image
Gurney's Inn
image
bulletNight Moves
spacer spacer
spacer
image
spacer spacer
spacer
image
spacer spacer
spacer
image
spacer spacer
spacer
image
spacer spacer
spacer
image
spacer spacer
spacer
image
spacer spacer
spacer
image
spacer spacer
bulletNight Moves
spacer spacer
spacer
image
spacer spacer
spacer
image
spacer spacer
spacer
image
spacer spacer
spacer
image
spacer spacer
spacer
image
spacer spacer
spacer
image
spacer spacer
spacer
image
spacer spacer

November 28, 2012
/editorial/recurring/jerryink.jpg
shadow

Jerry's Ink


PAY YOUR "FAIR SHARE" OR ELSE


I'm writing this for my brother Joe and for my hundreds of well-meaning Republican/Conservative friends who are sending me hundreds of emails saying the Presidential election was rigged. Yes, 99 percent of a district in Philadelphia came out and voted for Obama. Yes, Obama won 116 percent of another district in Ohio. It doesn't matter.

Romney was never even coming close in Pennsylvania or Ohio. Get it through your thick heads: We lost . . . we lost . . . we lost . . . we lost. Live with it.

It's not unlike what happened to General Custer at the Battle of the Little Bighorn. Custer was West Point educated. His 700 men were well-armed, well-fed and well-trained.

They came upon over 3000 Sioux and Cheyenne Indians, led by Crazy Horse and Sitting Bull. The Indians were not trained and were poorly armed. But, there were many, many, many more Indians than there were soldiers in Custer's army.

Custer lost because he was outnumbered. So did we.

My good Republican friends, we must face reality – there are more of them than there are of us.

I only have one question. Who did the unemployed (8.9 percent of the country) vote for?

It seems like an easy thing for Gallup or any of the other polling companies to find out.

Why is it important? I believe that if I'm right, and if a majority of the unemployed voted for Obama, it means there has been a significant change in this country. No president has ever been re-elected with unemployment this high, with the exception of Franklin D. Roosevelt, who was coming out of a depression where half the country was unemployed.

It means that the United States is now in the hands of the new majority which, besides the rank-and-file Democrats/Liberals, consists of the young who have voted for Obama because they were promised free education, the old who voted for him because they were promised free medication, and those who feel put upon by the world who voted for him because he promised them free vindication. If it ended in "ion" he cleverly promised it to them and they voted for him.

What does this mean for your future?

Here's a number that will make you flinch: 46.4 percent of U.S. households in 2011 didn't pay federal taxes. Did you?

If you're middle-class, if you and your spouse earn $150,000 a year, or if you're single and earn $90,000 a year, or even $60,000 a year, what makes you think that the majority of the people who are unemployed or living on welfare or food stamps don't resent you?

You have what they want and you are living in a country where politicians will give them what you have in exchange for their votes.

Take a look at the Black Friday pictures of the out-of-control crazies who were rioting to rip 70-inch television sets out of each other's hands. Did you see those fat ladies who went berserk over see-through bras and nightgowns at Victoria's Secret?

Do you wonder, as I do, if all those 300-pound women pushing and shoving each other on Black Friday have jobs? If they all pay taxes? If those grossly overweight people got that hideously fat as a result of a food stamp program that sadly grew dramatically even as we were being told by the Obama team that the economy was getting better?

Did you ever wonder if the economy is getting better, why did so many more people have to go on food stamps?

What makes you think that you will never be asked to pay your "fair share," no matter how little you earn?

Is unemployment a political chip?

Think of the bakers' unions, who put 18,500 of their members out of work as Twinkies, Wonder Bread, Ring Dings and Yodels, among others, disappeared off the shelves.

Hostess Brands could not afford to meet the union demands and went out of business.

Is it time for another Obama "Chrysler-style" bailout? In this, the Twinkie bailout, Obama will declare the Hostess company to be vital to the country. The government will then buy Hostess and hand it over to the unions.

The result? All of the stoners and sugar-addicted diabetic fat people will live happily ever after and sign petitions to flaunt the law so that Obama can run again in 2016.

DID I DEPRESS YOU? HERE'S A JOKE:

The Real Bin Laden Story:

Osama Bin Laden was living with three wives in one compound and never left the house for five years.

It is now believed he called the Navy Seals himself.

If you wish to comment on "Jerry's Ink" please send your message to jerry@dfjp.com.

  1. print email
    Things Could Be Worse
    November 27, 2012 | 07:36 PM

    Hi Jerry,

    Let's forget about all the politics for a moment and focus on your last line about Bin Laden.

    Which reminded me of an old "Borscht Belt" joke in true Jackie Mason or Henny Youngman style ...

    Why do married Jewish men die so young? Because they want to! Badda Boom. Badda bing!!! BC

    Bill Crandall
  2. print email
    November 28, 2012 | 09:40 AM

    the CEO of hostess gave himself a 300% raise before they went out of business. He gave himself a 300% raise and then claimed to be unable to afford worker's pensions and health benefits? I'd strike too.

    jimmy
  3. print email
    Pay your fair share or else
    November 28, 2012 | 05:32 PM

    Mike, here's a little more background on the General Custer who Della Femina says was West Point educated and who with 700 well-armed men fought 3000 untrained and poorly armed Sioux and Cheyenne at the battle of the Little Big Horn...and lost. Why did Custer lose? Well there were many, many, many, more indians than there were soldiers in Custer's army, that's why. Della Femina's point it seems, is that Romney really should have won the election. After all he, like Custer, has what it takes to win. If only he hadn't been outnumbered by those redskins Rather than go into Romney the candidate here is a snippet of information about our famous General Custer that Della Femina neglected to include in his profile of Custer: “If Custer signally lacked something it was what the rest of the world called conscience. He had no capacity for empathizing with the pain and suffering of others.” He provides ample evidence to support this harsh verdict. Custer executed Confederate guerillas without trial in the Civil War, massacred without provocation a Cheyenne village at the battle of Washita, and famously disregarded the advice of his scouts at Little Bighorn by dividing his forces and attacking with troops exhausted from a forced march of 83 miles. And here is where you can find the rest of this bio on the "General": http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/11/17/larry-mcmurtry-on-the-villainous-custer-and-the-myths-of-the-west.html

    David Enock
Reader Feedback Submission
Use this form to submit Reader Feedback.
* required value
Your Name*

Subject

Comment*

Verification*


Site Search



Scan
image