Election Results

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I need to rattle off this plan before the men in the black suits take me to the
“sedition removal area.”
The premise: ” when people vote they vote democratic” has been proven to us to
be wrong. I admit it, I did not see this coming. Yes in the back of my mind I
thought that George W. Bush had the potential to win this election but not in the
way it happened. The voters of Florida voted not overwhelmingly, but to the
degree to not question that George W. Bush had the majority of votes. Not what
I expected to see. The perceived accuracy of vote counts in this election did not
bring the legal battles I expected to see either. The state of Ohio is currently
seen to have been won by Bush by the smallest of whiskers ( about 20,000 votes
the last time I looked). Within a few hours of the closing of the polls in Ohio
John Kerry has conceded and George W. Bush is still our president. The most
striking factor that I see is not the electoral vote count but the Popular Vote. Yes
my friends our election system worked the way it was supposed to. George W.
Bush won the Popular Vote! I say it again: George W. Bush won the Popular Vote!
The masses of people we saw at the polls when we went to vote and on the
news media were not, in fact, voting for Kerry or Nader for that matter. The
most heavy voter turnout since Johnson vs. Goldwater voted for George W. Bush.
In Johnson vs. Goldwater the main factor that motivated voters in that election
was, Barry Goldwater supported the use of Nuclear Weapons to win the current,
and blossoming Vietnam conflict. Our population did not like the idea of using
Nukes, they are massively destructive and make areas of the earth where they
are used uninhabitable. the majority voted for Johnson and Nukes were not
used. Whew! The budding major factor of voter decision in this election:
MORALITY! Not war, not the economy, not terrorism. People liked George W.
Bush’s vision of morality. What is that vision most likely to be? Lets hypothesize:
the gradual and inevitable union of popular fundamentalist Christianity and
state. Along with this move comes the tenants of what fundamentalist
Christianity brings. The damnation of anything that opposes it. Lets dig a little
deeper. Placement of persons into social positions the the religion deems
correct. Examples: “Women in the home, no job. Men work. Women are
subservient and inferior to men”. Also, the move toward a non- abortion society,
this further reinforces the subservience of women by denying them self control.
The identification of homosexuality as a social sickness, like schizophrenia or
depression and finally moving toward a policy of criminalization is also a goal.
An ironic way to look at this is to realize that a convicted felon can enter into
marriage with a member of the opposite sex , but a homosexual union of the
same degree between non- felons cannot occur. This places homosexual
individuals in a social category that is sub- felon. I could go on. If this is what
people really want……. THEY CAN HAVE IT! Oh- no! War! Economy! Terrorism!
These are not the things that truly drive us, Its all those damn uppity women
and queens.

My friends I say this; WE’VE BEEN HAD! We have been taken hostage by middle
America. When I look at the electoral map and realize who voted for George W.
Bush all I see is the backwater, unintelligent, bigoted rubes who live in rural
areas. In the coming elections Democrats will progressively move toward the
right and thus creating a one party country, a “conservative” country. Bush will,
with the help of a more powerful republican congress, appoint Supreme Court
Justices who will mirror his social agenda. This country is damaged beyond
repair for at least the next two generations. I don’t particularly like the idea of
my country being sandbagged by this “majority.”

My friends I propose this notion. We can live without them, but they can’t live
without us. We control the major centers of commerce, we have the collective
intelligence, we have the ingenuity, we have the intellectual revenue, we have
the advantage. We have two options.

1. Secede
We can take the Atlantic northeast starting at the border of Maryland and north.
Then moving across the great lakes coastal states slicing Ohio in half ( giving
the useless southern half to them) grabbing Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin and
Minnesota ( We are just gonna have to find a way to get around Indiana). Finally
grabbing the Pacific coast, California, Oregon and Washington. We have the
advantage. We would control the St. Lawrence seaway, thus putting economic
pressure on the plains states and also the entire west coast thus affecting the
mountain states. Granted they would still have control over the Mississippi,
Missouri and Ohio rivers. But thats OK. This plan is a little far fetched and would
most certainly cause some sort of major armed conflict. It is however, very
possible. Realize the second American Revolution/ Cvil War (depending on how
you look at it).

2. Leave
Imagine a gradual mass exodus over the next four to six years of 49% of the
population of the United States. Visualize the major urban and industrial areas
looking as if they have been hit by a neutron bomb with nobody left except the
few Bush supporters in these areas scratching their heads saying “Duh! which
way did he go?.” This country would sustain a “Brain Drain” so massive that it
would make India look like it was populated by 100% MIT grads. We would let
the chumps of this nation destroy themselves through their own ignorance. The
GDP of the United States would drop like Michael Jackson’s pants in an
elementary school. With out us they are nothing and this country would turn
into the biggest third world nation on the globe. Skyrocketing debt, a crumbling
military, rife with corruption.
Where would we go? Currently the GDP of the US is about 10000 (in billions of
US dollars). Europe is comparable, perhaps less. Wouldn’t the European Union
like to have us? It is advantageous for them in two ways. First that would mean a
shift in relative economic power ( we have the smarts you see that good ol’
‘mercan ingenuity). The EU would like nothing more than to see the US loose
their strangle hold on the world economy and make them the new economic
power house. Secondly we would just make them look good (a second european
renaissance). We can help them, they can help us. Would they be able to handle
an influx of more people? They would probably have a hard time of it (especially
the French) but unlike the jerks we are leaving behind I think we have the
potential to be polite and live amicably along side them for a while. There would
admittedly, be a lot of us so the EU, although our primary destination, would not
be our only destination. Northern Africa, sub saharan Africa ( If we can just get
rid of the damn fighting), Japan, Argentina and others could potentially benefit if
we are smart about it (and we are). Russia, China and the middle east is up to
you to decide. We could institute a changing face of global identity. The walls of
international relations will become fogged and less easy to read. We would bring
with us our culture and beliefs of governmental systems. Then at the end of our
lifetimes and the beginning of our grandchildren’s we will emerge from a
prosperous, united, just world. We will return to our prodigal and pull out the
burnt, broken hulk of our mantle and bring it weeping and shamed into the fold
of Global Unity.

Both options would be painful and hard. What is that compared to what we will
endure if we do nothing.

Michael Seth Freed— Local Idiot