Ebola upgraded in seriousness from “dead foreigners” to “sick Americans”

18 Aug

ATLANTA—the Ebola epidemic has taken a grim new turn in the last few days, as officials confirmed that in addition to killing hundreds of people in Africa, there are now at least two sick Americans.

“I guess I was following it before,” said David Hemstrich, public-health expert at the National Security Council. “There were all these people dying in places like Liberia and Guinea, or maybe Guyana, or something. But now it’s serious.”

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta issued a bulletin advising Americans to “stay away from foreign countries” as well as avoiding foreigners who look “germy.” It also suggested ceasing to watch television shows set overseas, “just to be on the safe side.”

Hemstrich hastened to add that “we’re not saying that an African life is less valuable than an American life.” After a pause, he added, “at worst, we’re very strongly implying that.”

Police departments promise 10% fewer killings of unarmed African-American boys next year

13 Aug

ST. LOUIS—as the backlash against the shooting of Michael Brown continued, a coalition of US police departments issued a statement announcing a “commitment to kill fewer unarmed African-American children next year.”

Said Dave McAughtry, spokesman for the Association of American Police Chiefs, “While I don’t want to say that killing unarmed boys has to stop, we think it’s probably appropriate to take it down a notch.”

McAughtry said that police departments would engage in a rigorous training program that would enable police officers to tell the difference between a deadly weapon and “other similar looking items” such as candy, beverages, or nothing, “even when held by a black person.”

At the same time, though, McAughtry said that it was important not to criticize officers who killed unarmed black youth, especially if someone only did it two or three times.

“I mean, there are moderately serious consequences for a patrolman’s career if he kills someone he shouldn’t have,” said McAughtry. “You can count on some serious ribbing from the guys down at the station, often for months on end.”

Obama promises Iraq intervention will be strictly limited to “bombing and fighting and, you know, whatever”

8 Aug

WASHINGTON–as President Obama ordered airstrikes in Iraq, he reassured a skeptical American public that he was not making an open-ended military commitment. Instead, he pledged that American intervention would be strictly limited in scope to “bombing, and maybe some fighting, and, you know, whatever sort of seems like a good idea at the time.” He also noted that he had put a non-negotiable time limit on military involvement, promising that it would last no longer than “a while, or until we win.”

The White House announcement immediately brought relief to worried citizens. “I was afraid this was the beginning of another quagmire,” said Tom Dallard of Sheboygan, WI. “But now I figure the worst case is a long, unproductive war.”

Republicans rallied behind the President, but their support came with warnings. “If we’re going into Iraq, we need to go in all the way,” said Sen. John McCain (R–AZ). “I expect that an invasion of Iraq will result in a lot of American soldiers being killed, so if we don’t invade, then we’ll be dishonoring their future sacrifice.”

Obama made a second announcement, hours later, in which he expressed confidence that the intervention in Iraq would be successful. “If history teaches us anything,” he said, “it’s that when we dabble in complex internal conflicts in faraway countries where we can’t really explain why we’re there, everything turns out just great.”

SPECIAL REPORT: Looking to the future, Republicans plan to nominate a middle-aged white guy for president in 2016

5 Aug

TWISSBLOG EXCLUSIVE–after months of investigation, Twissblog can now reveal for the first time that the Republican Party, concerned about its appeal in light of changing American demographics, is highly likely to nominate a middle-aged straight white man for President in 2016.

“We’ve been looking at this for the last several years,” said one senior Republican strategist, speaking on condition of anonymity. “America is changing, and we thought–what kind of candidate should we put forward? And we’ve decided to take some risks here and nominate a white dude, probably in his 50s.”

A Republican congressman who also asked not to be named observed that “the party’s backbone has a lot of great African-Americans, Latinos, women, you name it–but it’s time we went a different direction.”

The congressman, who coincidentally was a middle-aged straight white man himself, shared data to explain why the party was headed in this direction. “88% of Americans are now men,” he explained. “100% are white, and 94% were born between 1955 and 1965.” Asked about the source of the numbers, he explained that they “came straight from Paul Ryan’s budget experts.”

The only other presidential elections in the last 100 years in which the GOP candidate was a middle-aged white guy were in 2012, 2008, 2004, 2000, 1996, 1992, 1988, 1984, 1980, 1976, 1972, 1968, 1964, 1960, 1956, 1952, 1948, 1944, 1940, 1936, 1932, 1928, 1924, 1920, and 1916. Before that, you have to go all the way back to 1912.

20140806-103748-38268749.jpgJust some of the white people the Republican Party has already elected to Congress

In shift, Republicans will start to complain about breakdown in sanctity of gay marriage

31 Jul

WASHINGTON–cementing a trend towards greater open-mindedness, the Republican Party today altered its official platform to start bemoaning how no one respects gay marriage any more, and how things are much worse than they used to be.

“We need to be seen as the party of tolerance,” said Reince Priebus, RNC chairman. “That’s why, effective immediately, we will start making narrow-minded judgments about how all Americans, gay and straight, are letting this country go to the dogs.”

Like many people, Priebus attributed his change of heart to getting to know gay people in everyday life. “There used to be this unmarried gay couple that lived across the street, and I never thought anything of it,” he explained. “Then one day, I saw the two of them, and it just started to make me mad–living in sin like that just made me sick, and it was tearing at the fabric of our society. And that’s a change towards inclusion I hope all Republicans can make.”

Lisa Niedermayer, a divorced lesbian mother of two, was pleased to hear of the change in the GOP platform. “On behalf of divorced gay people everywhere, I’m really pleased that I’ve started to be a disappointment to the Republican Party,” she said.

Paul Ryan’s far-reaching anti-poverty plan calls for poor people to “get some more money somehow”

25 Jul

WASHINGTON—in a bold statement that will upend the politics of inequality in America, Rep. Paul Ryan (R—WI) today announced the new Republican approach to fighting poverty, in which he called on poor people “to somehow get some more money, so that they aren’t quite as poor.”

“Just imagine how much of a difference it would make,” said Ryan, speaking to reporters, “if all the poor people in this country did something that enabled them to get a lot more money—fifty, maybe one hundred thousand dollars—with more where that came from. We could eliminate poverty within a generation, without using a dollar of taxpayer money.”

Other Republicans quickly rallied to Ryan’s plan. “Paul’s bold idea shows us the way to reducing poverty without getting the government involved,” said Ted Cruz. “I’m going to go down to that homeless guy panhandling in front of the Dirksen Building and tell him he should go get some money. And then I’ll take whatever money he has in that cardboard box, because he won’t be needing it any more.”

The White House was left playing catchup, announcing only that they would “study the issue” to determine whether more money would be helpful to poor people. “We don’t want to rush out with a lofty statement we can’t back up,” said a spokesman. “We save that for our foreign-policy speeches.”

Vladimir Putin denies he has ever heard of any country called “Ukraine”

23 Jul

MOSCOW–as pressure on Russia mounted over the recent downing of a civilian airliner, killing 298 people, President Vladimir Putin denied that he had ever supplied arms to rebels in, or ever heard of “this so-called Ukraine.”

“Look, I guess there must be something on our Western borders, but I sure don’t know what it is, and I’ve never been there,” said Putin. “I’d be afraid of falling off the edge of the world, or being eaten by a sea monster.”

Putin, speaking from horseback to reporters, said that “there is no way Russia could have supplied anti-aircraft missiles to rebels in–what did you call it? Hurricane?–because we have no such weapons ourselves.”

Asked about the “Made in Russia” stenciled on the backs of missiles seen in news photographs, Putin explained that they were “typos.”

Asked further about a note found in a crate of missiles that read, “Hello from Oleg, deputy foreman at the Export Division of Anti-Aircraft Missile Factory Number Three in Smolensk, Russia!”, Putin explained that “the experts are really not sure whether Smolensk is a real place, either.”

Putin added that Russia could not afford to build missiles. “As you can see here today, the country is so poor that I am unable to afford a shirt, and need to keep warm by flexing,” he explained.

Vladimir Putin speaking to reporters, immediately before beating an alligator to death with his bare hands


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,649 other followers

%d bloggers like this: