New Study Shows Politicians Have The Same Approval Rating As Cockroaches But Less Useful
The Great Taxpayer Bake-Off
Trump Cuts Waste, Fraud, and Abuse (And Marxists Are Now Applying at McDonald’s)
In a brave new world where every dollar of taxpayer money is under the microscope, President Trump’s recent decision to cut funding for “waste, fraud, and abuse” has sent shockwaves through the bureaucratic gravy train. The National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH)—along with several other high-profile government programs—has found itself on the chopping block. And, as expected, the fallout has been utterly ridiculous. While many government employees and academics are scrambling to figure out how to survive without taxpayer-funded trips to “research” 1939 Hollywood films, Marxists across the country are now brushing up on their McDonald’s applications.
Let’s take a deep dive into the hilariously absurd world of wasted government funds that Trump has now yanked away, and what’s left in the wake of this brave new world of fiscal responsibility. Spoiler alert: it’s a mix of empty classrooms, disgruntled “historical researchers,” and an overwhelming flood of Marxists applying for jobs in fast food.
The Drag Queen Disaster: Kids and Sequins on the Taxpayer’s Dime
One of the first casualties of this anti-waste movement is the Alaska Humanities Forum, which received NEH funding to bring drag queens for kids to schools. Yes, you read that correctly. The children of Alaska—no doubt clamoring to understand their history of glaciers and igloos—were instead taught by men in sequins, glitter, and high heels. These “educators” didn’t just teach kids about art or culture; they taught them how to sashay into a future of tolerance—using sequined costumes and a deep knowledge of lip-syncing.
Now that the funding is gone, there’s a rush to see if Alaska’s youth will be better off learning the state’s actual history or whether they’ll be applying at McDonald’s to pay their bills. Former drag educators are now swapping high heels for uniforms and frantically Googling “How to Flip Burgers 101.”
And let’s not forget about those taxpayers. According to a recent survey, 42% of Alaska’s working-class citizens are outraged—not because they don’t support drag queens in schools, but because they feel left out. “I would have loved to be taught by a drag queen,” said one resident, whose name was conveniently omitted for privacy. “But now I have to send my kid to a public school and pray that they get some decent education instead of whatever that glitter show was supposed to be.”
“Whites Not Allowed”—Segregation’s Back in Fashion
In another shockwave of absurdity, the Alaska Humanities Forum also funded a conference that welcomed the return of “whites not allowed.” The premise? To discuss race and land in Alaska, because nothing says “progressive dialogue” like bringing back segregation to discuss how not to segregate.
This peculiar use of public funds had been justified as a way to promote more inclusive discussions. Apparently, the best way to have an open discussion on race is by preventing a certain race from participating. You know, to really “open up” the conversation. When the news broke that this conference would no longer be funded, attendees were seen gathering in small, exclusive circles—where the only thing they had in common was a deep confusion about how this was ever allowed to happen.
$5.9 Million to “Improve Classroom Teaching”—AKA, More Velvet Ropes
Then, there was Humanities Texas, which received $5.9 million to “improve classroom teaching and support libraries and museums.” This was a noble cause, no doubt—until you realize what it actually went toward. Rumors suggest that instead of textbooks and actual educational resources, the funds were used to install gold-plated chalkboards, purchase velvet ropes to section off “important” sections of history, and hire interpretive dance instructors to perform while students tried to learn geometry.
“I always wanted to teach history through dance,” said one bewildered teacher, clutching her high heels and wishing she’d received a more practical training grant. “But with the funding cut, I guess it’s back to teaching in a classroom… with books… and no choreography.”
Now, as these programs shut down, students are left wondering why they never learned a single thing about the American Revolution, but did spend three months memorizing the choreography to “Let It Go.” Meanwhile, the taxpayers, many of whom had probably never stepped foot in one of these classrooms, can only sigh in relief as their $5.9 million didn’t go to tap-dance lessons but instead to teaching “real-life skills”—like how to fill out job applications at McDonald’s.
Oral History for First-Generation College Students: “Just Ask Grandma”
Professor Jena Heath, in her infinite wisdom, developed an oral history curriculum for first-generation college students, encouraging them to spend their time interviewing their relatives about “the good old days” rather than focusing on any practical skills needed for modern academia. Apparently, in 2025, the best way to get into the workforce is to dig deep into your grandmother’s memories of rotary phones, black-and-white television, and how she once met Elvis. Forget practical skills or degrees—what really matters is a well-researched story about family traditions.
Now, with the funding gone, those same students have been directed to seek “real jobs.” The previously enthusiastic participants of this oral history program are now finding themselves at fast food establishments, armed with nothing but a notebook full of 100-year-old family anecdotes and a vague understanding of 20th-century Americana.
