March 13, 1996
Dear Mr. President,
I am writing you about an issue that has recently come to my attention. It regards our flag. I've noticed that when countries get massive chemical imbalances, become evil and our enemies, their flags become completely hectic. When the countries are straightened out, and they turn back into our peace loving friends once again, their flags become passive and weak. For instance, in World War Two, both Germany and Japan had extremely hectic, menacing flag designs. After we beat them, their flags became bland and irrelevant. 
I'm not suggesting that the American flag is in any way bland or passive, especially in comparison to Germany's three lines and Japan's dot. Our flag is very majestic and proud with it's bold stars and stripes. However, I do feel that if the United States is going to be using it's military influence in other countries (and despite the fact that no one in your position has admitted that America has been at war for years, I know for a fact we are) our American advisors should be equipped with a much more threatening flag. 
A good flag intimidates and puts fear into the hearts of the enemy. I suggest a bald eagle holding a severed head in it's claws. The back ground could be the red and white stripes from the old, traditional flag, which of course would be taken out of retirement for parades and such. I think that this updated flag would make a world of difference in our peace keeping missions and could help the United States to become the great imperial empire it is destined to become. 
As a young voter, this is an important subject to me. I hope you will spend time considering this controversial subject, or at least get Newt Gingrich to get on it, if you are too busy right now. I'm sure that he would jump at the chance to work on designing such a flag. 
Please give my best regards to Mrs. Clinton, Chelsea, Mr. Gore and all your secret service men. 
Sincerely,
Adam Beebe
606-05-9725
Thank you for writing. It's important for me to know how you feel about the challanges that our nation faces. Since taking office, my Administration has made real progress in moving America forward on the foundation of a growing economy and expanding opportunity for all Americans. As we continue our work to build a strong 21st century economy, assure quality education, enact meaningful health and welfare reform, and ensure peace and security at home and abroad, I hope that you will stay involved. Together, we can make a difference. Bill Clinton
April 28, 1996
Dear Mr. Clinton,
I received a reply to the letter I wrote you today, and frankly, I am somewhat disappointed. I don't even think you bothered to read my letter, let alone spend some time writing a decent response. I would expect such behavior from previous presidents, but I thought you were the exception to the rule. I guess I was mistaken to believe you were one of those "old fashion" presidents who, even in this day and age, take time to care about American citizens. I realize that I am merely one voter out of millions, but I think that my ideas are legitimate and could help our country greatly.
The reason I am writing this second letter to you is that I have more ideas that could move our country into the twenty-first century and I think that it's important that you, being the leader of the free world, hear them. 
I, like any other rational thinking American, am against nuclear war. I am aware that despite the fact that the United States has been dismantling a lot of nuclear weapons, many more are being produced, replacing the ones being taken apart. I don't see the logic in this at all and it seems like a huge waste of taxpayers' money. Why are we building these atomic weapons only to take them apart again? Why not stop building more bombs and just keep the amount we really need. Then, instead of dismantling the leftover ones, we could use them to do something positive; Like sending rockets full of these bombs into outer space and blowing up other planets. This suggestion may sound a little strange at first, but really it's quite a sensible solution to our problem. Just think of it: What could be more spectacular on the 4th of July in the year 2000 than a massive explosion in outer space? Such an awe-inspiring event would re-install people's hope for prosperity as we step into the future. 
I suggest blowing up either Mars or one of Jupiter's many moons. These heavenly bodies are distant enough that we on Earth wouldn't be harmed by the gargantuan explosions, radioactive waves and changes in gravity, but near enough so that we'll all get a great view. It'll of course take a couple of years for the missiles to hit their target, but I'm sure the guys at NASA could time it right so the explosions would happen exactly on New Year's Day or whatever. 
I know what you're thinking- that this whole blowing up planets deal is going to cost an arm and a leg- and you're right of course, but it couldn't possibly cost more than it costs to keep building and dismantling bombs all the time. This idea may seem a bit radical, but desperate times call for desperate measures. A spectacle such as this one would prove not only what a great president you are, but prove once and for all that the United States of America is the greatest nation in the entire universe. 
Please write back with your response. Thank you very much. Say "hi" to Chelsea and Mrs. Clinton for me.
Your pal,
Adam Beebe
606-05-9725
July 25, 1996
Dear President Clinton,

Well, it has been several months since my last letter, so I guess it's pretty safe to assume that I'm not going to get a reply. Though I'm disappointed, I'm not laying the blame on you, because I'm sure there is some legitimate reason for my not receiving an answer. Perhaps you are currently too busy to reply, or maybe there was a mishap at the post office (they seem to lose mail fairly regularly). 
Whatever the case may be, I decided to write you this third letter because I felt it was important for me to give you my thoughts concerning vital issues our nation is facing. I wanted you to begin thinking about these issues before your first term ends, so you could decide where you stand on these matters and what steps you want to take with them as we move into the future. 
I would like to address an issue based solely on the fact that we Americans often do not call other countries by their proper names. Instead, we call them whatever the hell we want. For instance, are you aware of the fact that the "Japanese" do not refer to their country as "Japan" as we do, but instead call their country Nippon? I don't have any idea where we got "Japan" from, since it's pretty far from the proper name, but that's what we call it. Likewise, what we call "Denmark" is called by the Danes, Danmark and "Spain" is called España by the Spanish. The list of improperly labeled places goes on and on, including most every nation on Earth. The problem is that the use of this re-titling is far too limited. I feel we should put this practice into use much more frequently. 
This system of 're-naming' countries and places could prove very beneficial to the American people. The most obvious of these benefits would be to remedy the confusion concerning the continents, North and South America. A lot of problems arise because currently, any foreigner can claim that he or she is an "American" just because they happen to live in Canada, Mexico, Panama, Equator or even Cuba. We need to re-name North and South America so we can end all this confusion over who truly is an American. I propose that from now on, we refer to "north America" as Pangea and "South America" as Gondwandaland, after the ancient 'super continents' that existed millions of years ago. Not only would this clear up any debate over who is an American and who isn't, but the United States' residence on Pangea, 'the original continent,' would show its importance to the rest of the world.
This idea could help America in many other ways as well. A lot of places have really stupid names and I don't think that we, as Americans, should have to take them seriously. If we were to disregard the ridiculous things people named themselves, and replaced them with our own names, it would show people that The United States of America is the greatest nation in the world. Some original names, such as Lapland, Sri Lanka, Africa, Mongolia and the now defunct, Austro-Hungary are effective enough to be left alone, but names such as "The People's Republic of China," "The United Kingdom," and "Chile" are pathetic and should not be tolerated, especially when there are so many other possible names that would be just perfect. We could re-name these and other places after famous American heroes such as Johnny Appleseed, Huddie "Leadbelly" Ledbetter and James K. Polk. In the Star Wars trilogy there is a huge wealth of names like Dagobah and Hoth just waiting to be used. The possibilities are endless. 
As you can see, it would be extremely easy and effective to improve the quality of any nation merely by assigning them with an improved name. As a voter, I am very concerned with this and other issues, so please write back so I can find out where you stand on this controversy.

Thank you for your time.
Adam Beebe
606-05-9725
PS: I am an artist who is very poor and needs a place to stay and paint. I was wondering if I could move into the White House with you. I am very neat and clean and would probably only require one or two secret service agents. I'd be more than happy to give free painting lessons to Mrs. Clinton, Chelsea or yourself. I would be willing to live in any space you have available, even the Nixon bedroom. Please give this some thought and give me a reply when you send a response to this letter. Hope to see you soon! 

Spleen-A-Zine main page  Mishap Productions main page