The Douchebag Bible (73 page)

concoct.

And yet, despite this fault, democracy has

performed more admirably than any other system

we’ve yet attempted. Perhaps because we made

pleasing the people part of the game that the elites

must play to one-up one another. “Look how much

more well-fed my peasants are than yours,

Mortimer!”

4. SLIP DOWN THAT SLOPE

The problem with debates is that nearly

everyone who engages in them will at some point

take their opponents ideas to the most extreme

possible level. If you’re against the death penalty,

someone inevitably says, “Well, what if it was your

family being brutally murdered with an ice pick?!”

Couldn't I just as easily ask them, “what if your

son bludgeoned 3 people to death with a dildo?” You

see how not compelling that hypothetical is? Well,

yours isn't any better. If you want to slip down a

slope, why not let your hand slip down my cock, you

mindless bucket of shit?

5. REDISTRIBUTE THAT SHIT!

We have to be like Robin Hood (not the lame

ass Russell Crowe version). We have to rob from the

rich and give to the poor.

Here’s why: poor people spend money.

We need more spending. We need people to

buy buy buy buy buy.

No one can buy when everyone’s broke!

However, the rich have never been richer.

Now’s the time to take their money (which they

horde) and give it to lower and middle class people

who will spend it. More money in the hands of the

middle class means more demands for goods and

services, more demands for goods and services

means more jobs, more jobs means more people

making money.

Be like Robin Hood. Steal from a rich guy, give

to some poor, unworthy slob. Then, punch a

libertarian in the face and laugh.

If I could create one new law, I’d mandate that

no one in a company can make more than 10 times

the average salary of the company. For instance, if

the average employee makes $32,000 a year, the

CEO can make no more than $320,000 a year.

This not only closes income gaps, but it also

ties CEO’s directly to the success of their companies.

Too often now, CEO’s are there to collect a paycheck

and they don’t care if the company fails.

Whatever money they made in or through

shares would similarly be capped if it surpassed 10

times what the average employee of the company

would be able to make.

The big argument people have made against

me on this is that if we passed such a law, CEO’s

would lose the incentive to run companies because

they couldn’t get rich. 10 times what a normal

employee makes isn’t wealth enough for them? 10

times a normal person’s income isn’t good enough

compensation for the job they do? Then fuck ‘em, I

say.

Ten times average will be good enough for

someone who truly loves the job and truly cares

about running a company.

6. THE 2012 ELECTION CLUSTERFUCK

I watched a small portion of the 2012 Republican

National Convention, and the analysts at the time

kept pointing out that the convention was largely an

attack on Obama. Many said that this strategy was a

bad one, and that the convention should instead

focus on building up Romney.

I have to profoundly disagree with these

analysts. Tearing down Obama was do-able. He

wasn't the most popular president by any stretch of

the imagination. He wasn't despised by all like Bush

was, but plenty of people hated him or could be

persuaded to hate him.

Making Mitt Romney seem likable, by contrast,

would have been a fool’s errand. The man was

simply not a human being that anyone could ever

like. He had the personality of a wet blanket. He lied

more often than breathed. He constantly looked

confused. He emanated no warmth or humanity.

Mitt Romney was best used as a prop—and that’s

exactly what he was to the Republican party. He was

a prop. A variable. An “insert whatever you want to

hear here.”

So, I think the GOP was wise to make the RNC

all about Obama-hating. It’s the only card they had—

but they still couldn't win with it. Obama probably

did more to help Obama than to hinder him. I

believe that if the republican party had run a centrist

candidate whose policies weren't a total affront to

anyone to the left of Ayn Rand, they would have won

the election.

The moral crusaders voted for Obama because

Obama supported gay marriage and Mitt Romney

opposed it—Obama was for the insurance reforms of

The Affordable Healthcare Act and Romney was

opposed to them (even though he pioneered them as

Massachusetts' governor.

But to the left I ask, what good does gay

marriage and healthcare do me if I live in a world

where my government butchers innocent people

and views them as acceptable “collateral damage,”

jails me for the slightest infraction and doesn’t care

that my social class is increasingly unable to sustain

itself while the richest class control ungodly

personal fortunes?

Think about it: every issue where Obama and

Romney were identical represents an issue where

you had NO CHOICE in 2012.

Obama and Romney were essentially the same.

Their differences were all superficial. Pretend.

Wedge issues designed to divide the populace and

drum up votes.

When it comes to the military industrial