If Stephen Colbert Was Running For Congress

Then, in all likelihood, he would completely copy John Fleming’s website.

(Including the dubbed-in sound effects of Fleming’s footsteps, which make it seem like the good doctor is wearing high heels).

Fleming wants us to be sure to visit the “Issues Page” of his website, which outlines his basic platform on the “issues.” I also suggest a visit: The man wants to eliminate all taxes on individuals and businesses, destroy the IRS, and institute a Fair Tax, which will require doubling (if not tripling) the sales tax on all goods sold.

As a man who owns five trillion Subway franchises and is set for life, he can speak personally to the incredible financial burden of taxes.

Yes, I am a physician. A medical practice is a business. For over 20 years, I have owned and developed non-medical businesses that have created jobs for over 500 Louisiana families. I brought the first Subway store to north Louisiana in 1986 and we have grown that business to 30 stores. I own other restaurants in the Shreveport area. And my company, Fleming Expansions is a regional developer for the UPS Store, a subsidiary of UPS, which has sold and continues to provide support services to 130 stores across Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas.

My business experience helps me understand that the most powerful thing that we can do to stimulate economic development, the growth of business, the creation of new jobs and the growth of personal income for Americans is to dramatically reform the tax system.

Tax reform ought to be a national economic imperative. As your Congressman, I will make tax reform my priority.

On Wednesday, January 23rd, I signed the Americans for Tax Reform’s Taxpayer Protection Pledge. I have committed in writing that I will not increase marginal tax rates, or vote for any new taxes whose net result is that Americans pay more in taxes.

I strongly support the concept of the Fair Tax. The Fair Tax will abolish the federal income tax and the IRS.  April 15th will become just another beautiful spring day!

The Fair Tax will replace the income tax, corporate taxes, capital gains taxes, and estate and inheritance taxes with a national sales tax.

Hooray for ignorant grandstanding!

All those so-called “economists” with their fancy degrees don’t understand that the only way to further enrich the franchisees of the American economy is by not taxing them anymore. Duh!

Don’t tax the owner of the Subway stores. Instead, just increase the taxes on those lazy Americans who buy Subway sandwiches.

I advise reading about the “Fair Tax.” It’s awesomely and audaciously unfair:

The sales tax rate, as defined in the legislation, is 23 percent of the total price including the tax ($23 of every $100 spent—calculated similar to income taxes). This is equivalent to a 30 percent traditional U.S. sales tax ($23 on top of every $77 spent).^[4]

With the rebate taken into consideration, the FairTax would be progressive on consumption,^[3] but would also be regressive on income at higher income levels (as consumption falls as a percentage of income).^[5][6] Opponents argue this would accordingly decrease the tax burden on high income earners and increase it on the middle class.^[4][7] Supporters contend that the plan would decrease tax burdens by broadening the tax base, effectively taxing wealth, and increasing purchasing power.^[8][9] The plan’s supporters also argue that a consumption tax would have a positive effect on savings and investment, that it would ease tax compliance, and that the tax would result in increased economic growth, incentives for international business to locate in the U.S., and increased U.S. competitiveness in international trade.^[10][11][12] Opponents contend that a consumption tax of this size would be extremely difficult to collect, and would lead to pervasive tax evasion.^[5][4] They also argue that the proposed sales tax rate would raise less revenue than the current tax system, leading to an increased budget deficit.^[4][13]

On national security, Fleming wants you to know he is a hawk.

Frankly, I abhor the way modern Democrats in Congress are soft on national defense and how they undermine the morale and the mission of our troops.

Those anti-American modern Democrats keep getting in the way of our hope for an all-out global war against radical Muslims.

I will work hard to support the brave American men and women who at this very moment are fighting against our terrorist enemies – the radical Muslims, in Afghanistan and Iraq.

This is not a fight that we started. This is not war by choice. Islamic fanatics decided to wage jihad on America. They flew planes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and planned to destroy other targets – either the White House or the U.S. Capitol.

We must not forget that in a malicious attack they killed over 3,000 innocent civilians. Given the opportunity, if emboldened by a weak response, if continuously encouraged by irresponsible politicians who blame America first, these diabolic zealots will attack again and again.

You see, Dr. Fleming, just like John Kerry, was in the Navy. The only difference is that Fleming, unlike Kerry, didn’t have to serve on the front lines of Vietnam and earn a slew of medals to know that service to our country requires a completely blind and uncritical allegiance to a Republican political agenda. It’s a part of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy.

That said, Dr. Fleming believes “Iraq should pay America back.”

Seriously.

I’ve never heard this sentiment expressed by any candidate for national office, and with all due respect to him and his family, the notion that the people of Iraq should financially compensate the United States for a pre-emptive invasion that has led to the deaths of over 4,000 Americans and nearly 600,000 Iraqis seems to be the most ignorant and seriously misguided policy statement ever expressed during the past decade. It’s not just insensitive; it’s idiotic.

Fleming displays his incredible political acumen when he describes the “real reason” Republicans are now in the minority:

I am calling the Republican Party back to its roots. We are in the minority in Congress today, not because we are too conservative, but because when we were in the majority, we were not conservative enough. The 2006 elections were not a repudiation of conservative principles. They were a repudiation of politicians who forsook Republican values and acted just like Democrats. I will be a Congressman who acts in a manner consistent with reducing taxes and spending and reducing the size and power of the federal government.

Really? Republicans like Rick Santorum and Tom Delay lost their seats because they weren’t conservative enough. Riiiight.

Incidentally, Fleming’s platform is conspicuously similar to Santorum’s and Delay’s.

Well, if the 2006 elections weren’t a repudiation, I wonder what he thinks about the 2008 elections. There seems to be a willful suspension of disbelief at play here– the notion that, in this electoral climate, the best path for Republicans is to take a hard right turn. It’s the classic “Elect the Ideologue” strategy.

Which is why, in typical form, Fleming wants us all to believe that our country’s sacred heritage is being threatened by the non-existent boogeyman of secular intolerance.

America was founded on the Christian principles contained in the Word of God. Our nation is the greatest nation in the history of the world because God has blessed America.

The United States has never been the secular nation that today’s liberal myth-makers proclaim. And we must never allow it to become such.

The American people, in the vast majority, are a profoundly religious people. We must never allow the noisy liberal minority and radical groups like the ACLU to impose their secular vision on the majority. We must resist the oppression of religious liberty.

We must never allow the Liberal, anti-God, anti-religious freedom minority to remove the words Under God from the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. We must never allow them to abolish our National Motto: In God We Trust.

Aside from Fleming’s blatant misrepresentation of American history (which reveals his ignorance of the writings and beliefs of men like Thomas Jefferson, John Madison, and John Adams), he is premising his candidacy on waging a culture war– a war, I might add, which is only fought on the fringes and has no real place in the daily work of a serious Congressman.

Just as Fleming abhors those dastardly modern Democrats, I abhor candidates, whether they are Democratic, Republican, or Independent, who are only interested in fracturing our democracy along cultural lines– candidates who attempt to claim our country as, exclusively, belonging to people who look and think just as they do, candidates who use wedge issues to construct a tenuous majority.

With all of that said, I have respect for Fleming’s personal history. We both lost our fathers when we were teenagers. In writing about his life, Fleming displays a sensitivity to and understanding of the issues facing disabled Americans. But you have to look hard to find this information. It’s almost hidden.

Instead, front and center, Fleming presents himself as a hard-right “culture warrior,” not as a legitimate, serious candidate for Congress– a candidate who, instead of speaking in hackneyed abstractions, speaks to the specific needs of his district.

Put another way, instead of basing his campaign on increasing development, encouraging the augmentation of Barksdale as a cyber command center and Fort Polk as a major training facility, investing in infrastructure reinvestment, and improving the over-all quality of life for residents of District 4, Fleming has based his candidacy around a series of divisive cultural issues.

One can only hope that his opponent, Mr. Carmouche, will not fall for the bait and will decide to engage him on the real issues facing the good people of Louisiana.