Celebrating the Death of a Dictator (By Ignoring the Fall of Another Dictator)

When Fidel Castro died, Cuban Americans celebrated. In Miami, Cuban-Americans chanted “The tyrant is dead.”

There’s no question that Fidel Castro was a dictator and no question that he overthrew another government to become Cuba’s dictator. However, if you do a little research into history, you’ll realize many Cuban Americans’ parents lived in Cuba under another dictator named Fulgencio Batista.

According to Wikipedia, Batista ran for president in 1952. Facing certain electoral defeat, he led a military coup.

With financial and military support from the United States government, Batista suspended the 1940 Constitution and revoked most political liberties, including the right to strike.

He then aligned with the wealthiest landowners who owned the largest sugar plantations, and his policies helped widen the gap between rich and poor Cubans.

Eventually it reached the point where most of the sugar industry was in U.S. hands, and foreigners owned 70% of the arable land. Batista’s increasingly corrupt and repressive government then began to systematically profit from the exploitation of Cuba’s commercial interests, by negotiating lucrative relationships with both the American Mafia, who controlled the drug, gambling, and prostitution businesses in Havana, and with large U.S.-based multinational companies who were awarded lucrative contracts.

Batista essentially was a dictator who exploited Cuba at the expense of the common people. So when you see Cuban Americans dancing in the street to celebrate the death of Fidel Castro, the big question is did the parents of these Cuban Americans also celebrate the overthrow of Fulgencio Batista since he was also a dictator? If not, why not?

If the goal is to free Cuba of a dictator, then how come the American government seemingly supported Batista, who was a dictator? Did they support him because he was friendly to American financial interests and ignore his oppressive regime against his own people? If so, then how come American newspapers don’t report this information as part of the story covering Cuban-Americans celebrating the death of Fidel Castro?

By just taking a little time to research history, you can suddenly see that the hatred for Fidel Castro isn’t just because he was a dictator but likely because he wasn’t friendly to the financial interests of the people profiting off the exploitation of the common people regardless of whether a dictator was running Cuba or not.

There’s no question that Batista was a dictator just like Fidel Castro was a dictator. So why is Fidel Castro hated and Fulgencio Batista is not? Could it be that financial interests are more important than democracy and the well-being of the common people?

To read a Wall Street Journal article about Castro’s death that conveniently ignores any question about Batista’s equally repressive dictatorship over Cuba, click here.

How to Pick Up Women Who Support Donald Trump

Donald Trump has made numerous sexist comments about women, yet close to half of all women in America decided to vote for him anyway. That makes as much sense as black people in Louisiana who voted for David Duke, a renown Ku Klux Klan leader.

Since so many American women supported Donald Trump, this opens a huge opportunity for men to pick them up in bars. In the interest in helping men get laid in America, here are some pickup lines you can use on women who support Donald Trump:

  • When you smile, you light up a room faster than napalm dropped on a village in Vietnam.
  • Your skin is softer than the children working in my factories.
  • Are you an angel? Or are you just wearing your Ku Klux Klan hood and robe out in public?

By appealing to a woman’s sense of vanity and support for Donald Trump, you too should have little problem convincing a Donald Trump supporter to go home with you at night.

An Easy Way to Get Into Heaven

If you listen to conservatives, the real solution to all of our problems is to return back to God. By that they mean their God and their way of worshipping their God.

The general consensus is that we’re all going straight to hell unless we follow the rules of God, which basically means always doing good and never getting tempted into evil. If you get tempted into evil, you risk facing God’s wrath and being punished in the afterlife by getting sent straight to hell.

So there are two flaws with someone’s desire to get into heaven. First, getting yourself into heaven is basically a selfish act. You want to save yourself because you think you deserve it, yet a truly unselfish, Christian act would be to give up your place in heaven so someone else can have it instead.

I guess you won’t see too many religious people embracing that idea.

However, a more serious obstacle to getting into heaven is the so-called belief that you must be 100% good all the time and if you stray from the righteous path, you risk going straight to hell. Using that logic, it seems like the fastest and most direct way to hell would be to worship not God, but the devil.

If you become a devil-worshipper, now you must be evil 100% of the time so you can go straight to hell. However, if you do a few good acts in your life, you’ll risk having Satan punish you by sending you straight to heaven.

See how easy that path to heaven can be?

With a God-fearing approach, you have to be good most of the time. With a Satan-worshipping approach, you just have to be good some of the time. Then Satan will punish you in the afterlife by denying you from hell and sending you straight to heaven instead.

So the quickest path to heaven seems to be embracing evil and doing good once in a while — which is exactly what most extreme right-wing (and left-wing) people actually do.

Of course, if those people are going straight to heaven, then it’s far more likely that heaven is really hell, so you really want to go to hell so you won’t have to ever see those people ever again for the rest of your life.

After all, it’s bad enough sharing your life with so many self-righteous people who use religion as an excuse to justify everything from slavery to war, but how would you like to spend an eternity with these same people?

That’s the definition of hell right there, spending an eternity with self-righteous people. If given a choice, maybe hell doesn’t sound so bad after all.

The Real Purpose of Any Government

The first priority of any government is self-preservation.

The second priority of any government is enrichment of the people running the government.

There is no third priority.

Anything governments do that actually helps people is really designed to keep that government in power and/or enrich the people running the government.

Governments never work for the people. The people work for the government.

In the eyes of the government, its citizens are expendable. The only time citizens are not expendable is when they’re needed to protect the government or enrich the people running the government.

It’s a simple system. It only requires citizens to remain unaware of their real purpose. Loyalty and patriotism are ways to convince citizens to sacrifice their own lives for the good of their government.

When was the last time any government risked destruction to protect the lives of its citizens?

You can never trust any government because it’s impossible to legislate away corruption, greed, and selfishness.

You can only trust people. The moment people become part of any government, they’ll only do a good job based on their own moral and ethical values, which is impossible to predict or control through legislation. Making laws can never eliminate the worst parts of human behavior.

Therefore the whole purpose of Congress, which makes laws, is meaningless if they don’t define the moral and ethical values of the nation at the same time.

Governments are only as moral as the people running them. To run a government intelligently, the people running that government must be intelligent and rational.

Most governments are not intelligent or rational because most people are not intelligent or rational.

People get the governments they accept. If the people’s standards are low, then the government’s standards will be equally low.

Ultimately, people are in control of the world, but only if they recognize this fact and exercise their power to choose.

It’s all up to you.

How to be Stupid as a Corporate Executive

When Sam Walton started Wal-Mart, he had to put up with a problem that all retailers face, namely shoplifting and employee theft. Rather than hire security guards at the front of his stores, which might prove intimidating to customers, Sam Walton decided to hire greeters instead.

The job of a greeter was to welcome people to the store but also to keep an eye out for theft in a non-obtrusive way. Wal+Mart’s executives fought Sam Walton on this, claiming it was a waste of money but Sam Walton got his way and put greeters in all of his stores. Not surprisingly, theft dropped and the cost of the greeters was more than made up for by the savings in reducing theft.

Then Wal-Mart’s executives got the bright idea to save money by getting rid of the greeters. Their logic was that since greeters cost money and didn’t do anything directly to increase profits, they were an unnecessary expense. Not surprisingly, Wal-Mart saved money by eliminating greeters and then started losing money after theft started increasing dramatically.

In a move meant to save money, Wal-Mart’s executives found a way to cost the company money. That’s the typical corporate executive mentality. Save money now regardless of the consequences later.

With that in mind, here’s a similar idea. Why not eliminate corporate executives? This would provide an immediate cost savings, especially once you eliminate the exorbitant salaries, company perks such as company cars, and executive offices not to mention corporate secretaries who often double as thinly disguised (and equally thinly dressed) prostitutes and mistresses for the corporate executives.

So how come corporate executives never think of saving a company money by eliminating their own jobs? Most likely because corporate executives aren’t really interested in saving a company money so much as they’re interested in increasing their own benefits regardless of the long-term consequences for the actual company.

