The People's Cube - Political Satire

My dear Blogunov, it is apparent that you are nothing more than a Racist. Only a racist would hold any opinion other than those so eloquently held by the caring hands of the prog pictured.

You disgust me.

Ahem. Comrade Blogunov?

The laws of gravity still stand. When it rolls downhill, it gathers speed...

Blogunov, I am shocked, shocked, I say, at the intolerance of your post. Nothing that that raging pot of boiling estrogen said is false. Don't you know that?

Psst. Psst. Pinkie, Blogunov is no longer in the loop. He's not been getting the Current Truth Prime(tm) and you know that means that some of us consider that he's vulnerable.

[ off ]I'm all for, as you might expect, being able to be openly gay but please please do not believe that I want a victim class. I insist on being tolerated, and I insist on not being licked.

I am foursquare against putting sexual orientation on the goo-goo gimme list. Goddamn it, I did all that calculus, Latin, wrote that program, built that business and not because someone held my hand and told me I could.

Equal competition, across the board.

Father Prog Theocritus wrote:... and I insist on not being licked.

not liked? Who could possibly not-- wait,... oh, LICKed!

I got it now... right,


Yeah dammit, what FPT said!

Komissar Blogunov,

It is patently obvious that you are, indeed, OFF!

An appointment with Father Prog Theocritus is recommended! For your own good, mind you.

[img]/images/clipart/Prog_Off.gif[/img]

However, in support of your post, I offer this link, Ode to the Welfare State, and a hint of what it contains below. (something a friend sent me the other day)

He's a Cuber, too! (But, don't tell anybody.)

[img]/images/clipart/Prog_On.gif[/img]

BTW, Excellent color-coordinated post so all us Progs can all understand!

OK, I edited 3 times for "tweeking" purposes. You all know how us Progs like to "tweak" things! And, Rich Text, Poor Text issues!

Father Prog Theocritus wrote:Blogunov, I am shocked, shocked, I say, at the intolerance of your post. Nothing that that raging pot of boiling estrogen said is false. Don't you know that?

Psst. Psst. Pinkie, Blogunov is no longer in the loop. He's not been getting the Current Truth Prime(tm) and you know that means that some of us consider that he's vulnerable.

[ off ]I'm all for, as you might expect, being able to be openly gay but please please do not believe that I want a victim class. I insist on being tolerated, and I insist on not being licked.

I am foursquare against putting sexual orientation on the goo-goo gimme list. Goddamn it, I did all that calculus, Latin, wrote that program, built that business and not because someone held my hand and told me I could.

Equal competition, across the board.

Hear, Hear! Father Prog! Hear, Hear! X!

Pamalinsky wrote:Komissar Blogunov,

It is patently obvious that you are, indeed, OFF!

An appointment with Father Prog Theocritus is recommended! For your own good, mind you.



However, in support of your post, I offer this link, Ode to the Welfare State, and a hint of what it contains below. (something a friend sent me the other day)

He's a Cuber, too! (But, don't tell anybody.)



BTW, Excellent color-coordinated post so all us Progs can all understand!

OK, I edited 3 times for "tweeking" purposes. You all know how us Progs like to "tweak" things! And, Rich Text, Poor Text issues!

Dear Comradette, that "November 4, 1919" DAILY NEWS clipping is from the pre-Stalin era. Please be advised that for such honesty, many an honest Comrade has spent the rest of his/her/its life taking permanent vacations in Siberia. (Never mind that I shouldn't be spying on your PROG-OFF inner thoughts.)

Actually Jibaro,

The date is hard to read because it's a bit faded but, it actually says November 4, 1949! Just so you know. ; • )

Comrades, I am now just sobering up after a horrible bender, for that's all that it could be. Why else would I have written that horrible thing about demanding to be tolerated and not to be licked?

I'm a prog, for Lenin's sake. There is nothing on earth which is too good for me. I mean, I would wipe my ass on the Shroud of Turin, if it were just softer. Because I'm a prog.

The whole idea of personal responsibility is utterly abhorrent to me. Because I'm a prog. And being a prog means never having to say you're sorry. Or wrong.

So I am beginning to worry if the technology I use at Jiffy-Lobo™ is getting outdated. Really. I ought never to think any responsible thoughts; I had those circuits burned out by years of indoctrination and then years of Drexel Moto-Tool trepanation.

Obviously Bush edited my post above.

Fiat.

I've spent the past few days obsessing over what the hell is meant by the phrase "don't you know you can't turn the Titanic around in a day" and I've finally come up with two possible explanations:

1. The placard was written by Ricky Ricardo, who had a knack for mixing one idiomatic phrase with another; e.g. don't cross that bridge before it's hatched.

2. He's referring to the movie, not the actual ship. Because of its length--longer than it took the ship to sink--the movie comes in two videocassettes or discs, depending on format, which automatically qualifies it for more than a one day rental. Hence, no one-day turnaround.

