The Gist: Boycott Everyone!: Stopping at France would make us look weak.

| 11 Nov 2014 | 11:35

    To: W. . From: One of your many seasoned focus group coordinators/pollsters.

    Subject: Why stop at France?

    Sir, before getting to the subject of this memo, I must congratulate you for your stand against antiwar protestors who marched in cities around the world two weeks ago. It was brilliant to compare listening to them with listening to a focus group–as if you don’t listen to focus groups!

    We realize, of course, that you were giving us a wink-wink and nudge-nudge, and we did let out a giggle. Your strategist Karl Rove and the Republican Party, after all, spent much of the past two election campaigns and your first two years in office consulting us and lots of other focus groups. Heck, that hack Republican pollster Frank Luntz has been conducting his focus group research on the air on MSNBC for years, claiming to be getting the pulse of the nation while really putting out your party’s propaganda. Just what made you suddenly turn to the U.N. last fall for a resolution on Iraq, after all, if not at least in part your own focus group research and polling, which showed that the vast majority of Americans wanted exactly that?

    Really, comparing over four million protestors to a focus group (which is usually made up of 10 or 12 people), was also a stroke of political genius, even if it is utterly ridiculous. Next thing we know, you’ll be saying that voting, too, is nothing more than a slick focus group maneuver, since only a small percentage of Americans actually vote. Way to go W.!

    But let me get to the issue at hand: The base is revved up by the French-bashing and is completely on board with the idea of boycotting all things from that snobby, wimpy place–not that many of them were drinking the better Bordeaux secretly favored by you more patrician Republicans anyway, but that’s beside the point. Since you have not asked people to sacrifice anything in this war, we think this is a good opportunity to start. And if we’re going to talk about boycotting those who are against taking out Saddam, surely we must move beyond the French.

    Now that the Italian prime minister has begun backtracking after over a million protestors–or, rather, focus group members–took to the streets of Rome, it’s time we put those operatic drama queens in their places. No more imported provolone, pasta, sausage, olive oil, Armani or Dolce & Gabbana.

    And let’s just ban pizza altogether–too much of a cultural celebration of that formerly fascist, crypto-communist and now Saddam-loving country.

    Germany? Simple: keep out the Mercedes, ditch the fancy Krups coffeemakers, outlaw the strudel. We can promote "Burn your Braun" parties, in which people throw their Multiquick hand blenders and CombiMax food processors into flaming pits in their yards. It’ll make for some striking video.

    Sir, you may have been told that a diner in North Carolina has changed a sign in its window, renaming french fries "freedom fries." Great idea! With Russia still opposed to the war, our focus group research is telling us that we would do well to rename the Siberian husky too. How about "Patriotic Pooch?"

    A shocking poll of the Irish suggests that more people in Ireland think that you, sir, are more of a danger to world peace than Saddam. May we suggest calling Irish whiskey "Liberty Libation"?

    China has been staunchly opposed to the unilateral war–yet another security council member that is thwarting us. Now just think about all of those cheap trinkets and assorted other doodads Americans buy that say "made in China" on the back, from tacky folding fans to kitschy salt-and-pepper shakers to snow domes of just about every U.S. icon imaginable. Who needs all that crap anyway? And while we’re at it, we should change the term "Chinese food" to "American chow"–most of that stuff doesn’t resemble anything served in China anyway.

    Then there’s the tiny but influential Vatican City. We have to go bold on this one, sir: Let’s boycott Catholicism altogether. Pope John Paul has been railing against our war and he even had the gall to send an emissary to Baghdad recently to break bread with the Saddamites. Catholicism is the one product that the country of Vatican City exports and the one product that fills its coffers with billions of dollars each year. Banning it will surely cripple the Vatican and soon have the pope kissing your ring.

    Now, about the Turks and their extortion racket: Here they are, demanding billions of dollars even though we’ll be saving their asses from Saddam as well (even if 95 percent of the Turkish population is against the war, and even if Turkey did get screwed after the Persian Gulf War–left with the responsibility of feeding hundreds of thousands of displaced Iraqi Kurds while we hightailed it out of there). Talk about ingrates. So, we say, no more Turkish carpets!

    Since most Britons are opposed to the war despite Tony Blair’s constantly caressing you, we’ve got to hit them in the knickers as well. On this one, our research tells us that we should stop calling our language English. We’ve been speaking it now for more than two hundred years; they no longer own the lease to it. We should simply change the name of the language to "American." We can launch an "I speak American" campaign on radio and television that even includes a few jabs at the Queen for the funny way she talks.

    Too many Australians have been stridently opposed to the war as well, no matter the support for you from their prime minister. Sir, we’ll have to bite down hard on this one: Ban Nicole Kidman. Yes, even if she is a shoe-in for the Oscar for The Hours (it’s a lesbo film anyway).

    As for whining and whingeing Canada, our largest trading partner and one of the biggest exporters of oil to the U.S.–bigger than even Saudi Arabia–who needs their black crude? Soon, we’ll make Iraq into a giant Mobil station, not to mention that we’ll be digging up the wasteland tundra we call Alaska.

    All of these countries and others just make us feel too beholden–even if it is correct to say that in the 90s we grew a robust, truly global economy, broke down international trade barriers and saw America prosper dramatically, precisely because the U.S. rigorously engaged them. We agree completely with your philosophy, Mr. President: Who the hell needs the world?