Occupy Wall Street is a Hate Group!

Occupy Wall Street hates all rich people. In fact, everyone does. If anyone makes one cent more than another person, they are automatically hated by all those making less than them. This is self-evidently true and is stated in Article 4609 of the U.S. Constitution. So the problem is not that there is a disparity but that OWS pointed it out. Even I hate the CEOs of Bank of America now and I take kickbacks from them!

That’s why we can’t talk about wealth disparity. Because it reminds people that other people make more money, which then makes them burn with hate.

Really, OWS is no different than the Ku Klux Klan. For one thing, the Occupiers have been burning down the churches of the wealthy and leaving burning Guy Fawkes statues on the lawns of mansions. Remember when roving bands of the poor lynched the board of directors for Bear Stearns? That’s gonna happen to you too if they find out that you make even a fraction of a percent more than them. And Pelosi is playing into this hate. She went to a Rich Bar and lured an executive out into the parking lot, then beat him and dragged him down the street tied to the back of her truck.

A lot of this discrimination is more subtle such as people earning a certain amount are barred from adopting children or getting married. But if we don’t crush them now, it’s only a matter of time before the Occupiers start attacking job creators with fire hoses and dogs.

After everything they’ve done, I will not sacrifice free enterprise. We’ve made too many compromises already, too many retreats. They invade our public spaces, and we fall back. They occupy entire parks, and we fall back. Not again. The line must be drawn here! This far and no further!

To make them pay for what they’ve done, follow us on Facebook.

Cornel West is Totally Right


Recently Dr. Cornel West of Princeton has been highly critical of President Obama as highlighted in this interview with Chris Hedges.

At first my hyper-liberal proclivities led me to begin work on a death threat to send to West, as I do for all critics of Dear Leader. After all, you just cannot question a leader in a time of war unless he is George W. Bush.

Before I finished the letter I realized that I might be wrong about this. So I totally flip-flopped on my position and said, “Fuck Obama!” I still think that it is inexcusable to question his brilliance in the arena of foreign policy, economics, teleprompter usage, philosophy, baking etc…but Obama crossed a line by not being a good friend to Cornel West. As a touchy-feely Democrat, I feel that if someone’s feelings have been hurt, a legal line must have been crossed.

At first I thought, “Too busy to call? Making compromises? That sounds like reasonable behavior for a President.” Then I dug a bit deeper and found out that there is more to it than that. It turns out that Obama took over three weeks to accept West’s friend request on Facebook, and after he did he never responded to West’s post on the President’s wall except to “like” it. If Obama is really in favor of transparency in government, why won’t he answer West publicly to let us all know what “the haps” are?

West has been clicking refresh on his browser all day to see if the President will help him with Farmville.

According to my sources, the President has also been snubbing West on Twitter. West has retweeted several of Obama’s tweets and not once has Obama reciprocated. In fact, he has not even used the hashtag #cornelwestrules, even when that tag was trending. How far does this scandal go? This is almost as bad as when Bush ignored Cindy Sheehan’s texts.

It is of course possible that after these criticisms get more attention Obama will stop leaving West hanging and perhaps even catch him on the rebound. But if things don’t change, can we really trust a President whose reliability in completing high fives is this shakey?

Whatever he's doing on here, it can't have been more important than commenting on the video of cats riding roombas West emailed him.


I’ll leave my readers with this unanswered question: Where is Obama’s “Too Busy To Hang Out With Cornel West” certificate?

Like CSDP? We do that Twitter thing that the kids are into these days.

Racist Tea Partiers Stop the Patriot Act


Those extremist, racist, wingnut, Nazi-Nazi teabaggers worked together with democrats to kill parts of the Patriot Act that were up for renewal. So racist! Why are tea partiers so racistly attacking Obama? I hate the Patriot Act too, but you don’t see me criticizing Obama do you? Of course not, that would be insanely racist. I didn’t want to support the Patriot Act, but I can’t be a racist, so there ya go.

Perhaps the problem stems from the tea partiers stupidly (and racistly) misunderstanding what racism is. Racism is defined as disagreeing with anything someone of another race does or says. It is also defined as holding any view that is right of center. So logically economist Thomas Sowell must be racist since he is right-wing and he disagrees with me, a white guy.

Snakes are a bunch of racists.

Not only are these tea partiers racist, but they are notoriously racist for wanting the economic policies of George W. Bush still maintained. Supposedly the number of black owned businesses has increased by 61% (three times faster than the rest of the market) to 1.9 million between the years 2002 and 2007. Yeah, but then the economy went to crap, so basically Bush was just building them up before he tore them down in the 2008 recession.

Some might argue that Bush then tried to bail out businesses in 2008, thus he cannot be racist in this regard. Yeah, but you are never going to convince me that the free market isn’t inherently racist, even if all races equally controlled the means of production. I learned a long time ago at Berkley that the invisible hand is an invisible white hand oppressing the other races, invisibly.

America is Post Partisan, Post Racial and Post Labels!


I was watching some old videos of Mein Fuhrer Obama, and I wept with joy at his idea of being post partisan. Who cares about liberal or conservative, right? We can all band together to oppose the Republicans.

