A Modest Proposal – Kate Paulk

Posted on by Sarah A. Hoyt

A Modest Proposal – Kate Paulk

A Modest Proposal (With apologies to Jonathan Swift)
Given the appalling decision-making powers of the political elites, and the equally appalling spectacle displayed by the recent primary contests in this nation, it becomes essential to propose a simple solution to the destruction of our essential liberties by means of a simple proposal designed to respect the disabilities of those responsible for such poor choices while enabling those of us retaining the capacity for independent thought to continue to enjoy our freedom without doing harm to any other free person.
Whereas the Thirteenth Amendment forbids involuntary servitude of any form save as penalty for commission of a crime, it becomes us to enact involuntary servitude as the penalty for the following crimes:
The offering of; and acceptance of bribes, be they in the form of lobbyist ‘gifts’, financial remuneration, quid-pro-quo understandings, or any other action commonly understood as corrupt.
The use of blackmail; such that a person would reasonably fear for his reputation upon public knowledge of an act that is both legal and meets common understanding of ethics.

That the blackmail of an unconvicted guilty party should expose the guilt and enable prosecution may be considered a fortuitous event.

That the act of knowingly accumulating debt for which payment in full can never be made be considered an act of fraud, and as such, subject to penal servitude similar to that for corruption and blackmail seems only reasonable, and may, with judicious use of auction facilities, assist in the reclamation of this nation’s alarming foreign debt.

We understand that this may cause hardship to those unaccustomed to labor, yet we consider this to be advantageous; in that those most likely to find themselves sentenced to auction are those who, by their decisions and actions, have demonstrated that they are wholly in favor of slavery and desire nothing so much as a benevolent master to serve.
We wish them good fortune in finding such a paragon.

99 thoughts on “A Modest Proposal – Kate Paulk”

  1. I have a different tack on bribes.

    When someone tries to bribe a public official, the official gets to keep the bribe – as long as they immediately turn in the person who offered it for prosecution. The person or company offering the bribe will then be barred from all Federal contracts or employment for an appropriate period.

    Liked by 1 person

    2. Disagree. When the public official often says/implies bribe me or else. This would just make it worse.

      Like

      1. Agreed – too many citizens feel they have to pay up or find the IRS on their door, or worse. That’s why I’m willing to cut a lot of slack to anyone who has, say, given large donations to Democratic politicians.

        Like

    3. What happens when a politician calls a private citizen with a request to make a donation and a suggested size for it?

      Businesses can not stop lobbying as long as the Leviathan had the power to put them out of business with a whimsical regulation and the sneer that they should have watched the agency more.

      Like

      1. Then you throw the politician in jail for soliciting a bribe. When they protest, “But I wasn’t soliciting a bribe!” then you say, “But the basis of the law is what a reasonable person would understand your actions to be, and a reasonable person understands that to be solicitation. If you didn’t intend to solicit a bribe, you shouldn’t have tried to sound like you were soliciting a bribe.”

        I am afraid there would be some problems with that proposal, but it’s better than my first impulse — which was to make “But he was soliticing a bribe, Your Honor!” an affirmative defense against a charge of murder.

        Like

        1. The tern “fall guy” originated in the Teapot Dome oil scandal in the ?? 1920s ?? when then-Secretary of the Interior Albert Fall was convicted of accepting a bribe that Doheny (?Sinclair Oil?) was acquitted of paying.
          JPDev

          Like

  2. That the act of knowingly accumulating debt for which payment in full can never be made be considered an act of fraud…

    Yes. Yes. And Yes again. Sometimes what should go without saying must be said.

    This proposal seems like a simple no brainer, but apparently most of those who serve in our government must be victims of the great Zombie apocalypse.

    Like

  3. “That the act of knowingly accumulating debt for which payment in full can never be made be considered an act of fraud, and as such, subject to penal servitude similar”

    Sooo, does this apply to the Federal Gov’t? How would it be applied? ;-) I mean they have the country in hock up to our eye-balls.