Pinkie, I think you should let sleeping dogs bury their own dead here.

Hee, haw!? Neigh.

Very good one, Komi Blogunov!

Hah, hah!

Don't turn around, Der Komissar, wuh-uh-oh! You gots it all wrong re: #7. You see, the idea is for all of the kollektive to have less, sure, but have less EQUALLY. Duh. As recent pollskis prove, der peeples would rather have less money and property, just as long as no one else (well, save prog elites, of course) has more money and property than they do. Although we've not yet figured out how to maintain even that level indefinitely without working--curses! Foiled by damned facts again!

You just made my day XD Thanks =-p

Gosh, M84, who are you? And, what exactly made your day! I'm asking because my name begins with "p".

I see no XD here. Can you be more specific?

Thanks.

Pamalinsky wrote:Gosh, M84, who are you? And, what exactly made your day! I'm asking because my name begins with "p".

I see no XD here. Can you be more specific?

Thanks.

A figment of your imagination, the original post (and follow ups,) and XD is a laughing smiley, =-p can also be rendered as :P or whatnot.

I am merely a fellow comrade with a chip against Rethuglikkkans on one shoulder and a shovel on the other, and my daily lobo naturally made my day. XD is merely shorthand, x-amount being the Dollars our Glorious Leader will be depositing into my account any day now. $40 would be nice.

Ha!

How fun it is to draw you out, M84, a trollster exposing itself! Yummy cannon fodder! Where shall I begin? Hmmmm. Let's see…….

Can you explain to me how M84 is a "figment of my imagination" when you, M84, posted this moniker yourself? Only thing I can think of is that you, M84, consider yourself a figment of anyone's imagination, including yours.

Next!
Can you tell me what "original post" you are referring to? I get so confused when someone doesn't give me specifics. Hey, maybe that's just me. Please, I am open to your "information."

As to your being "merely" (how stunningly humble) a fellow comrade with a "chip?' Good grief!

As Krasnodar would say, "You can smell the Brylcream from here."

And, BTW, I take particular note of your great mathematical skills! (Snort!)

BTW again! I am Andrew Breitbart, to the best of my ability!

Now, now Comradess Pamalinski, we mustn't jump to conclusions.

Unfortunately, we in the USSA have not yet achieved a complete Stalinist "judicial system ", so for now we must first consider the facts before demanding a show trial.

I have reason to believe M84's explanation..... That is correct.
After all he mentions that Obama's $40 stipend " would be nice ".

Consider for a moment that our Dear Leader's deficit spending has cost each and every one of us $17,000+ dollars during the last three and a half years.

And yet M84 would be grateful for $40 to be tossed back to him.

To myself, who is without a shadow of doubt Krasnodar, I find it indicatative of one who has diminished expectations about how government should be run. This makes M84 an ideal socialist servant of the State.

Be patient, P. If I'm wrong about him, the trains are always running east.

Thanks, dear Kraz,

I guess I got carried away with my grief about Andrew. I'll give M84 the dreaded benefit of the doubt.

Unfortunately, and most often, a big mistake. HUGE! (as in Obama)

Edit: Didn't post the "off" button.

I will spare you my righteous indignation for now, as a Comrade has already Done His Fair Share in defending my public image honor. Indeed the trains do run to the east, and I am but a conductor on the line, proud to sell my soul use my back in service to Comrade Obama.


Not the first time I've been mistaken for male online, and won't be the last. *Hugs for all*

Hugs to you too, M84.

Why waste any indignation, righteous or not, on an overwrought fool?

I waste mine all the time, as you can see. (Sometimes I'm one of them)

1) "...who would not want these changes?" well for one, I would have to assume all women and those who love women. I mean for all the promises of cheaper, govenment backed insurance for the sole purpose to put private insurances out of buisness with D.M.V. style government insurance, how on earth are they going to pay for all of the coverage we currently enjoy with our own private insurance? Oh that's right, by cutting coverage we currently have with private insurance.

Perfect example, and more to come from our beloved Obama, "The debate erupted last year when the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommended that women under age 50 don't need routine screening mammography; whereas its earlier stance was in accord with American Cancer Society guidelines suggesting mammography every one to two years for all women age 40 and older." https://abcnews.go.com/Health/OnCallPlu ... 05dNIcgffs

oops! Because we ought to trust the government attempting to save money on pre screening for women because the ratio of women diagnosed with cancer at that age compared to those that are clean of cancer sounds like a risk-to-pay out ratio from the movie "Fight Club", more then we ought to trust what the American Cancer Society has to say on the issue.