Before corporate executives cut other people’s jobs, they should first cut their own jobs and salaries to save money, provided, of course, that they’re actually serious about saving the company money.

Since corporate executives really aren’t serious about saving a company money, they should simply be open and honest about it and  publicly promote themselves as pursuing greed and selfishness. Then again, most corporate executives do promote themselves as the party of greed and selfishness by hiring lobbyists to influence politicians for their benefit.

The real problem isn’t that corporate executives are greedy, selfishness, and short-sighted. The real problem is that much of the general public is also greedy, selfish, and short-sighted, so they don’t want to hold others to a higher standard because they hope to reach that same “higher standard” one day when they can also exploit others by being greedy, selfish, and short-sighted. The only difference between a rich greedy and selfish person and a poor one is that the poor one hasn’t yet had a chance to be greedy and selfish on a mass scale.

After seeing theft increase, Wal-Mart decided that the cost of hiring greeters was still less than the expense of store theft. So Wal-Mart brought back their greeters and theft levels have dropped as a result.

Most people follow the common sense rule that “if it isn’t broke, don’t fix it.” However corporate executives follow their own common sense rule that says, “If we eliminate employees, buildings, and products, we can bring our total expenses to absolute zero while still maintaining our current level of profits!”

If you own a company and want help running it into the ground as quickly as possible, hire more corporate executives. They’ll never fail or disappoint you.

To read more about Wal-Mart’s mistake in eliminating greeters, click here.


Stop Comparing Donald Trump to Hitler

After Donald Trump announced he wanted to build a wall to keep out Mexican immigrants, do a mass deportation of all illegal immigrants, and ban Muslims from entering the United States, many people started comparing Trump to Adolf Hitler. Strangely, many Rabbis have come out to say that making comparisons of Trump to Hitler is wrong because it diminishes the real tragedy of the Holocaust and the six million Jews who died.

When you read the arguments against comparing Trump to Hitler, you realize that these rabbis aren’t defending Trump so much as they’re protecting the memory of the Holocaust. These rabbis argue that Trump is different from Hitler because Hitler committed genocide against the Jews while Trump has simply talked about deporting illegal immigrants and banning Muslims.

So these rabbis are correct in saying that Trump is not Hitler because Trump has not yet rounded up masses of people and exterminated them in concentration camps. Then again in the early days before he came into power, Adolf Hitler didn’t do that either. Hitler only committed mass atrocities against people once he became the leader of Germany while Trump has not yet had the chance to become the leader of the United States.

With that in mind, the arguments against comparing Trump to Hitler could also be used to defend Hitler in his younger days from Hitler after he came to power. After all, before he became Chancellor of Germany, Hitler also didn’t round up Jews and exterminate them. He simply blamed all of Germany’s problems on Jews and encouraged violence against them.

The main argument rabbis are using to avoid comparing Trump to Hitler is that Hitler committed atrocities but Trump has not. So if Trump is not Hitler in his later days, perhaps it’s more accurate to compare Trump to Hitler during Hitler’s early days.

In the early days, Hitler blamed a group of people (Jews) for all the problems of the nation. Today, Trump blames two groups of people (Mexicans and Muslims) for all the problems of the nation.

In the early days, Hitler said he would make the country great again by making it a stronger world military power. Today, Trump says he will make the country great again by making it a stronger world military power.

In the early days, Hitler roused people’s emotions by promising simple solutions (take over more land) to complex problems (the consequences of the Treaty of Versailles). Today, Trump rouses people’s emotions by promising  promising simple solutions (build a wall) to complex problems (illegal immigration).

So in many ways, Trump is not the Hitler who committed atrocities and genocide, but perhaps Trump really is much closer to the Hitler of the early days before he committed atrocities and genocide.

Maybe the comparison of Trump to Hitler isn’t to diminish the Holocaust but to warn people that Trump is so close to Hitler during his early days that if we allow Trump to go unchecked, he could turn into the Hitler of the later days because he’s already so close to Hitler during the early days.

If the arguments of rabbis defending Trump from comparisons of Hitler are valid, then those same arguments could have been equally valid in defending Hitler during the early days. After all, Hitler in the early 1930’s hadn’t killed any Jews yet; he simply advocated blaming them for everything.

So if these rabbis dismissing Trump comparisons to Hitler were around in Germany during the 1930’s, would they have advocated people to stop comparing Hitler in his early days with Hitler in his later days?

The main reason people are comparing Trump to Hitler is to warn people that Trump is too closely following Hitler’s actions before Hitler committed atrocities. The point is to keep Trump out of office so he won’t have a chance to commit atrocities like Hitler did.

Perhaps Trump won’t commit atrocities like Hitler did, but do you really want to take that chance, knowing that Trump is far too similar to Hitler in Hitler’s early days?

Comparing Trump to Hitler isn’t meant to diminish the Holocaust in any way. It’s meant to warn people that there’s a new person capable of creating a new horror to the world because he’s closely following Hitler in the early days.

It’s fine for rabbis to say that Trump isn’t Hitler because there was only one Hitler and there will never be another Hitler. However, there can be people who may be similar to Hitler (or possibly even worse), supported by rabid followers who believe in violence to solving problems. Do you want to take a chance on putting someone like that in power?

Trump is not Hitler. He could be even worse. If that happens, people could then compare Hitler to Donald Trump.

If We Hired People the Same Way We Elect Presidents

One of the oddest features of the latest Presidential campaigning is that the most popular candidates are those with the least amount of experience working in government. Candidates touting their “outsider” appeal are basically saying, “I’ve never done this type of job before so therefore I’m best qualified to make the changes we need.”

That’s like hiring someone who knows nothing about plumbing to fix your clogged toilet or hiring someone who knows nothing about electrical wiring to rewire your house.

Nobody in their right mind would hire an unqualified worker in any other field, but when it comes to politics, knowing nothing and having zero experience is somehow an asset while having experience and working in the government is somehow considered a liability.

With that in mind, we can now visit a job interview between two applicants for a brain surgeon in a major hospital.

INTERVIEWER: As you know, this hospital prides itself on hits excellent reputation as the finest medical facility in the world. We’re looking for our next head surgeon who can maintain this hospital’s research and reputation and take it to new places. So first, tell me about yourself.

APPLICANT #1: I’ve been working as a surgeon for the past twenty years and helped Dr. Rubens perform one of the latest artificial kidney operations in the world using techniques that he and I both helped pioneer. I’ve written and published numerous scientific papers about surgery and healing techniques that use light and sound to heal damaged cells at the molecular level, and I’ve volunteered for the past ten years to perform operations in Third World countries absolutely free.

INTERVIEWER: Uh, thanks, but to tell you the truth, we were looking for someone with more radical ideas for changing the way this hospital, and the entire medical community, works. I don’t think you’re the person we have in mind. Next!

APPLICANT #2: I’ve never used a knife before in all my life because when I rob liquor stores, I only use a gun. I carry a big gun because a big gun scares people and if they et in my way, I blast a hole big enough to put Cleveland in. I never wash my hands because that’s a waste of water, and I don’t trust medicine, surgery, or hospitals. Whatever happened to the old fashion way of draining someone’s bad blood like they did to George Washington? If you drain a person of enough blood, there’s no way their illness can survive. Of course, they might not survive either, but just because someone didn’t work in the past doesn’t mean it can’t work differently in the future. That’s why I think I’m qualified to be the head surgeon of this hospital because I bring an outsider’s point of view. I know nothing about medical practices so I’ll bring fresh ideas. I’ve never worked in a hospital before in my life, so I know how to run a medical institution the right way. I’ve never healed anyone so that means I’m completely qualified to work as a healer in the medical community. I promise to bring change even if those changes make no sense whatsoever because people want to see action, even if those actions do more harm than good. More importantly, I’ll never apologize for my actions or decisions because apologizing is for weak pansies. Everything I do will always be right and if it isn’t, I’ll just keep saying it’s right until you people agree and stop looking at facts to think otherwise.

