Your Tacit Agreement To Nonexistence

 In the real world the Constitution is only binding upon the 40 people who signed it. Your willingness to have it apply to you too is a bizarre act of self-abnegation or else it's kind of a herding need to be led around by the nose to some end you are not in control of. Much as is the frame of mind of cows on a dairy farm or cattle in a slaughtering yard.

Hey Now

   Hey, how's it goin'? I ain't been here for a while, I was adopted by a PTSD lunatic lady 4 months ago and have been researching schitzophrenia and various related mental maladies in an effort to get a handle on this individual. Apparently I have spelled schitzophrenia wrong, according to the computer. A fundamental error that could be indicative of why I have made no progress at all with this person in getting through to her. Which basically makes her just a normal woman, as far as I can see. But a normal woman on steroids. All the requisite female attributes are there; ding-ey ness, talks on and on, makes little sense, is demanding, is ungrateful…..but to a more powerful degree; in short totally female. Only nuts. However she is not at all dangerous, so nuts to me is just everyday people only more so. I mean I don't know anyone who isn't nuts in at least one or more theaters of their life. Politics being at the apex of this pyramid of acceptably lunacy.
   This woman who I will call Huong simply because that is actually her name, she is not what i would call a political conversationalist other than to mutter things about Obama and Hillary, the only two politicians I think she is aware of, she mutters things of disapproval.
  Speaking of Obama, he has basically announced that he is now the king. The Republicans do not have a problem with this since that now opens the door for one of them becoming king at some future date. However they are making a big ta-do about being all upset. But they are not upset. They are just pretendingto be so that the Republicans who vote for them will think they are upset.
   John Boner, one of the stupidest child molesters to ever be in Congress - which is in itself quite an achievement - is mumbling that Obama is usurping the Constitution. Well, so what. The Constitution is bad enough, what's a jive nigger going to do to make it worse. In fact it's kind of refreshing to see a politician say "I'm going to do anything I want" rather than say "This is the will of the people" before doing what he wants. So I'll give the fucker that. Which he would have eventually taken anyway, since he already has most everything else of mine. It's called looting. It's a black thing. And a government thing. Which was invented by blacks. That's why it's all fucked up.

What Government Does

 

The job of government is to pass laws. Laws are things that prevent you from doing something; incarcerate you for doing something; fine you for doing something; tax you so they can afford to  continue to do the other three things. This is what government actually does.  And no one has a problem with it. Because for some reason Americans - and everyone else on earth - is convinced that unless you stop people from doing things, fine them for doing things, incarcerate them for doing things and taxing them to continue to be able to do the previous three things…..people are convinced that if this does not occur there will be rampant unstoppable chaos. Performed by other people, of course. Not themselves. Other people will do this. They themselves wont do this. They will behave. But other people will do things to them: such as stop them from doing things, take their property, incarcerate them into slavery, and demand protection. So in order to stop these things we have to institute these things. This is human thinking on planet earth in 2014.

The Constitution Manifesto

 

Contrary to anything you have been taught or figured out on your own the Constitution is actually the blueprint for the whole Marx, Engle, Lenin, Communist "thing." They would not ever have gotten all their bright ideas unless - unlike you - they had all sat down and actually read the American Constitution. The American Constitution lays out the groundrules for what the Conservatives of old called "fabian socialism" and what I call "commie muslim sharia masonic bullshit crap." In its essence Marxism is just Sharia Islamic decrees with a lot of Philosophical Slang surrounding it coupled with a "theory" that is more preposterous than the theory of Martians living inside Mt. Shasta and a whole lot easier to discredit. The only reason it's popular at all is because it promises to the world's loafers a life of ease provided by the world's ambitious. The invention of "democracy" thus, through something called "universal sufferage" makes this eventually the trend, since more loafers vote than ambitious people. Eventually the ambitious people become loafers then everyone starves, or everyone becomes Africans in other words. Politics and Sociology are not complicated. At least not to me. But I am sure it is to you.
   Getting back to business here, the Constitution was in fact the pair of shoulders Karl Marx, an unwashed Jew unemployable lover of government, as are all Jews, and by contagion all Christians, stood upon the view off in the distance his logical consequence of the premises laid-out by the Constitution - the premise being that all property is owned by the State and is temporarily allowed to "the people" up until such time as it is not allowed to them. Marx saw this premise and decided to just do away with the "temporarily allowed to the people" part. Thanks Founding Fathers! You founded Marxism!! Good job!!

The Conservatives And The Constitution

   The Conservatives are convinced that somewhere the real Constitution is being parried and warded off and held in abeyance or maybe kept in a vault underground in a prison dungeon somewhere and that we need to return to it, or bring it back to us so that we can reinstall it into its proper…i don't know…container. Or box. Or pedestal or table, or wherever they think it should go.
   I have no idea where they get this idea unless it's something they have carried with them from childhood where make-believe becomes something you need to hope and pray is real. When I was a child I really wanted The Phantom to exist even though I really knew he was just drawings on paper created by some guy in a small room bent over a drawing board and smoking cigarettes. But I wanted The Phantom - and Tarzan and The Blackhawks and a few others - to be real. But I knew they weren't. And at some point in my life I just stopped thinking about them altogether.
   Conservatives think the same way about the Constitution but they take this fantasy with them into adulthood and then get angry if you say or suggest to them that whatever Constitution they think exists…doesn't really exist: that the one that actually exists is the one that's actually in use.
   This, however, is too much for a Conservative to listen to without going LA LA LA LA and pushing their index fingers into their ears and squeezing their eyes shut to drown you out aurally and visually. And if they could drown you out olfactorally so that they wouldn't have to smell you they would be covering their noses too. Every sensory input would be blocked in order to keep you and your hideous words from gaining entrance.
   It is impossible to get a Conservative to explain to you why the Constitution that exists is not the Constitution we are supposed to be using. It would be easier for you to find a video of Rosie Odonnell with a white human dick in her twat and a look of rapturous delirium on her face. Conservatives cannot explain why their imaginary Constitution is the real one. They just insist that it is. And they are as boneheaded as cultists about it. Scientologists think we come back and that we have been here before. In fact they insist on it. If you tell them that's not the case they get very angry at you. Try it, you don't believe me. You tell a Catholic Jesus is not in the bread disc, installed there by a child molester who said the secret words, he will get very angry at you. You tell a Muslim that Mohammed was a sociopathic mental patient in love with death, pain, and sorrow and gathered bands of like-minded sociopaths from the dungheaps of the wildernesses to join him destroy all who would not obey them in order to gather new 10 year old girls and boys to rape they get very angry at you.
   "Oh, now you're comparing a Conservative with a Muslim."
   Kinda, yeah, I guess you could say that. Both groups are insistent that you obey them.
   But, really, let's not go too far afield here, even though I have an enthusiastic penchant for it.
   Anyway, Conservatives are so adrift and far out to sea regarding their imaginary real Constitution that it's easier to get a schizophrenic to believe the voices and the visuals of burning monkeys are not real than it is to convince that the Constitution that is in use is the real Constitution.

I Do Not Need A Constitution

   There is nothing I have ever done in my life that required me to have a constitution different from the internal one i was born with.  The one written on hand-wrought parchment covered in ink from the feather of an actual bird  that Shawn Hannity and Rush Limbaugh revere and worship and bow down to like bullshitting idiots pretending to be patriotic while not actually picking up arms and joining the service….that one i don't actually need. For anything. For anything imaginable. For anything imaginable even by Jules Verne and H.G. Wells on acid.
   All the conservatives and republican dunderheads on the radio, however, they say "Constitution" like it's the words of consecration, which, if you are not a Catholic, are the words uttered by a child molester that turns bread into Jesus. They say it with that level of reverence. The same level of reverence that the child molester uses when he creates Jesus out of pastry. That level of reverence. Because that level of magic is being employed, if you are fumbling around for an explanation. Yeah: it's because in both instances magic voodoo nonsense is being employed. And lots of it. Enough of it in fact that millions and millions of people actually think Jesus is in bread and liquor and that Rights and Liberty are in the Constitution. Its at that same level of what-the-fuckness.
   As these words are being written, Nigger Number One is threatening to create citizens out of 30 million illegal savage Muslims and prehistoric Aztec Mexicans and Nigger Number Two is resigning to be - it is believed - assigned to the Supreme Court…..and this is all being done within and with great ruination in full accord with what the Constitution allows and in fact encourages. Meanwhile all the Right Wing radio dunces are screaming that "We need to return to the Constitution!" even though at no time in history has Washington ever left it. Nothing Washington has ever done has ever been declared unconstitutional. Only things States and counties and cities and individuals have done are declared unconstitutional.Washington never varies from the Constitution. And if it does, the Supreme Court declares that it has not and that is the end of it. So, in other words, fuck you. Thank you. And fuck you.

Anti-Constitutionalism Catches On

   The other day on KFI Los Angeles radio Bill Handel who has the morning radio show people actually listen to in LA said, offhandedly, that the Constitution was basically a joke and a preposterous mess. He will not get into trouble for saying this because he is a lawyer. So he is fearless. Sue him and he will happily go to court and rip you to shreds. Threaten to fire him and he'll quit. He has a lot of options other than radio, which if he doesn't hold it in contempt is making a pretty good show of pretending he does.
   I can only assume he has been reading this blog. To anyone with a smidgeon of a brain cell stumbling upon this blog would have to be a mind-bending, heart-filling experience of unbridled happiness and the glories of heaven brought to earth and resting upon his soul.
   His contempt for the Constitution is apparently so not-an-issue that he didn't even elaborate about it. He just went on to other things. No one in the studio objected either because let's face it, where does one start when defending the Consitution? Where is the good part? The part worth something? Where is the part that fills the spirit with the will to begin a Defense Strategy for it? you tell me. You will have to because I don't know where the fuck it is, you should know that by now. So you find it. You find that portion of the Constitution that thrills your soul with vitality and a desire to fall to your knees and thank Jesus that it's there. Then you read it to me so that I will feel ashamed of myself for speaking ill of that great and majestic document that spreads liberty throughout the planet. Thanks in advance. I'll wait while you look.

Anti-Contitutional Thought For The Day

   The Constitution is a document that boldly declares "The human mind and human intelligence do not exist. Only the declarations and edicts of the men signing this document that is designed to govern your life exists as far as you are concerned. Even though we - not one of us - has never created a nation before, we know that we are qualified to get the job done. Because we say so. It took us months to work all this out. We are the First American Bureaucrats and we know best. We are that goddamned fantastic."
   American bureaucrats are still saying this today. Recently one of them created what he declares is universal health insurance. With a pen. The same one probably used to create the Constitution.

The Imaginary Balance of Power

Today's anti Constitution lesson: the balance of power. You cannot create "balances of power." If you create three powers….. the executive, the legislative, and the judicial….. all three of which have the power to fuck you hard in the ass….you cannot expect them to cooperate toward a balance. Why would they? They all three have equal power. Each one of them is going to want dominion - cause that's how it is with people who have power. And all government power is illicit power, not legitimate power. It's power by decree, not power by ability or ownership. So they will never balance to fuck you in the ass equally. No,  one will always eventually defeat the other two so that it can be the one fucking you in the ass exclusively. So the "balance of fucking you in the ass power" never stays balanced for long. Eventually one of the powers reigns supreme and then dissolves the other two powers and then fucks EVERYONE in the ass. Even the people in the previous two powers. So the "balance of power" notion, when it was created, was a very stupid one, to put it charitably. A very evil one to put it the way i suspect it actually should be put.

The Movement West

   Americans began moving westward the day after the Constitution went into effect. This is not the version they teach in the Constitutionally-mandated State schools. However, in fact, it was the Constitution that caused the more-American of the Americans to get the fuck away from its sudden sphere of influence.
   This was not at all hard to do, there was tons of room west. There was only an ocean to the east, and it was close. And you cant live on the ocean. You need ground. We live on the ground. So the Americans who recognized the Constitution for what it was - the nullification of the war of "independence" - moved the fuck to the west of the Constitution's influence. Which would be past the last outpost of the American Army: which the Constitution created.
   The Indians were not a problem for these people. These were not conquerers moving west, these were escapees. Plus they had nice cloth. And nice shiny things. And the Indians liked these things. And being Indians they loved the barter system. They loved the barter system so much, in fact, that the Indians from east coast to west coast already had in place a universal sign language system to use between tribes 3000 miles apart from each other to trade furs and trinkets and drugs. The new tribe of white people showed up with amazing new trinkets, amazing new drugs, amazing new cloths and fashions……. and firearms! God bless these white-eyes pale-face fuckers with interesting saddles.
   Trading went well, far out of range of the New Constitutional Government of Godliness and Perfection and Delight. Indians and escapees got along great. Everyone was learning new things. Whitey learned hunting tricks and Tonto learned about Western History and Progress.
    Meanwhile the Constitution Police were staring into the West and noticing that a lot of Americans were hightailing it into unknown territory. Escapees meant less taxes, or less looting, confiscation, and tribute, to put the proper accurate exact words to it and escapees meant more liberty. What if they became so independent they came to realize they didnt need the new constitutional government? We would have to go to work in the private sector! HOLY FUCKING SHIT!!
   HOW TO PREVENT THIS???
   Well, one way would be to kill some Indians. Dress the soldiers in civilian clothes - as is the custom with Muslims today - and slaughter a tribe or two. The Indians will retaliate against the escapees (who are innocent) and the Constitutional Police will ride to the rescue and confiscate all the Indian property and land holdings and declare it US Territory. Please keep in mind that i am no booster of the idiotic way of life of the fucking Indians. Keep this in mind. That's how bad the Constitutional Police are as far as I am concerned compared to the Indians.
   Where was I.
   So as the escapees moved farther away from the Constitutional government in order to remain free,  and the Consitutional-created assholes-in-charge saw the need to do some conquesting in the interests of fencing these Americans in. The story you get is that the Federal government was simply enthusiastically exploratory, foraging into the wilderness in advance of the corraled and penned-in citizens who yearned to expand into the lands of the savage monstrosities from the Pleistocene and reclaim the land for Christianity against the heathen enemies of Jesus.
   In fact, the escapees were all fine, they had already gone exploratoring on their own,  the Indians were all fine, sharing their youg women with the settlers in exchange for whiskey, and the lawyers comprising the government were all pissed. Being lawyers they made sure that the crimes they were about to commit were made to look like rescue, humanitarian, efforts.
   By the time the escapees made it to the far west, out passed the deserts, liberty was pretty intense. As a result the American Western is the most popular  genre of any kind on earth in history. The days of "lawlessness" are the most beloved and romantic in the entire pantheon of Times Past.
   Eventually Washington DC was in full control of both coasts and everything in between.
   Go outside and look at the result.
 