    Like

    1. It appears to have been particularly (though not entirely) aimed at the Fed Gov, and I’m sure it was intended to be aimed at auctioning off the Representatives, Senators, and possibly even the President, into slavery.

      Works for me.

      Like

  4. You know what else would help clean up the political situation? First, rounding up all the global warming folks insisting that public and private money not be “wasted on space”, used for various medical research, or spent solving “first world problems”, until “global warming is solved”. Next, tossing them all in Meteor Crater, pouring in bunch of gasoline, and tossing in a lit match. (I’d suggest just shooting them, but the approach above has a larger carbon footprint.)

    Like

    1. “(I’d suggest just shooting them, but the approach above has a larger carbon footprint.)”

      Oh, come now. There’s no need to be vindictive here. If they honestly believe this nonsense, lowering their carbon footprint to zero in the most environmentally friendly way possible seems like a win for everyone.

      Like

    2. No no no, my friend, that is not at ALL how to solve the problem.
      Instead, force them to live a carbon-neutral lifestyle.
      In other words, hunting and gathering without fire.
      I give them three weeks.

      Like

          1. Um, yes. But we also need to weigh the negative effects of the plants eaten as these plants are no longer removing CO2 from the atmosphere. It would seem that vegans have a larger carbon footprint than do carnivores. (?!)

            Like

    3. Hey! My State’s natural wonder, there, bub!

      If it must be a crater, the country still has quite a few Volcano Gods that could use appeasement, and are used to such “offerings.” (Won’t raise the price of gasoline, either.)

      Like

          1. I’m good with either, having them hunt without fire OR being thrown into the fiery depths of a volcano. Though I may be more in favor of the volcano if I got a free pass to watch.

            Like

  5. Possibly taking the proposal too seriously, but I’m not sure the “blackmail” definition holds water. What act that would be both legal and, by common understanding, ethical would ruin someone’s reputation so badly that they would be willing to pay to keep knowledge of it from the public?

    And if blackmail is a crime, then crimes it exposes can’t be prosecuted, either: “fruit of the poisoned tree” applies to all illegal methods of discovery or it doesn’t apply at all, I think.

    Like

      1. Not so much owners as executives. When they try to execute on owners, the business gets a massive boost in sales. Unfortunately they can get executives fired.

        Like

        1. And the problem there is that the sort of people who want to punish executives for their political opinions generally get more satisfaction from exposing those opinions than from profiting off their concealment.

          Like

    2. Yelp’s entire business model is based on blackmail. “Pay us and we’ll put your good reviews first. Don’t pay us and, well…”

      Like

        1. Argh – darn you, WordPress! That was supposed to be a reply to a different comment. [sigh]

          Like

          1. But THIS drill actually exists!

            You might claim that it’s stretching a point, just a little, to call it a drill. But you know what? When something that weighs fourteen kilotons says it’s a drill, I’m going to say “Yes sir, Mr. Bagger, sir. Whatever you say, sir.”

            Like

      1. This is a reply to the reply for comments, which is itself a comment.

        Like

          1. you commented to the no comment before I could no comment to the comment. …. which is also a comment

            Like

    3. I would comment on the fact that this has to be one of the silliest C4C threads I have ever seen; however, since it certainly will not stop you, I’ll refrain from commenting.

      Like

  8. NO!! NO!! A thousand times NO!!! Slavery corrupts everything that it touches. This proposal would have horrendus effects on, for lack of a better phrase, the moral fiber of the nation. Shoot them if needed, but do not let them poison the nation by making them slaves.

    Like

    1. Good point. So let’s sell them to some other nation that’s still so low as to have slaves… that way we can poison our enemies. Two birds, one stone.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I thought of that, but how much knowledge do the new slaves have that the foriegn country could exploit against us?

        Like

        1. Sell them at a Boko Haram auction. That is practical multiculturalism.

          Auto-correct kept insisting that I wanted Book Madam.
          Haha! I won.