INTERVIEWER: Well, you’ve certainly proven your point! I believe you have all the necessary qualifications needed to run this medical institution and heal the community with your medical knowledge. Welcome aboard, and if you get tired of running this hospital with no experience of any kind, perhaps you can then move on to run for President of the United States.


An Interview with God

Professor Jean Decety, a neuroscientist from the University of Chicago, studied over 1000 children from around the world and published a paper in the journal  Current Biology, which found that children from religious households are actually less generous than kids from a secular background.

While most people think of religion as making people more generous, it appears that this one study contradicts this common belief. So to get to the core of this study, it’s only fitting to ask the creator of the universe what He thinks, so we offer you an interview with God.

Me: As the main object of worship in all the world’s religions (except for those druids who seem to worship trees, but are indirectly worshipping you after all), what do you make of this latest study that shows people are less generous if they’re religious?

God: Well first of all, you have to realize that studying people is an inexact science so it’s hard to draw general conclusions from a sample of 1000 kids. But to answer your question, the problem with religion is that it allows people to interpret it any way they wish to justify their own lifestyle choices anyway. Generous, caring people use the Bible to justify continuing to be caring and generous towards others, while selfish people find ways to use the Bible to justify being selfish to others. Just look at all the religious extremists currently controlling the Republican Party and you can see what happens when selfish people use religion as an excuse to hide their own obnoxious behavior.

Me: So you’re saying religious people aren’t necessarily more or less generous than secular people?

God: That’s right. Remember, I gave people free will and look what a mess they make of it. Historically, people have used the Bible and religion to justify slavery, war, torture, and racism. That’s not a fault of religion so much as it’s a fault of people who hide behind religious righteousness so they can appear saintly while continuing to perform horrible, selfish deeds. Again, just look at the right-wing religious extremists in the GOP and tell me if those people aren’t looking out for their own selfish interests at the expense of anyone they consider to be outside their groups.

Me: Do you think religion brings people closer together or divides them apart?

God: Again it boils down to free will. For some people, religion provides rules to guide people into generous and loving behavior. For others, religion provides equally strong rules for hurting others, discriminating against others, and oppressing others all in the name of religious freedom. I didn’t give people the right to make others miserable, but that’s what happens when you give people free will. Just look how free will turned out in Satan and you can pretty much see how it works with right-wing extremists in the GOP as well.

Me: Why do you think right-wing religious extremists overwhelmingly support the GOP?

God: Most likely because the GOP actually listens to them and caters to their whims, no matter how small they might really be compared to the rest of the party. Yet because religious extremists are the most vocal, they tend to exert more influence than the larger majority that stays silent.

Me: Do you see any hope in people overcoming the negative aspects of religion and only embracing the positive aspects?

God: Don’t make me laugh! You really think people will actually read the Bible and follow rules like loving thy neighbor when they can simply focus on other parts of scripture to justify their own horrible behavior? That’s a good one. You see, far too many people use religion as a way to separate and divide themselves from others. When you join a particular religion, it gives you an identity and anyone outside of your religion is obvious an outsider, unworthy of the same benefits you deserve for choosing to join a particular religious group. Just look at how most people want to get to heaven. That’s a selfish thought right there. If they were truly religious, they would want to sacrifice their own lives so someone else could get into heaven, but most religious people don’t think like that. They want to get into heaven for selfish reasons masked as religious doctrine so they can avoid seeing how they’re really selfish and self-centered. If all those selfish people really got into heaven, it would actually look more like hell.

Me: So what would you say to all those people who blame other religions for atrocities while avoiding mentioning the atrocities of their own faith?

God: Those people make me laugh because they embrace the worst aspects of human behavior while disguising them as religious beliefs. Strip away religion from these people and you simply have maniacal psychopaths no different than Charles Manson or Jack the Ripper. The only difference is that serial killers at least acknowledge they’re hurting others.

Me: if you could recreate the world all over again, how would you do things differently?

God: Well I’d probably put a disclaimer in the Bible explaining that you can’t take the word of God literally because it’s all your interpretation anyway. But most religious people wouldn’t want to read something like that, so that seems like a waste of paper. I suppose I’d like to tell religious extremists that they really don’t know what they’re talking about, but if these people won’t listen to reason and logic, what are the chances they’d listen to someone like me, who they claim to worship and love while ignoring everything I tell them anyway?

Me: It’s certainly been interesting talking to the creator of the universe, knowing that He feels just as frustrated dealing with humanity as everyone else.

God: Thank you, and let me say that even I still can’t figure out a way to bring peace to the Middle East. You can’t wait for God to fix things on this planet. People have to learn to do it themselves, but then again, that’s something else most people don’t want to hear, even if it comes from God Himself.

Me: Thank you God for agreeing to this interview. I hope people will one day get a chance to listen to you for a change.

God: I wish they’d listen to Me too, but if they did, they’d have to actually change their behavior rather than find ways to justify it, so you know that’s never going to happen.

It Can’t Happen Here

Sinclair Lewis once wrote a novel about a fascist dictator taking over the United States. The novel, called “It Can’t Happen Here,” shows how easily Americans could be swayed to support a fascist dictator since it’s always easier to blame others for a nation’s problems rather than take an honest, objective look at the problem and find solutions using brains instead of military might.

But not using the military to force nations other nations to work for our benefit isn’t what many extremists want. After all, they prefer being a bully rather than thinking and cooperating because thinking and cooperating takes too long when it’s easier just to beat somebody up instead.

If Sinclair Lewis’ novel can’t convince that it can happen here, perhaps you’d like to read the story of an American teacher who created a fascist movement in his classroom during the 60’s when many American students were already fed up with the government.

These students willingly went along with their teacher, even to the point of turning on each other. Each day, the teacher created new rules that made the students’ lives tougher and harsher, yet because the change was so gradual, the students went along with it.

Finally when the experiment went too far, the teacher stopped it, but his exercise proved his point that it’s far too easy for people to support fascism than you might think. After all, if people willingly spend money supporting Kim Kardashian, it makes fascism look good in comparison.

To read how a California teacher convinced his class to embrace fascism, click here. Then you can use this story as a warning to others. The only problem is that it will only warn people willing to think, and those are the people in the minority of any nation.

Who Would Hitler Vote For?

With so many people jockeying to become the GOP Presidential candidate, it might be interesting to look to previous experts in politics to see who they think might be presidential material. Now through the miracle of imagination, we bring you an interview with Adolf Hitler.

ANNCR: Welcome Adolf. We’re glad you can join us in analyzing the top GOP candidates.

HITLER: Glad to be here. After all, hell is getting crowded these days with people like Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, and Kim Jong-Il.

ANNCR: As the former dictator of the Third Reich, what is your opinion of the top GOP contenders and which one do you think will become President of the United States?

HITLER: What most people don’t realize is that dictators always get the support of the people in the beginning because dictators tell people what they want to hear. That’s why Donald Trump is currently the leader. What better way to rally his supporters than to blame all the problems of your country on illegal immigrants. It’s brilliant! I did that with the Jews back in Germany.

ANNCR: Donald Trump says he wants to deport 11 million illegal immigrants from the United States. Do you think his plan is feasible or not?

HITLER: Of course it’s feasible. In the early days of my rise to power, I slowly pushed the Jews out of Germany. At first we just pressed them to leave on their own. Then when other countries, even the United States, refused to let Jews in because they didn’t want them either, all the Jews kept coming back to Germany. Since it was easier to round them up and exterminate them rather than keep trying to push them into other countries that refused to let them in because they were Jewish, I believe it’s only a matter of time before Donald Trump’s plan of mass deportation will turn into complete misery and chaos for all Mexican families and the entire United States in general. Naturally we know Trump is really talking about Mexicans when he talks about illegal immigrants because do you really think he’d deport a Brazilian supermodel just because she overstayed her visa restrictions?

ANNCR: So you see a future of concentration camps and extermination for Mexicans in America’s future?

HITLER: Hey, it’s what Trump supporters really want anyway. They just need someone to give them permission to express their discriminatory ideas. Why do you think so many Germans supported me? I gave them permission to let their cruelty express themselves on the Jews. Do you think I could have killed 6 million Jews on my own without the willing cooperation of so many law-abiding German citizens?

ANNCR: Well, let’s talk about Ben Carson. He’s a well-known neurosurgeon with nearly identical right-wing extremist views as Donald Trump.

HITLER: I love doctors! In fact, Doctor Josef Mengele was one of my best friends.

ANNCR: So do you think Ben Carson has a chance to be elected President?

HITLER: I see Ben Carson having a better chance of getting a cabinet position within the Trump administration. Ben Carson was the first doctor to successfully separate conjoined twins at the head. Josef Mengele loved experimenting with twins as well, so maybe Ben Carson can use his medical skills to find a solution to your illegal immigrant problem like Josef Mengele tried to do with the Jews.

ANNCR: Let’s talk about Carly Fiorina. What do you think of a woman running a country?

HITLER: I’m a firm believer of women’s rights just as long as they allow a man to have most of those rights. The best part about Carly Florina is that she drove Hewlett-Packard into the ground and walked away with a multi-million dollar golden parachute for her efforts to enrich herself at the expense of the workers. That’s the mark of a dictator if I’ve ever seen one.

ANNCR: Let’s get back to Donald Trump. If Trump gets elected, how do you think he’ll fulfill his promise to “Make America Great”?

HITLER: That’s easy. When I was rebuilding Germany, I used a similar phrase to make Germany great again. One way to make any nation great is to become the smartest, most productive people in the world and build a great civilization, but that takes too long. It’s far faster and simpler to make a nation great by building up your military and invading an easy target like Poland.

ANNCR: Do you see Trump’s promise of making America great again leading to a military buildup?

HITLER: Not necessarily any more of military buildup than your country’s been doing for the past few decades anyway. What Trump needs to do is find a common enemy (beyond the Mexicans) and start getting easy victories to give people a sense of satisfaction. I started by invading Poland and annexing land. Then I worked my way up to invading Belgium, Denmark, and France. Trump needs to start small by attacking Mexico and maybe some of those Central and South American countries that keep selling illegal drugs to Americans who keep buying them. Create a phony outrage, justify it with a military excursion against a weak opponent, and then the people will be so happy and blood thirsty that they’ll want to keep attacking one more country after another because they think they can’t lose.

ANNCR: Is war a valid long-term strategy for making a nation great?

HITLER: Of course not. Look where I wound up. But that’s not the point. People want simple solution to complex problems, so if you can convince them that blowing up another country that can’t put up much of a fight will make them feel better about themselves and their country, that’s all that matters.

ANNCR: If Trump does start a war, do you think it could escalate out of control?

HITLER: Of course. I thought I could invade Russia and win, so it’s likely Trump will keep using military force against all the nations of the world until he goes one step too far. Then it will be too late and he’ll wind up fighting a losing battle that he can never win.

ANNCR: If Trump did start a war with a bigger country like Russia or China, and started to lose, what do you think he would do next?

HITLER: Trump has an ego the size of Jupiter, so if he starts a war that starts turning against him, you know he’ll launch a nuclear strike just to protect his fragile ego. When you compare the deaths of millions of innocent people around the world to avoiding admitting that you were actually wrong, why would you believe Trump would do anything but destroy the world rather than admit he was wrong?

ANNCR: Well, Hitler, your insight on the thinking process of Donald Trump and the other GOP contenders is certainly enlightening. Fortunately most of the GOP supporters don’t read or learn about history so they can’t benefit from your mistakes.

HITLER: That is the beauty of people. They prefer making the same mistakes over and over again rather than learning from the past. That insures people like me and other future dictators will always have a chance to wreck the world once more.

ANNCR: Thank you Hitler, and let us know the next time you’ll be back on Earth to share your wisdom and insight with people who want neither wisdom or insight.

HITLER: It’s my pleasure. I’m looking forward to seeing Donald Trump turn the United States into a fascist dictatorship. Perhaps my Thousand Year Reich might find new life among Trump supporters after all.

ANNCR: Thank you Hitler, and good night.

HTML Snippets Powered By : XYZScripts.com