The Constitution As A Magical Decree

   Talking to right wingers about the Constitution is a whole nuther universe from talking to left wingers about the Constitution. You talk to left wingers about the Constitution they are very matter of fact about it and do not think it's magical. They might not be sure exactly what it is - nobody I have talked to really does: but left wingers know that it's a good thing, in some practical way, somehow, that seems to be working for them, even though they don't know what it is exactly, even Constitutional Lawyers, whatever in the fuck those even are, they are so - I guess bewildered and involved and all-wrapped-up in it….that they can slice and dice it into fractal-like increments and never repeat themselves explaining its convolutions and highways that go off into the far horizons of contorted unendingness….they might not know all its particulars but they know that it can be shaped and reshaped and molded into this that and the other thing if enough of the right people do the molding. So left wingers have a very practical down to earth attitude about it: it's something they can work with and adjust on a day to day basis. To them its a reshapable piece of tit-silicon implant that can be made bigger or smaller by injecting or withdrawing "interpretations" and "decisions." They see it as a Useful Idiot, in other words, to dredge up a phrase from the John Birch Society used to describe Democrats themselves.
   Now then, to right wingers? Oh, well now, the Constitution is something else altogether to them. To them it is something that came from the sky and is inviolate and contains the Ten Commandments. It is something modern day Moses-clones called The Founding Fathers received on Mt Vernon when the Constitutional Deity created it and hammered it into tablets and gave it to - I guess James Madison or one of his close friends - and it allows them to have small pistols and rifles until confiscated by conditions allowed by the Constitution: a document that clearly permits them to own virtually nothing if it is confiscated via "due process." which means "until its taken." If "due process" is followed, well ok, to a right winger all is well. It's Constitutiona. Doing something heinous to a right winger by government is not a problem if Constitutional guidelines are followed.
   What I'm trying to say is right wingers are insane idiots. And aggressively so. They will have an absolute fit if after they are Constitutionally arrested they are not allowed a phone call. Even though that's not one of their "rights" as "guaranteed" by the Constitution. They think it is. So what the fuck, the government lets them make a phone call. It's amusing, why not let them have it if that's what they want. Meanwhile they're in jail. Constitutionally.
.

The Constitution Is The First Welfare Document

   The Constitution is the template authorizing all the welfare recipients that have been created. This includes all elected "representatives," all cops, all parks, all meter maids, all postal workers, all soldiers, all old people, all medical personnel (this one is pending, but assured) all regulating agencies and their employees, all staffers in government jobs…..it's over half the country at this point. When the Constitution was signed it was just the signers getting welfare. Then once the first elections were finished all the new "representatives" were on board. Now its everyone. Even people out of work can get welfare. It's all going to collapse and then welfare will be replaced by armed robbery by private citizens not by police officers. This is what the Constitution that Right Wingers worship and that Left Wingers are merely thankful for. And being thankful is far far less heinous than idolatry. Just in case some Right Winger reading this - which is unlikely - thinks his love of the Constitution is something else. Like patriotism. It's idolatry, dude. Don't kid yourself, Christian.

