A Treatise on the Need for the Right Wing of the Republican Party to Move Left

By:

Dr. Henry R., Dr. of Political Science, P.H.D

San Francisco University

            Republicans; disperse! For far too long we have been maligned as the party of the rich and the religious. The time has come for us to take a new direction, specifically, to the left. The problem is not that we weren’t right in the first place, we were too right. In the 2008 election it has become clear that the old Republican stump-cries have gone out of style. People no longer care about lower taxes and a strong national defense, they want Liberalism! And Liberalism they shall have.

            This election cycle we stand to lose even more power in the House and Senate and maybe even the presidency. This decline in popularity is undoubtedly a result of the ultra-left leaning media. As a dedicated student of the right I have come up with a plan that can in no way be skewed by the media and puts us back on the road to winning the hearts and minds of the American people.

            My plan for regaining control of the House, the Senate, AND the Presidency is a simple one and is as follows. By my calculations and by careful observation of the most accurate polls I have come to the conclusion that the country’s electorate is fairly evenly split between the two parties at the moment. Roughly 50% of the electorate is Democrat, and 50% is Republican (there is of course a three point margin of error in which case the country could be split into 53% Republican and 47% Democrat and vice-versa). They occupy the space left of center, and we the right. My idea then, is to move 25% to the left. In this way we retain our hold on 50% of the electorate, and they will keep theirs; only theirs will be split into two parties of 25%, one on the far left, and the other on the far right. This schism in their party will result in a divided group that will not be able to agree on anything, leaving us wholly in charge with a united 50% of the electorate.

            With an undoubtedly overwhelming majority in the House, the Senate, and with control of the Presidency we will be able to set up several privately owned, government run programs to correct those areas which have for so long divided our country. I want you all to know immediately that I don’t stand to profit in the least by these measures I am proposing. I make my living as a professor, a job which pays too little for me to benefit from any of the tax cuts our trickle-down based tax philosophy offers, and I have no connections to anyone in politics as I spend most of my time in arcades.

            How will we do this you ask? We Republicans have, for far too long, tried to hold the moral high ground in issues regarding foreign policy and  domestic policy. This is fine for people who understand the need to hold the high ground, but what about the average voter who could not find Georgia on a map? As long as Russian tanks aren’t rolling into Atlanta what do they care that a sovereign country’s liberty is at stake and a world nuclear power is asserting its strength in an attempt to regain its former empire?  What we need to do is not to raise the average voter up to the high ground; but lower the high ground so we are level with them. This is easier than trying to change their mind and more cost efficient than educating them. This policy would dictate that instead of trying to pressure Russia to withdraw, why not quietly suggest Georgia suck it up and go back to being a part of the Soviet Union? Were things really so bad then? And as for Israel, aren’t there a lot of other places those Jews could live? Say… Australia?

By becoming totally inactive in the United Nations and not taking stances on any world events we can correct the Republican Party’s image as trigger-happy cowboys. And to satisfy the more hawkish parts of our party, our policy will be to only confront foreign rulers when our national security in directly threatened and to settle the disputes outside the United Nation’s authority by a sudden-death game of table hockey. Played of course by the highly trained table hockey players most often found in quarter arcades. Just making this simple change in foreign policy would unify our party and allow us to move on to more important matters while the far-left and far-right wings of the Democratic Party squabble over whether they should nuke North Korea in response to Russian aggression or legalize marijuana so both countries will get along.

            The one place I can foresee we will have trouble uniting our new party is in the area of domestic policy. Our constituents don’t really care about the genocides taking place in Africa. And they are hardly aware that the world’s economy is falling faster than Bush’s poll numbers. They do however care that gay people may or may not be getting married. My plan deals with this issue in a way that is sensitive to everyone’s needs. First of all gay people will not be able to get married; neither will straight people. The word “marriage” will never be used in our party’s administration. All unions will be referred to as “couplings.” This will satisfy the people to the right of our middle party because gays won’t be using the word “marriage” for their unions. And it will satisfy the gays because straight people won’t be able to call their unions by a word they can’t use. All couplings will be accomplished by an application process overseen by a review board made up of four people on the right, four people on the left, and a dog. The people on the right of the bench will make sure that the couples satisfy their moral standards. And the people on the left will make sure that the coupling seems fair and that there is not an overabundance of straight or gay people getting coupled, interracial or homo-racial people getting coupled, or too many couplings on either side of the party. The health and genetic merits of the applicants will also be considered during the process, to insure the offspring produced will be of some good to society. Obviously the right side of the bench will look for physical prowess while the left looks for intellectual integrity.

The dog will be called on only in times when both sides can’t come to some kind of agreement. A representative from both sides of the bench will stand at either end of a long hallway with a pork chop. To convince the dog they will yell their arguments at the top of their voice and the decision will be made by seeing which way the dog goes. If the application is rejected the board will have the authority to find a more suitable match for both parties in question. This will give people like computer programmers and professors, who are the best of breeding stock but who often lack the time and social skills to succeed in the dating world a chance to improve the world in their own small way.

As we watch our political power waning, we have to ask ourselves what we can do to stop it. The ebb and flow of politics in America is too slow for most Republicans in the political arena to wait for; so we must do something drastic. Not everyone will be comfortable with these changes at first, but as the only united party in a two-party system, what choice will they have?