2)Actually he didn't end the war in Iraq, he simply pulled out our troops. how is this not the same thing? Well, because we still have a bases in Germany, Japan even Italy and any where else we came in, took care of buisness and then rebuilt. Seemed to work well in those other countries, but I'm sure Iraq will do fine all on it's own with Iran's influence

3)Really?! I agree why is the DMC, and the media moderators at the Republican Debates still making this an issue? Does Obama also believe that women should have free access to air to breath? Maybe we can paint conservatives with the idea they think women shouldn't be allow to breath. hmmmm. Also as a note point to this, see point #1 dealing with raising the age for women to get pre screened for cancer, to save the govenment insuance money.

4)lilly ledbetter fair pay act? Yea!! more affirmative action type legislation!! Repeal of "don't ask, don't tell"? yes! because the majority of U.S. citizens are for that. =/ Ok, now I can definatly see why your so happy with this point.

5)"Promoting and investing in clean energy.." Really? You meant to say pouring billions of dollars that disappear down a blackhole, in an attempt to hold up buisnesses that wouldn't be able to make it on their own? I know, I know your rebuttal would be, "but the government is subsidizing gas companies with tax breaks". Yes, tax break on profits they made. Hell, give these clean energy buisnesses tax breaks too, I'm all for that. But see, you actually have to have product, and if you actually have a product, it actually has to be something that people want to buy, rather then having it shoved down their throats (the death of incandescent light bulbs anyone? <yeah I know that was under Bush>) to eventually make profits, to then get a tax break on. Not "no-questions-asked" full upstart funding and upkeep that's not even a loan.

6)First of all, this statment dealing with no child left behind being more flexable and college aid being more available starts with the premise "he believes. That's it? He believes? yea we are saved! ..and He's done what?

7)He thinks millionaires and billionaires should pay their fair share of taxes, like the rest of us. See unfortunatly this statement ISN'T a "no-brainer". Let's see who's paying taxes: Top 1% - 36.73%, Top 5% - 58.66%, Top 10% - 70.47%, Top 25% - 87.30%, Top 50% - 97.75, Bottom 50% - 2.25%. hmmm now I'm confused Do you mean they ought to be paying as much taxes as the bottom 50%, you know as you stated "to make it fair"? or should the bottom 50% be paying as much of a % of their income as the top 50%? See by the very definition of the word "fair", everyone would be recieving the same treatment. So say what you really mean, "They got more, I want it, and I want someone to take it away from them for me".

8)Ok first of all, how long does a person have to be behind the wheel before he is declared the driver??! Enough of this crap that everything is the fault of every administration before this one. The best anecdotic analogy I have heard was the one just after the earthquake that hit D.C. a while back and that an ancient fault line was discovered that they were thinking of naming "Bush's Fault". Now as for the claim of 2.8 million private sector jobs being created, please do a fact check next time before simply spewing out an article title of what Florida congresswoman Wasserman Schultz said before she retracted by saying she "misspoke". "About 800,000 manufacturing jobs have been lost during President Obama's time in office, reaching a low of about 11.5 million in December 2009. Since then, about 303,000 manufacturing jobs have been created — not “millions.” At the current pace, the country will not return to the pre-Obama manufacturing job level until August 2016." https://www.factcheck.org/2011/11/wasse ... bs-figure/
But, the ridiculous number of Americans out of work or underemployed know this hard fact quite well, no matter how much the Obama administration pushes to tell people to not believe their own eyes. -Nothing to see here folks, what you know is only a figment of your imagination.

I feel so ashamed now, I shall go and have myself shot, and be sure to have my family charged for the bullet.

Why I support Barack Obama:

1. He gives me free contraceptives.

2. He calls me on the phone to make sure I'm all right after being called bad names by rightwingers.

3. He'll hang curtains for me.

4. He sings really good.

5. He's a responsible pet owner who lets Bo ride in the limo with him, instead of in a crate strapped to the top of Air Force One like Romney would do.

6. He has a beautiful wife with beautiful arms and cute kids.

7. He gives me free Obama money from his stash.

8. I would be racist if I didn't.

Commissarka Pinkie wrote:Why I support Barack Obama:

1. He gives me free contraceptives.

2. He calls me on the phone to make sure I'm all right after being called bad names by rightwingers.

3. He'll hang curtains for me.

4. He sings really good.

5. He's a responsible pet owner who lets Bo ride in the limo with him, instead of in a crate strapped to the top of Air Force One like Romney would do.

6. He has a beautiful wife with beautiful arms and cute kids.

7. He gives me free Obama money from his stash.

8. I would be racist if I didn't.

I am thrilled to know that there are so many intellectual giants such as Pinkie to take up our progressive cause. Reading this while consuming my state provided milk and cookies is a joyful experience indeed. Gotta go... teacher says it is time for our naps.

Komissar Blogunov,

I get the impression you are a little under the weather. It is made apparent by your regression into old ways of thinking. I'm sending this to help cheer you up, and to help get you back on your game. We will all be preying for your deliverance. We will all be well soon.