Man Kills Deer. Gets To Not Admit It. That's His Right.

   Today the Supreme Court allowed a man who refused to answer a Ranger's questions about a dead deer in his back yard permission to refuse to answer a Ranger's questions about a dead deer in his back yard. Since this was a news item transcribed by a toddler journalism-major intern from a transcript emanating from a "newswire" the contents of which are composed by uncurious, agenda-driven hypnotics…there is no way in hell to determine if this ruling resulted in an end to the fellow's bullying by the Federal government. All we do know is that "he was within his Constitutional rights" in refusing to answer the Ranger's inquiries about the dead deer on the man's property. Apparently the dead deer was the property of the Ranger. As are all the deer in the forest. The Rangers own them. Apparently. I assume this because they are so protective of them. They are the government's deer. Not yours. That is apparently a lot larger right granted to the government than the right granted to you - the right to not answer questions. However being given the right to not answer questions does not save you from arrest. The Constitution does not save you from arrest. Oh-ho nosir. Uh-uh. Not by a long shot. It does however grant you the right to be taken quietly. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Let's defend that with our lives, Citizens. A government document fucking you hard in the ass composed by bad writers is certainly worth dying to protect if anything is. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Bit o' Review o' The Bill o' Rights

The 1st Amendment, much vaunted by Americans educated by the State, gives you the "right" to - ok, sit down for this, there are 5 of them - gives you the "right" to 1: pray to invisible beings - 2: talk - 3: write - 4: gather - and 5: complain.

If these are rights at all they are given to you by Nature and or God and by virtue of you actually existing. The federal government to claim that IT is "giving you these rights" is a lie. And a big one. It's a whopper. It is claiming to actually BE a deity. Which is the establishing of a religion by the State. Which is forbidden by the 1st Amendment. Is your head spinning yet? Probably not. You would need to UNDERSTAND the First Amendment for that to happen.

The 2nd Amendment, as written, actually ALLOWS you to own a fully armed Tomcat fighter jet. However you in reality are NOT allowed to own a fully armed Tomcat fighter jet. So, even though the NRA is trying to convince you what a great job it's doing, actually it's doing a very shitty job. It's doing a great job of collecting dues from you though. Meanwhile the 2nd Amendment is being nonchalantly overruled by the Feds. i guess it should have been written in more ferocious ink.

The Third Amendment that YOU think allows you to kick soldiers who want to live in your house out of your house ACTUALLY says you not only have to house soldiers if the feds order you to but that they can be enemy soldiers. Now THAT is one fantastic right. You have to actually READ the third amendment though in order to see this. Otherwise you will just parrot what they told you in school to parrot: that it gives you the "right" not to barrack soldiers inside your house. It doesnt. It actually orders you to barrack soldiers inside your house. Even Muslim ones. Which Obama is filling the army with right now: jihadists.

The 4th "right" in the Bill of "Rights" that YOU probably think protects you from being searched and protects you from being seized ACTUALLY gives power to the feds to search you and seize you. You have to actually READ the 4th amendment though to see this. Otherwise you will be going around saying you have the right to be not searched and seized and sounding like a Conservative, or like a dunce, in other words.

The 5th Amendment of the Bill of Rights gives you a bunch of stuff and here is what it all is: you can be executed and or jailed: you can be tried for every offense on the books but only once for each offense: while under arrest you cant be forced to confess so while under arrest you are unofficially presumed not guilty while under arrest: you can be deprived of life, liberty and property if the proper paperwork is submitted: and finally, the federal and state and county and municipal governments in America are the actual owners of all the real estate within the national borders. Even though you might be the deed holder, the fabricated edict called Eminent Domain is the real owner. in other words the 5th Amendment of the Bill of Rights is the real owner of what real estate you think you own.Enjoy these rights, a lot of people died so that you could have and exercise them. God bless you.

Number 6 in the Bill of Your Rights gives you the following: the right to be arrested: the right to a trial in the town you were arrested in: you have the right to be told why are are under arrest: you have the right to gaze upon any accusers who the arresting officers are obeying: you have the right to have an employee of the State Agency that is arresting you defend you when you are undergoing your right to a trial. Please enjoy your 6th Amendment, Citizen.

Amendment 7 of the Bill of Rights has actually been officially nullified. I am not making this up. So you only have 9 actually-operating Amendments in the 10 Amendments of the Bill of Rights.

