bush. These men, and many others, were too busy planning their future prosperity to answer their countries clarion call in times of war, but ever since the threat of personal hardship was lifted they have been espousing warfare at the expense of others, and energetically aggrandizing themselves, usually without actually producing anything of value, and often at the direct expense of the American people.

There are lots of younger men too, men who have never been threatened with anything in their lives except the possibility of actually working for a living. I’d recruit people from Wall Street too, and some managed health care folks too, I don’t think that the insurance industry would get away undiminished. I’ll make more of a definitive list after I get the authorization to set up the camp.

The Camp.

Yes, a camp, but I’m not a hard guy, the level of hardship will be very, very low. Unless, that is, you find actual work to be hardship. I admit, my first inclination was to put the camp in North Dakota, way out in the Chinook Wind somewhere, no trees, you know, like Mars with breathable air, but I quickly decided that North Dakota would be unnecessarily punitive. This is only re-education, after all, not some Stalinist Gulag death camp. So I think way out in the woods of Maine is a better idea, maybe have a pretty lake nearby. That would be nice.

I admit, though, that I have read Solzhenitzen (sp), and those Soviets were certainly the geniuses of the concentration camp. The Nazi’s just worked people to death, trusting to an endless supply of death-camp workers. Foolish, really, like it was so easy to make machine gun bullets in long belts that wouldn’t jam in the MG 42’s, their soldiers knew better and wished that the workers were of better quality. The Soviets figured out ways to maximize the work output of inmates who had no interest in the end product. The work of the Nazi’s is of little use to the modern day practitioner, but I have drawn more than a little inspiration from the successes of the Soviets.

The Program.

The program is work. The only political indoctrination will be, shut the fuck up and stop complaining, it’s about fucking time you did some actual work instead of just raising hell by erupting in public for a so-called living. The work, I believe, will be the building of unnecessary walls. Perfectly accurate, beautifully realized walls, made from reinforced concreter, cinder-blocks and bricks, placed in precise rows and perhaps adorned in flowers, when the weather permits. If we run out of space, the work may become the demolition of unnecessary walls, by hand, preserving one hundred percent of the materials for further use, of course.

Here’s where the Soviet experience comes in. How do you get an uncooperative, fat, lazy, brutally stupid, evil minded person, whose life has been devoted to wrecking American society, to build a wall against his will? The answer is simple: you make his nutrition and comfort dependant upon work output. No, I’m not going to starve anybody, this is America after all, not some Soviet death camp. But if a candidate refuses to work, his meals will come two a day. The first will be some decent bread and some thin vegetable soup. The second will be a cup of good, white rice and a piece of fish or something. If your not working, and you’re overweight to begin with, seven hundred or so calories a day should be lavish. Of course, the candidates will all have unlimited access to drinking water and proper sanitation.

Those who work will be fed three proper meals a day. A good breakfast, at about five thirty a.m., if the previous days quota had been met; a nice, hot lunch, if the morning’s quota had been met; and a good, hot dinner after work, about six p.m., if the days quota had been met. With extras if the days quota had been exceeded, extras like magazines, or dessert, or decks of cards, maybe board games like Monopoly, or special food, or maybe videos of Walt Disney movies. No television, that would be counterproductive. Lights out at nine o’clock.

Another tip from the endlessly inventive Soviets: put the candidates in teams. If one candidate refuses to work, the entire team is confined to quarters with the limited rations and no extras. The team lives together, in a warm, dry but very plain room built to house them all comfortably. The team can have a talk with the recalcitrant candidate, and see if they can all come to an agreement, as a team. The same thing happens in the field. If a team member slacks off and the team does not meet its goals, the entire team misses dinner and “Peter Pan” on a nice TV. They can then discuss the matter. It all works very well in practice, you can look it up.

A year or two of this should be plenty for most candidates. I believe that was the Vietnamese experience. They just sent people down to the rice farms for a while. Their candidates were merely small businessmen or academics, though, I believe that we in America have some tougher nuts to crack. So the walls.

I propose that after the election we simply wait until these people start their anti-American, anti-democratic, anti-Constitution, anti-logic, and anti-common-decency campaign of obstruction and hindrance of the elected president of the United States, recall that something similar was done in the 1990’s with disastrous consequences, and declare these people terrorists under the Patriot Act and sentence them to re-education. Habeus corpus my ass, isn’t that the way we do it now? I’ll take care of the rest.


Rory Cripps said...

Fred: How can you describe Bill O'Reilly as a "punk/bully"? The man from Levittown says that he's "looking out for you"--and he says that he's 'one of us' and a 'man of the people'; and it must be true because he says it's true! Moreover, O'Reilly is a big guy, physically, and he played football at one time. In America, a big-guy football player can never be a "punk/bully" and can never be wrong. Furthermore, Mr. O'Reilly taught high school, briefly, during the Vietnam war--quite a sacrifice on the part of an American "patriot". For you to call O'Reilly a "draft-dodger" is totally unacceptable and I'll tell you why: I'm willing to bet you, as much as two cents, that Mr. O'Reilly tried to enlist as soon as he turned eighteen, but the stripes down at the draft-board dissuaded him from doing so. And the reason why the stripes dissuaded O'Reilly from enlisting is because they deemed O'Reilly to be a young man of rare intellect and foresight and a great potential ass-kisser of, and proponent for, the American cause ... or perhaps Mr. O'Reilly simply failed the psychological examination.

