Thursday, August 18, 2005

The Robin Williams Peace Plan

The Robin Williams' Peace plan from here

I see a lot of people yelling for peace but I have not heard of a plan for peace. So, here's one plan.

1.) "The US will apologize to the world for our "interference" in their affairs, past & present. You know, Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Tojo, Noriega, Milosevic, Hussein, and the rest of those 'good ole boys.' We will never "interfere" again.

2.) We will withdraw our troops from all over the world, starting with Germany, South Korea, the Middle East, and the Philippines. They don't want us there. We would station troops at our borders. No one allowed sneaking through holes in the fence.

3.) All illegal aliens have 90 days to get their affairs together and leave. We'll give them a free trip home. After 90 days the remainder will be gathered up and deported immediately, regardless of who or where they are. They're illegal! France will welcome them.

4.) All future visitors will be thoroughly checked and limited to 90 days unless given a special permit! No one from a terrorist nation will be allowed in. If you don't like it there, change it yourself and don't hide here. Asylum would never be available to anyone. We don't need any more cab drivers or 7-11 cashiers.

5.) No foreign "students" over age 21. The older ones are the bombers. If they don't attend classes, they get a "D" and it's back home baby.

6.) The US will make a strong effort to become self-sufficient energy wise. This will include developing nonpolluting sources of energy but will require a temporary drilling of oil in the Alaskan wilderness. The caribou will have to cope for a while.

7.) Offer Saudi Arabia and other oil producing countries $10 a barrel for their oil. If they don't like it, we go someplace else. They can go somewhere else to sell their production. (About a week of the wells filling up the storage sites would be enough.)

8.) If there is a famine or other natural catastrophe in the world, we will not "interfere." They can pray to Allah or whomever, for seeds, rain, cement or whatever they need. Besides most of what we give them is stolen or given to the army. The people who need it most get very little, if anything.

9.) Ship the UN Headquarters to an isolated island some place. We don't need the spies and fair weather friends here. Besides, the building would make a good homeless shelter or lockup for illegal aliens.

10.) All Americans must go to charm and beauty school. That way, no one can call us "Ugly Americans" any longer. The Language we speak is ENGLISH.....learn it...or LEAVE.....

Now, isn't that a winner of a plan?

The Statue of Liberty is no longer saying 'Give me your poor, your tired, your huddled masses.' She's got a baseball bat and she's yelling, 'You want a piece of me?"

14 Comments:

At 5:39 PM, Blogger Roseville Conservative said...

AMEN ALL BY MYSELF!!!

 
At 1:54 PM, Blogger Possum said...

Some how or another I don't think he really said those things... unless Robin Williams is some other guy with the same name.

I like what is written, I'm just saying it sounds like folklore to attribute it to the Robin Williams because I've heard him be wacky liberal. A quick google/snopes search proves this did not come from him. But I do like it!

 
At 3:36 PM, Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...

How about the following:

1. Apologizing for funding the overthrow of democratically elected governments in Iran, Algeria, Guatemala and Nicaragua for starters?

2. Great idea to get the troops out of everywhere except here. They should be defending the homeland.

3. Bush and his buddies want the illegals so don't spoil the party. How else will we get cheap fruit?

4. Probably because I am well educated, most of the people I know from "terrorist nations" are engineers, doctors and scientists here in the U.S. It would be a real shame to ban them from the country at a time when the CEO of Texas Instruments and CEO's of other corporations are complaining the post-9/11 immigration restrictions have made it difficult to find qualified people for their companies.
Check out this Fortune Magazine article for more on this point: http://www.fortune.com/fortune/ a...1081269,00.html

5. Same comment as #4.

6. It's about f'ing time someone from the reich wing suggests this. Solar panels and biodiesel.

7. Offer Saudi Arabia $10 a barrel and it will certainly take its business elsewhere. Hmm, like China.

8. You're obviously not a Christian because Jesus preached charity for charity's sake.

9. The U.N. is irrelevant to U.S. policy and always has been. Get over it.

10. Does the speaking English requirement apply to the migrant workers who pick fruit and allow us to have such cheap produce? If they are forced to learn English, I fear that the cost of the English lessons may be included in the price of grapes.

 
At 4:13 PM, Blogger Free Agency Rules said...

intellectual insurgent:

Wait, I'm not a Christian because I posted someone else's qoute?

Please explain how this makes me a non-Christian.

Next, Jesus expressed the need for Charity, but his teachings also said not to feed people who refused to work.

"For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat." 2 Thes 3:10


FAR.

 
At 4:14 PM, Blogger Free Agency Rules said...

possum,

I provided the link, but I can not verify the authorship beyond that.

It doesn't sound like the Robin Williams I heard about either, but it was attributed to him on the site I found. (Maybe another Robin Williams. :)




FAR.

 
At 4:25 PM, Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...

I thought that was your quote. Oops.
Refusing to feed people who refuse to work is a very different thing than the post point that says if anyone has a natural disaster, they can pray to god for seeds because we aren't going to help. That is very un-Christian.

 
At 8:24 AM, Blogger Free Agency Rules said...

ii,

Helping people is what Christians do better than anyone else. The Christians in this country give "billions" of their own money every year to charity.

However, as the quote at the bottom of my blog says..."Charity comes from the heart, not the Government."

Government should not be in the business of helping some by punishing others. Unless you believe that taking money from some without due process is not punishiment.

Aren't fines a form of punishment? Why do we fine some people just because they make a certian dollar amount more than someone else?


FAR.

 
At 8:49 AM, Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...

I don't disagree with you in any way on that point. You sound like more of a libertarian than a republican. Republicans believe strongly in welfare - for corporations, farmers, energy companies and rich people who don't want to pay taxes. Welfare is welfare, whether you call it a tax break, an incentive or whatever. A rose by any other name is still a rose.

The U.S. Tax Code is one of the biggest welfare systems in the world.

 
At 12:14 PM, Blogger Free Agency Rules said...

ii,

I do lean toward being more to the right than most Republicans. That is one of the subtle reasons I choose my moniker.

FAR = FAR RIGHT.

I think anyone that is right of center that is not a Republican is throwing away their vote.

Now, if J.F. Kennedy was running for President, I would vote Democratic.

I vote for the person, not the party. It just so happens the Dems in general want more socialism than the Repubs.


FAR.

 
At 1:11 PM, Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...

The left-right distinction is arbitrary. The unfortunate state of affairs in this country is the two-party state. It limits true intellectual debate on issues because it reduces everything to us v. them. If I am pro-life and anti-war, who do I vote for? No one represents my views. In that case, if I vote, my vote is wasted no matter who I vote for because it was cast for someone who holds beliefs with which I fundamentally disagree.

What America really needs is a viable third party. The Dems have been out to pasture for years and the Republicans are looking more like fascists every day.

 
At 3:33 PM, Blogger Free Agency Rules said...

ii,

I agree with most of what you say, however, I do think that there is a right and left position which is much more relavent than a Dem v Rep position.

Draw a line. The line represents the amount of government intrusion in their citizens lives. This is the true spectrum of government, because government is force.

Now, on the far left we have totalitiarism and on the far right we have Anarchy.

A pure Democracy lies to the left of center, while a Republic such as ours lies to the right of center.

Socialism and Communism are near the far left. Which is where many liberals find themselves. They generally see the government as the "be all, end all" solution to all life's probelms, where as the conservatives generally see the government as the "big brother screw up" that it is. You want inefficient and bungling, give it to the government.

Most (R)'s want the "Golden Rule" to be the order of the day, which makes me wonder how that is fascist?

I think people who find that their views are not in line with either liberals or conservatives, just need to understand where one of their views is relative to which side of the line their overall philosophy is on.

Nobody wants war, but there are some that are worth fighting. We can then determine which party best aligns with their views.

I am somewhat in the same boat as you in as much as I support Bush's position on the war on terror, but I can't stand his positions on big spending and the border/illegal Aliens problems. So, I decide which positions carry the highest priority, and I choose the war on terror.

Alas, I have found myself faced with poor choices in almost every election and have had to select the best of the two poor canidates, except for Regan.

But I would rather vote for Bush than for some other guy and wind up seeing Kerry win becasue I didn't support the "canidate that is closest to what I want AND HAS A CHANCE TO WIN."

A third canidate does not fall into that category.

FAR.

 
At 3:38 PM, Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...

I understand your point, but I assess the situation much differently. It is the Republican party that is promoting massive government intrusion into private lives. The PATRIOT Act's provisions allowing secret courts are reminiscent of dictatorships; allowing the government to sneak and peek into our homes, library records and medical records without a warrant and without a notice requirement is frightening. And those are just two provisions of the Act that fly right in the face of all their bullshit about loving "freedom".

No Child Left Behind requires all high schools to provide the Pentagon with lists of their students so that the military can recruit kids.

Even with this phony baloney rhetoric about the "culture of life", the President, Congress, state and federal courts (led by Tom DeLey) mounted a massive intrusion into the marriage of Michael and Terri Schiavo (what happened to the sanctity of marriage). http://intellectualinsurgent.blogspot.com/2005/03/sanctity-of-marriage.html

If I have to choose, I will go with the "liberals" because they have at least proven they respect the Constitution. War on terror or not, the Constitution is what makes America a unique and special country and it is the Republicans who has launched a massive assault on our individual rights. The Constitution is my priority.

 
At 11:12 AM, Blogger Free Agency Rules said...

ii,

I agree with you that the Patriot Act has provisions that "go too far" such as the ability for the Feds to sign their own search warrants, but I think the Libs and the ACLU have been using "freedom to destroy freedom" much more so than the Repub's.

I think the Libs are by far more to the left of center and the R's are by far more to the right of center. And the Constitution is without a dobbt, to the right of center.


FAR.

 
At 2:28 PM, Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...

American in 10 years will tell us which one of us is right. I suspect I will be. :-)

 

Post a Comment

<< Home