          Like

    1. I think we’re about ready for a class action lawsuit against the educational establishment of knowingly misrepresenting the future worth of what they are selling.

      The financial burden many students are encouraged to take on comes close to indentured servitude.

      Like

      1. Legal students have been trying that for a couple of years now against their schools. The courts have been backing the schools even in the face of proven fraud.

        Like

  10. My modest proposal for dealing with politicians involves live, to-the-death reenactments of the fight from “Amok Time”.

    KROYKA!

    Like

      1. Bill and Hillary in the first match. Survivor vs. Chelsea in the second.

        Yes, I *am* evil.

        Like

        1. No, no, no. The “Amok Time” match was between two men for the honor of marrying the woman (who was a coniving bitch).

          Like

    2. A friend has been promoting his “Coliseum Channel” concept for a couple of decades now.

      Like

  11. We could start by simply requiring Congress to follow the laws they pass. Like their ‘exemption’ from insider trading, their ‘exemption’ from Obamacare, Like the Kennedy Clan.
    I think a simpler proposal would be a constitutional amendment, where upon ratification, all laws and executive branch ‘regulations’ currently on the books are null and void. Second, anyone with a Law degree is automatically ineligible for any position in Federal service.

    Like

    1. Removing the lawyers from federal employ has long seemed to me to be an excellent starting place. I’d also like to see random spot checks of government agencies, where a citizen volunteer can insist that any randomly selected employee (“Hi, Bob? Right, Bob, I have a question . . .”) explain in twenty worlds or less what a rule is does, and they have another twenty to explain why. If three feds can’t explain in clear English what a regulation is supposed to accomplish and why, the rule gets flagged for removal.

      Like

      1. Ooh, I like that.
        But then, without mindless regulations to interpret and enforce, how can all those bureaucrats stay employed?

        Like

        1. I have a few ideas . . . *beatific smile, lightly runs nail file along claw tips*

          Slightly more seriously, a ten year hiring freeze sounds like a good start. The lump-on-an-anaconda of baby Boomers retiring will start trimming the numbers without requiring the use of the volcano suggested above. I’d also like to find a way to strongly discourage the revolving-door of things like Goldman-Sachs and the Treasury that seems to begin in college, but small, practical steps first.

          Like

          1. Glenn Reynolds has been proposing a 50% revolving-door surtax for years now, where if a legislator takes a job in a private industry that he/she had a hand in regulating during his/her term in office, their income is taxed an additional 50% (on top of regular taxes) for five years.

            Like

          2. Democrats like to drone on about the Bill Clinton Era of Prosperity.
            So simply reset the budget of each Federal department to the level of spending under Bill (adjusted for inflation, of course). Also insist that 50% of all GS-15s and Senior Executive Service folks be stationed more than 250 miles from DC. Finally, someone wiser than I suggested building the Attu Island Federal Office Building.

            Like

            1. Dems really dislike it when you point out that Clinton Prosperity requires Republican run houses, and a President who will sign their bills into law.

              Like

    2. We could start by simply requiring Congress to follow the laws they pass.

      And they get it first. If they have issues with a trial run of it, it fails and doesn’t apply to the rest of the country. If it’s a good idea, they get to demonstrate that it is.

      Like

      1. *grin* Dick was supposed to be a proper noun. I was unable to capitalize on that for maximum effect.

        Like

          1. Some puns require a bit of setup to come off effectively.

            Poor Dick. We’re going to miss him.

            Like

    1. I think spending cuts should precede the tax cuts, but some tax cuts are definitely in order.

      Like

      1. Not to start off with, I think. First thing we do is compromise.
        5:1 spending cut to tax increase.
        Then, after the next election, 10:1 spending cut to tax increase.
        Then, after the next election, 20:1 spending cut to tax increase.
        Then, after the next election, tax cuts and spending freeze, indexed to inflation, to only be lifted in case of a declared war.

        Like

Comments are closed.