While the country awaits a Senator's decision on ratifying the START treaty, MeanMesa takes a look behind the scene.
|Patriotic Senate Republican War Experts (image source )|
To: Billionaires Club, Admin. Assistant, Political Division
From: Senator Jon Kyl
Subject: Modified Tactics, START Treaty Ratification
First, please accept my apology for communicating so openly. I would like to clearly emphasize how reluctant I am to disturb you. I understand that our agreement stipulates very concisely that I am to avoid any traceable association with your interest group, but what has surfaced in my own office may represent important new information requiring a decision at your level.
I have recently added a science consultant to my Senatorial staffers. The results of research conducted by this individual form the basis for the current dilemma. Based on this latest finding, certain elements of our original strategy have come into question. Of course, I remain entirely prepared to carry out your intentions as they were first given to me, but in this case, I feel compelled to suggest revisiting some of the basic ideas you introduced before.
I am taking this action because I now suspect that some of our original conclusions may need to be adjusted in the light of what has been revealed by my science advisor.
Given the great importance you have expressed concerning my complete adherence to the directives of the party's leader in the Senate, I have searched for some third path for my future actions. Our original concept was to deny, at any cost, any opportunity for the President to garner Presidential respect which could arise from his administration's ratifying the START treaty with the Russians.
To this end, I fully understand your group's willingness to place the US population of common people in jeopardy as unavoidable, collateral damage should failure to ratify lead to nuclear conflict. I have never been of a mind to hold this prospect as a great concern because a majority of the general population of the lower classes which would be lost in such an exchange do not, in general, agree with the party's leadership's policy, anyway.
|Slim Pickens as Maj. King Kong from movie Dr. Strangelove (image source )|
The political value of either of the two possibilities, as you have accurately pointed out already, is acceptably balanced, that is, the value of discrediting the President is more than worth the risk of vaporizing a few million voters who seem unwilling to embrace our longer term political goals. In any event, even if the Russians are simply perturbed by non-ratification and only progress to their threats of a new arms race in the absence of an actual attack, the foreign policy nightmare can still be beneficially blamed on the President's Democratic administration.
If this be the case, we can still look forward to extremely favorable contracts with our associates in the arms supply sector.
However, I feel that we must now also consider the revelations of my science advisor. He has prepared a careful estimate of the price/value loss to real estate your group has been acquiring in the favorable market brought about by your carefully designed economic collapse.
|"Darn, all of our new stuff that we got cheap is getting vaporized!" (source)|
Quite aside from the rather uninteresting possibility of the elimination of a large block of voters, the projected losses in your group's recent real estate and commercial acquisitions might prove severe enough to alter decisions made in our original investment model. If your group concurs with this concern of mine, I am, of course, entirely prepared to respond under any modified directives they forward to me through our normal channels.
Most Respectful Regards,
Most Respectful Regards,