$30,000 to Research “The Women”: Lights, Camera, Waste!
Author Alison Macor received a generous $30,000 grant to research the 1939 film The Women. In case you’ve been living under a rock (or not spending your days watching old movies on YouTube), The Women is a comedy about women in 1930s New York. A perfectly valid subject for a sensible research project… if you have nothing better to do with $30,000 of the taxpayers’ money.
But now, with funding yanked away, Macor is forced to watch this 1939 classic on a dusty DVD from her local library. No more swanky trips to film festivals, no more luxury accommodations in “research hotspots” like Venice or Paris. Instead, she’s sifting through old black-and-white films while wondering if her next paycheck will come from… McDonald’s.
“I had dreams of screening The Women in major film festivals, but now I guess I’m just going to have to share my knowledge on Reddit or something,” said Macor, clearly bitter but mostly confused about the government’s priorities.
History of Sugar and Texas Prisons: Candy Bars and Jail Bars, What a Combo!
Let’s not forget about the University of Texas professors who were studying the history of the Imperial Sugar Company and the Texas penitentiary system. Nothing screams “important” like the connection between sugary snacks and mass incarceration. Perhaps they were looking for a “sugar-coated” excuse to explain Texas’ prison population—or maybe they were simply looking for the sweetest way to tie candy bars to modern-day criminal justice reform.
But as the funding dries up, they’ll have to take their research to the next level: actually working in sugar factories or correctional facilities to “get the real feel” of the historical connection. Honestly, though, the bigger mystery here is how the professors, who had been on this “sugar high” for years, are now faced with a harsh reality check: a giant donut hole of no funding and no clear path forward.
Chilean Farmers and American Scientists: A Cross-Continental Bromance
We cannot forget about the Chilean farmers and American scientists—a pairing funded by taxpayer dollars, no less. The grant was meant to study the agricultural exchanges between Chile and the United States in the 20th century, which absolutely no one asked for. It’s not clear if the funding was for a new agricultural revolution or just a very expensive tour of South American farms, but either way, it was a classic example of money spent in ways that could only be described as “unnecessary.”
Now, those involved in this research have to pack up their books and diaries about Chilean farming practices and find actual jobs. Maybe they’ll work in local nurseries, growing plants that could’ve been studied in Chile, but now it’s about figuring out if they can actually grow food on American soil. Guess they’ll learn a lot about farming practices now… just not the kind they originally thought they’d be doing.
Black Cuban Immigrants in the 60s: Retro Research Gone Wrong
As the funding for historical research into Black Cuban immigrants in the U.S. South during the 1960s evaporates, the researchers have to ask themselves: Was this a project for historical understanding or was it an expensive time-traveling exercise? The research’s relevance to today’s cultural climate is, at best, questionable. Still, these scholars were convinced their work would help inform a new generation about race and immigration, despite the project being straight out of The Twilight Zone.
Those involved in the research are now searching for alternative jobs at food banks, hoping to save some of the marginalized communities they researched. Instead of digging into the cultural intricacies of Cuban-American life, they now have to deal with the everyday realities of survival.
The Marxist Exodus to McDonald’s
And then there are the Marxists—those who had their hopes pinned on ever-expanding government grants to fund their ideological research. With these programs cut, they are suddenly thrust into the workforce. Yes, comrades, the era of sitting in coffee shops with iPads and half-sentences about “revolutionary change” has ended.
Instead, the “Marxist Intellectuals” are now in line at McDonald’s, wondering how to “flip the system” while they’re flipping burgers. The reality is harsh: they’re suddenly facing a government that says, “If you want to change the world, you better start with getting a job.” Sadly, their PhD in Political Science doesn’t apply when the primary skill on the job market is “customer service.”
The Aftermath: Taxpayers Rejoice (Sort Of)
While the cuts may have left many confused, disillusioned, and broke, there’s a silver lining: taxpayers no longer have to fund programs that were—at best—more about self-indulgence than education or social improvement.
The cuts, although ridiculed by many, might just lead to a rethinking of how public funds should be spent. Will this reimagine the way government programs operate? Will we be funding essential, practical projects? Or, as seems more likely, will the government just keep shifting the deck chairs while a new batch of Marxists trains to become the fastest fry cook in Austin? Only time will tell.
A Disclaimer (Because We Have To)
Before the pitchforks come out: this satirical piece is a collaboration between two sentient beings—a cowboy and a farmer—who decided to poke fun at the absurdities of government spending. No AI was harmed (or used) in the making of this article. Remember, it’s all in jest. Or is it?
Fake an Allergic Reaction
.
