Arizona State Legisislature Votes To Change State Motto, Slogan

Giddy with the joy of Christ at successfully legalizing state sponsored endorsement of dark age phobias and insanities the Arizona State Legislature voted to to change the State slogan and motto along with other state designations and affiliations.

Suggestions included:

State Slogan – From “The Grand Canyon State” to “Boldly Forging Ahead Into the 17th Century”.

State Motto – From “God Enriches” to “You Will Be Assimilated”.

State Bird – From “Cactus Wren” to “Golden Vulture”.

State Flower – From “Saguaro Cactus Flower” to “Venus Flytrap”.

State Tree – From “Palo Verde” to “Hangin’ Tree”.

State Fish – From “Apache Trout” to “Mudsucker”.

State Reptile – From “Arizona Ridgetailed Rattlesnake” to “GOP”.

State Gemstone – From “Tourquoise” to “Pyrite”.

State Neckwear – From “Bolo Tie” to “Hemp Noose”.

NFL – From “Arizona Cardinals” to “Vatican Cardinals”

NBA – From “Phoenix Sun” to “Sons of God”.

State Pastime – From “Picnicking” to “Dragging homos, hebes, spics and spooks around town behind my pickup on Saturday night”.

Arizona Sister State – From Costa Rica to Uganda.

Share

20 comments on “Arizona State Legisislature Votes To Change State Motto, Slogan

  1. Seriously, I had like 10 great ideas but with all the outages this is the one that was lucky enough to have it’s number come up in the morning lottery.

  2. Okay, this one was a political rant. I try to stay away from this genre but it got away from me this time.

    FWIW I am a registered pub and a fiscal conservative, gun owner, lifetime NRA member. But too many times those who I should consider allies piss me off to no end.

    Sanctimonious evangelicals will be the end of the repub party.

  3. In my opinion, there is a fine line between outing someone else’s prejudices and showing your own, just ask Paula Deen of late. She is comparing her situation to that of “that black guy.” I think we can write satire in such a way as to get our point across without using derogatory names…but hey, that’s just me.

  4. Would you have preferred fags, christ killers, taco benders and darkies?

    The point of satire is to be absurd to illustrate the absurdity of others in order to make a point and assist people in thinking about issues.

    IMO if you have boundaries in satire then you are limiting your effect.

    Lenny Bruce might disagree with you.

    • Honestly, Dt, would I have preferred one ethnic slur over another? Are you kidding me? You alluded to lynching no less than three times in your article. It astounds me that you take compliments well, but constructive criticisms are something you’d rather not hear. Sure, keep on writing stories for shock value, but I guarantee, you won’t be highly regarded as a serious writer of satire, except in very limited circles where your brand of humor is appreciated. P.S. “If one is afraid of offending others, then satire…”

  5. What are you talking about P? I didn’t tell you to shut up or not to respond to me, you asked a question, I answered it…as honestly as I could.

    I understand you might get offended if I use provocative terms, maybe others as well. I don’t do it often but when I do its because I feel it is necessary to drive home the point of the article.

    You seem to be offended at my references to lynching (2). Why does that offend you? Did it not happen? Do you not like to think about it?

    It is my opinion, and the reason I wrote the article, that this same reason used to justify this horrible legislation…religious liberty, is the same argument used to support slavery, pogroms against Jews, hatred against homosexuals and non white, non Christian indigenous people’s throughout the world, for centuries.

    Ya, my language might have trampled a few sensibilities…and I’m glad it did. That was the intended effect.

    At least this time.

  6. And BTW, if I flared up a bit it was because in your first response you implied I was a racist or bigot…for using terms that might be common among bigots and racists.

    Which is weird since their inclusion was to illustrate the bigotry and racism of others.

    • I won’t belabor the point except to say that I never said you told me to shut up. I was merely pointing out a grammatical error in your comment. I’m comfortable in my skin, and I will continue doing what I like to do, writing satire that hopefully doesn’t scratch open wounds to get a point across. I hope I never hide behind the excuse that since it is called satire, anything goes, because I don’t think that is the intention of satire.

  7. Trout, if you have a problem as to which stories go live first, submit them run-ready and I’ll have this discussion. The CNN piece, while I love it, requires a fair amount of work on my end for graphics. I’m not complaining, I’m just surprised that you are.

    I make something like $50-80/month off this site while paying out hundreds in prizes. As much as I’d like this to be a business, it’s still a (fairly expensive) hobby. I do my best, but I ask you to be patient with me.

  8. I, as I’m sure everyone else on this site, are grateful and appreciative for the work and energy you put forth to give as a website where we can post our work.

    Thank you.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *