Matthew J. Bera, Editor

In a nearly unprecedented political experiment, the Republican and Democratic parties quietly switched platforms last Wednesday. To the apparent surprise of many in Washington, voters couldn’t even tell the difference.

Politicians could be seen last Wednesday robotically repeating the policy positions they were told to advocate for by donors, lobbyists and super PACs – it just so happened that those policy positions happened to be from the opposite side.

The switch led to various peculiar policy positions. Republicans reportedly advocated for sweeping environmental policies, while Democrats championed deregulation and tax cuts. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez even tweeted, “A robust free market is the cornerstone of American prosperity. #capitalism,” receiving thousands of likes on X.

Political scientists are trying to make sense of the situation. “We just haven’t seen something like this before,” says one expert who has read at least three articles on the subject of party-switchery. “The most likely conclusion is that the parties have been gradually switching platforms over the course of a long time and this is just the first time they did it without announcing or telling anyone in advance.”

Following the switch, we asked voters to weigh in on the situation. Party activists on both sides claimed that their parties’ new positions were “what [they’ve] always believed.” Only some unaware constituents and a small group of voters were slightly puzzled, noting indifferently that “it’s all the same anyway.”

Those who noticed the switch, or who were never completely complacent in toeing party lines, were quickly branded as “conspiracy theorists” by both parties and the media. Anyone who agreed with them was labeled as  “sheep.” However, most Americans who decidedly didn’t identify with either of the parties to begin with were not asked for their opinions.

Research shows these reactions aren’t at all surprising. One political psychologist noted, “90% of voters will simply adopt any position their party advocates for. We call this the ‘my party right or wrong’ effect, although another commonly used term is stupidity.”

The experiment ended at midnight, with both parties quietly reverting back to their normal platforms, though several congressional staffers were reportedly still confused about which talking points to use.

Both parties agreed never to try this again, though sources suggest they may have accidentally switched several times in the past century without anyone noticing, including that one weird Tuesday in 1986 that no one talks about.

Despite this promise, pundits believe this experiment could usher in a new era of “surprise politics” where the parties switch platforms every month. “It would be like Christmas every month,” says one analyst. “Except instead of Christmas presents, we get flip flopping politicians who don’t have the best interests of the American people in mind.”

Matthew J. Bera, Editor

On Jan. 20, 2084, I woke up at 11 a.m. – the global wake-up time, changed from 10 a.m. last summer due to reasons I wasn’t allowed to recall – and turned on the TV, as required for morning news consumption. This was of course the only way we could find out where to direct our emotional outbursts throughout the day.

“Good day,” the news anchor said.

“Good day,” I replied to my screen automatically. It was Friday, and I was permitted to be in a good mood.

“Today, the Global Safety Agency issued a new plan to combat visual discrimination,” the news anchor said. “The Global Safety Agency has determined that the most effective way to combat visual discrimination is to make everyone wear the same type of eyeglasses. Starting next month, all global citizens will be required to undergo a painless vision correction procedure and wear standardized eyewear.”

I felt a mix of emotions wash over me. On one hand, I was excited at the prospect of finally achieving true equality, and on the other hand, I felt obligatory outrage at the mere mention of visual discrimination.

The anchor continued: “This groundbreaking initiative will eliminate all visual distinctions related to eyewear. Global Citizens found attempting to alter or disguise their standardized glasses will face severe penalties.”

I was relieved. This was finally a solution to end visual discrimination once and for all. I decided that later in the day, during my 15-minute allotted period for social interaction, I would have to tell my neighbor. I wondered if he would be as excited as I was supposed to be.

The anchor moved on to the next story: “In related news, the Department of Acceptable Opinions has issued new guidelines on permissible thoughts regarding the standardized eyewear mandate. Citizens are encouraged to share their opinions during designated social interaction periods, but are reminded that expressing doubts about the procedure is strictly prohibited and may result in mandatory re-education.”

I nodded at the screen, making sure my enthusiasm was clearly visible to the monitoring cameras. I had no doubts whatsoever about this brilliant plan. I looked at my reflection on the screen, trying to imagine myself with the new standardized glasses.

The anchor’s voice brought me back to attention. “Specific assignments as to what type of standardized eyewear should be acquired in the procedure will be given to global citizens based on a variety of criteria, including but not limited to socioeconomic background, level of education and family history,” the anchor continued, before swearing servitude to the government and signing off for the day.

As the broadcast ended, I couldn’t help but be filled with joy. Joy at the fact that in our societal quest to end visual discrimination, we achieved something far greater. Joy at the prospect of a world where institutional discrimination was not only accepted, but celebrated. Joy that I would be able to live in a society in which I could finally judge people not by the content of their character, but by the type of glasses on their face. I walked to my door, eager to receive my food rations for the day.

Ethan McGlone, Staff Writer

New York City, New York – Child star Lyle Crocodile was arrested early Saturday morning at approximately 3:45 A.M. in downtown New York. Blowing a .27 on the breathalyzer, Lyle was apprehended by officials after pancaking a Prius going 120 MPH through a 4-way intersection. We could not get a quote from Lyle himself, but we got to ask the police a few questions as they were handling the situation.

“It was a red light. He went 120 through a red light,” says Chief Officer Brian Smith. We see this often, child stars who go off the rails after their career does not pan out as they had expected. In an interview only a few weeks ago, Lyle told reporters “La La La La La…” It was extremely apparent he was on drugs during this, which we expect to be either ecstasy or crack cocaine. From the Collegian newspaper, this is Ethan McGlone reporting.

Emily Allgair, Editor

Saying goodbye can be difficult. In fact, it can be one of the most difficult things to do at this point in our young adult lives. Saying goodbye can also be one of the easiest, least stressful things possible.

Let’s be honest, we’ve all ghosted someone in some capacity. Whether it’s that weird guy you met on said dating app that won’t stop messaging you even though you sent a one word answer once, or it’s that possible employer who didn’t seem to have their stuff together and you decided you actually don’t want to work for them but didn’t know how to say it professionally, or even that weird girl who asked for your number in your Stat class, you have ghosted someone. 

Maybe you’re sitting here thinking that’s not your style. Okay. But you’ve definitely done this in some capacity to someone once. 

So when May 13th rolls around, remember this cold-heartedness that we all know you’re capable of and Irish-goodbye some of those people you’ve met over the course of your time here at La Salle. 

With that being said, it has been my pleasure to be your 2022-2023 Satire Section Editor. For those of you who are not graduating (and even if you are), be sure to tune in to the Collegian come this fall. Until next time.

Editor’s Note: Don’t actually leave without saying goodbye. Some of these people really helped shape your last four years and they deserve to know what they mean to you. Keep in touch if you can, and if you can’t, at least send them off with good thoughts.

Ethan McGlone, Staff

Via: https://freebeacon.com/biden-administration/ncaa-bracket-scandal/

Washington, D.C. – “Joe…JOE!!!” The screams from Jill Biden echoed throughout the halls of the White House. “His eyes were closed so I assumed he was sleeping. I needed to wake him up for his 1:30 meeting.” Jill admits that the job of President is taking a toll on Joe Biden, and he often needs to catch up on sleep. However, this could not be further from the truth. President Biden tells us, “C’mon man, I was just resting my eyes for like 5 minutes. Jill never gets off my back.” Joe was not sleeping. In fact, he was never sleeping at all. 

“I’m actually working on changing my nickname,” President Biden informs. “I have a trademark pending for Sloppy Joe. Those things are pretty good, I’ll tell ya. If I could make my nickname Chocolate Chocolate Chip Joe I would. But, that doesn’t roll off the tongue enough…” Our reporters continuously said “Yeah” and smiled at everything the president told us until President Biden picked up on the fact we did not care anymore. “Anyways…” The interview was over, thankfully. From the Collegian newspaper, this is Ethan McGlone reporting.