And America is post racial too. When was the last time you even saw someone of a different race? I didn’t, and I looked all over the suburban culdesac where I live, the golf course and the list of the top earning CEOs and couldn’t find anyone of a different race. Clearly Chancellor Obama eliminated all the inferior races. Either that or he just focused conversation in a different direction on race…I can’t remember.

There might be some more races out there. But the point is that we don’t refer to these races. That would be labeling these people. Labeling is unacceptable! I don’t like being labeled as a liberal. I happen to believe in social justice, gay rights, higher taxes and death panels. That doesn’t mean you can just sum me up as “liberal.” I bring this up to my friends who have traits leading toward small government policies, indiscriminant war and racism and they seem perplexed. They just say to call them “conservative.” I wouldn’t dream of labeling them! I’m not some kind of labelist bastard.

I don’t want to be labelist though, so maybe I shouldn’t call people who are prone to labeling other people “labelists.” I wanted to find a group that was anti-label, but it was difficult. I went to a lot of groups that didn’t do a good job of describing themselves and I seem to have found a lot of support…I think. If I were more certain that these were groups opposed to labels, they probably wouldn’t be very anti-labelist.

Anyway, these groups are…well, I can’t describe them very well, but I sure do approve. If I called them fantastic, they’d feel forced to fill some sort of cultural role as fantastic people. I wouldn’t do that to them.

I have to wonder if opposing labels is enough though. I mean, I obviously oppose adjectives and binomial nomenclature, but what about names? Those are certainly labels. Actually, what about this whole language thing? Isn’t it kind of a scam? Why should I let someone force me into grammar and syntax?

I wouldn’t be caught dead labeling myself as some kind of Facebook user.

Congress Bans DDT!


First off, let me say that Obama truly is worthy of the love letters I write him daily. Thanks to his leadership Congress has finally banned DDT!

What is DDT exactly? It is a pesticide (non-organic) which was developed solely for the purpose of discriminating against the shell density of bird eggs. Some conservative shills for Big Poison have tried to argue that DDT is crucial for maintaining agricultural cohesion.

Senator John McCain had previously said that he would stop using DDT if the ecologists all agreed it was a bad idea. Then when they said that, McCain waffled and got really mad. Currently he is flying an industrial cropduster throughout metropolitan areas in Arizona, DDTing the entire populace. Aren’t you sick of stupid republicans and their birdphobic policies?

The only people who seemed to really support DDT were people that wanted the freedom to discriminate against egg production as part of their religious views. However, the majority of birds affected by the banning of DDT feel that this will lead to better flock formation in the long run.

On a bitter sweet note, the DREAM Act failed to get past Republican filibustering. On the plus side, the American Wet Dream act succeeded in passing and is expected to by signed into law by a still groggy President Obama who may be sporting Presidential morning wood. We now have a path to an REM cycle about my old biology professor!

Want to publish an article on CSDP? Send it to us. carlsagans danceparty [at] gmail.

The Evils of Capitalism

Capitalism is an evil force that sucks wealth out of the hands of anyone that rightly deserves it. For example, I broke into a rich man’s house one day and began collecting all his gold. And it wasn’t more than 10 minutes before this duck man in a top hat and his three duck grandsons told me to leave the premises. They told me to leave their privately held property. The nerve. I was just borrowing stuff that rightfully belongs to everyone. This leads me to the issue of private property.

Private property is just one of many problems with capitalism. If we had no private property, everyone would own everything and we could all share. In society without private property, no one would be more ambitious than anyone else and no one would seek to own more wealth than anyone else. Obviously.

Owning more wealth is exactly the problem and right to private property is the culprit. Private property creates a wealth disparity in society because some people privately own more wealth than others. My uncle used to tell me, “I’ve never been employed by a poorer man than me.” Oh yeah? It’s that sentiment that creates wealth disparity in the first place.

I showed my uncle right then and there. I sought employment by a man poorer than myself. I threw away all my stuff and money and went and worked for some guy at a convenient store. The guy at the convenient store didn’t seem to understand why I would throw away all my wealth to come work for him, but he put me to work anyway. Eventually, I convinced him to stop working for people wealthier than him. So he started working for me. Unfortunately, I became more wealthy than him, so I told him to quit his job entirely since he was working for someone wealthier than him and now he’s gleefully living in a dark alley somewhere. It became obvious to me over time that the only way to work for someone poorer than myself, I had to convince the person I was working for to demote themselves and then I would work for them in their newly demoted position. It was perfect. And that’s why I live in a dark alley now. I sure showed my uncle. He knows just how wrong he is each time he is bringing me warm food and clean blankets.

Probably one of the most disturbing things about capitalism is the profit motive. The profit motive totally ignores all the other wonderful motives. What about the motive to do what is good for everyone? The Soviet Union was very good at that. I know what you’re thinking. Josef Stalin murdered 40 million of his own people. First, we don’t really know if those 40 million people were so innocent. Maybe they were all evil greedy capitalists. Second, maybe Josef Stalin was really just some capitalist himself. Pretty obvious. Still, despite all that, we know the USSR was always better than us morally and the only reason the Soviets did not succeed at helping the world was because the United States greedily stopped them.

I guess what I’m trying to get at is that the profit motive is bad even if it creates really good conditions and increases the wealth of overall society. I guess what I’m trying to say is that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Wait! I didn’t want to end with that quote.

Help redistribute the humor over at Twitter.