As to Fat Bill, Mr. Newt, Heart-Felt Dick, and Curious George . . . these are highly "successful" and intelligent men. Indeed, they are "achievers" and their "achievements" place them well within the ranks of the most productive members of American society. Their description is also true; for the above-mentioned great men are at the apex of the American Dream. And as all patriotic/red-blooded Americans know, the American Dream is attained solely on the basis of education, intelligence, hard work, dedication, integrity, and strength of character (not to mention strict adherence to biblical principles). All of the above admirable traits, that I've attributed to Bill, Newt, Dick, and George, manifest themselves (and correspond)to the degree of material and financial wealth that one accumulates. It is a well-established belief, on the part of Americans, that the more money one has, the more deserving the "money-holders" are of respect, admiration, and emulation. In my opinion, all of the above are white-trash that, somehow, managed to acquire disposable income .... Yes, Fred; all of the above great and productive men have "earned" great amounts of material and financial wealth. Therefore, and in a nutshell, it is true, according to America, that O'Reilly, Bill, Newt, Dick, and George work harder, are more dedicated, and have more integrity and strength of character than the average American.

The "American Dream" is quite a simple concept and I can't understand why there are so many Americans, out there, that don't get it! In my opinion, Americans should place the above-mentioned "great men" on a very high pedestal and pay those "great men" the appropriate allegiance.

Fred: Would it be possible for myself and my family to be re-educated in your camp? I know that my credentials are nowhere in league with Dick and the rest of the dicks. However, the thought of a good breakfast and a good hot dinner; a nice hot lunch; decent bread; thin vegetable soup; and good white rice and a piece of fish ... is making me drool. And the thought of playing Monopoly and cards, reading magazines, and watching Walt Disney movies makes your re-education camp all the more enticing to me. Moreover, I'm used to getting up, every day, at four-thirty in the morning--if I could wake up at five and go to bed at nine, I would get eight hours of sleep and I'm sure that, in that case, some of my dreams would not be cut short by the alarm clock. I even have experience in building "block" walls and tearing them down. Indeed, I can sling concrete block and brick, and slap down mortar, with the best of 'em. And a twelve or thirteen hour workday--without having to commute to and from work? Get Out! I've got to hand it to you, Fred: you really know how to entice a guy and grab his attention! I just payed my mortgage, my homeowner's insurance, my family's health insurance, "out-of-pocket" medical expenses, car insurance, "utility" bills, etc.. I now have enough money left over to by a bag of rice and, perhaps, a bag of beans to compliment the rice . . . no fish though--too expensive.

Throughout the years, I've read alot about "economic theory" and I've stayed "current" with economic issues. For example: I know what the transfer of gold from one country to other countries portends; and what the rising price of metals portends; and what the Federal Reserve buying up securities from banks portends; and what rising food prices portend; and what falling housing prices portend; and what a "bear" stock market portends; and what rising inventories portend; and so on. Economists, for the most part, are essentially predictors. Sometimes their "predictions" are right and sometimes their predictions are wrong. And often times they are in total disagreement. But one thing that economists are always in agreement with and are never wrong about is this: when there's uncertainty and lack of confidence in the market (on the part of both buyers and sellers), the "economy" takes a nose dive, as it were. Me thinks this, Fred: It may get to the point, in America, that your proposed "re-education camp" will be viewed by many Americans (myself included) as a virtual paradise and a wonderful "retirement community".

"Dr." Cripps, proud republican

fred c said...

"proud republican" is a great handle, but I'm sure the irony is lost on most people. Would be on me too, absent our previous conversations.

O'Reilly is a good sized man, I've noticed that, but if you can arrange immunity from prosecution and a waiver of tort law suits I'll be happy to stomp him so bad it'll take an MRI to find parts of him that had been driven up into his thorax.

Rory Cripps said...

Fred: I guess alot of things are lost on most people . . . but that just makes it all the better (and funnier)for those that catch on. Good Lord, Fred! You really don't like O'Reilly do you? He is quite arrogant and bombastic isn't he? But he's "looking out" for us, Fred, HA!

Anonymous said...

Fred, just get the same lawyers O'Liely got to buy his way out of the otherwise career-ending Mackris sexual harassment lawsuit.

fred c said...

O'Reilly is just the kind of kid that I hated while we were simultaneously at Catholic high schools different ends of the same street in Queens (Me, Holy Cross; he, Bishop something or other). But I do hate Limbo more. Don't talk about anything you may actually do someday.

Rory Cripps said...

Fred: I don't know what O'Reilly's demeanor was back in the day. But I can cleary picture him as being the typical tough guy/jock that, due to his size and working-class upbringing, would take offense if someone accidentally bumped into him on, say, a dance-floor or on the LIRR. In my younger day, I hung out with a few guys that came from, virtually, the same background as O'Reilly--and they may have even attended the same high school (what was the name of that school?)that O'Reilly attended . . . and they often got into fights over the most ridiculous things. According to O'Reilly, he loved dancing at the discos. In my younger day, I spent alot of my time in "clubs" and discos--more often observing than participating. And when I saw a dork like O'Reilly get up on the dance floor and "shake his booty" it cracked me up to no end. Yes Fred: guys like O'Reilly provided great comic relief and they weren't even aware of it.

fred c said...

Yeah, what was that place? Bishop O'Mally maybe? It was right on the Expressway, across from the Bluebird dinner, which had the best BLT's in Queens. It only opened in the early sixties. I'll check an O'Reilly bio.

fred c said...

I agree. People only do that shit now because they know they can get away with it. I'm old fashioned: them as asks for it should get it.