The 8th Amendment to the Bill of Rights says you have the right to be punished and held for ransom, which ransom shall not be "excessive." Excessive is not defined. it is your right to have your punishment - which is guaranteed - not be "cruel or unusual." These terms are not defined, that is, the degree and nature and duration of your punishment which the 8th amendment gives you the right to.

The 9th Amendment of the Bill of Rights is as follows verbatim:

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

This is why i keep saying the Constitution was written by either idiots or demonics.

What this literally MEANS is the things claimed by the Constitution to be rights that actually in reality are permissions not rights, does not mean that other permissions called rights cannot be grandly and unselfishly tossed to the citizenry: for example - the right to a propeller beanie when you are arrested: a State or County or City can give you that right.

The 10th and final right of the Bill of Rights reads as follows:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

In plain language and not legalese duplicitous ambiguous "to be interpreted" language, the 10th amendment to the Bill of Rights gives the States any powers over you not given to the feds over you. Since there are no powers over you denied to the feds this amendment basically declares the states powerless if it comes to a showdown between the States and DC. if however at some time it is discovered that the Feds have denied themselves a power over you, a State or States can lay claim to that power over you. The "people" also have the power to do anything not forbidden for them to do.

And there you have it! the ten amendments to the constitution: your Bill of Rights! enjoy!!

Gettin' Some Muslim Support Here

   As you know I have been saying all along that the Constitution is a lot like the Koran. Well!…..apparently the Islamic Community agrees with me even though Mainstream Christian Right Wing Conservative Redneck American think I am borderline Aaron Burr. More and more I am coming across Muslim videos on You Tube explaining calmly and with quiet reassurance that the Constitution is basically an introductory version of Sharia Law. One of the videos has the maker of the video interviewing an "American" Congressman in his office in DC and the Congressman is showing the fellow the Koran that he took his oath of office on. The video also pleasantly shows all the murals in the Supreme Court that show the Koran and Muslims consulting in pensive contemplation the nature of the Law and how this tradition is what the Supreme Court is founded on: Lawmaking. Or As I put it Random Edicts of Oppression Piling Up Like Diarrhea Across the Land.

A Conservative Moment

   This - what follows -  is an explanation of the Conservatism philosophy as stated by William Buckley in the first issue of National Review, an extremely obtuse and exhausting magazine. The quote comes from the latest issue of Imprimis Newsletter, a phenomenally tedious and laborious monthly essay on Conservatism from Hillsdale College, a strange place where you go to learn - and not for free - something about the Constitution. It must be something hidden because the actual Constitution is pretty easy to read and takes about an hour to read and which requires handfuls of Benzadrine to actually make that happen without screaming in agony at the boatload of boredom that is its synonym. The Constitution: A Boatload of Boredom. True, it's a boatload of boredom that will destroy your life and happiness and that of all your progeny but it's still a boatload of boredom. Auschwitz was the most boring place in the galaxy to the people living in it. The Constitution is Auschwitz in manual form.

   To return to the Imprimis essay, this is an excerpt consisting of some written passages by William Buckley, the more or less founder or at least the main disseminator of Conservatism:

"Among our convictions:
It is the job of centralized government (in peacetime) to protect its citizens’ lives, liberty and property. All other activities of government tend to diminish freedom and hamper progress. The growth of government (the dominant social feature of this century) must be fought relentlessly. In this great social conflict of the era, we are, without reservations, on the libertarian side. The profound crisis of our era is, in essence, the conflict between the Social Engineers, who seek to adjust mankind to conform with scientific utopias, and the disciples of Truth, who defend the organic moral order. We believe that truth is neither arrived at nor illuminated by monitoring election results, binding though these are for other purposes, but by other means, including a study of human experience. On this point we are, without reservations, on the conservative side."

sentence 1: first who says that's government's "job" - to protect people by jailing them and ordering them around and taxing them and regulating them. what kind of protection is that. a conservative - never having heard this question before in his life - usually either starts foaming at the mouth hearing it or runs away after throwing something onto the ground and breaking it. sentence 2: EVERY - (not "all other") -  activities of government dont "tend" to diminish freedom and hamper progress, it's inevitable. sentence 3: if the growth of government must be fought at what point in its growth do you start the fighting. why not just not establish a government in the first place if you have to monitor it for some reason. who needs it? sentence 4: is a simple statement of intent without defining libertarian. sentence 5: why is a conservative government less "social engineering" than any other kind? what is a scientific utopia? why do the conservatives know what Truth is and no one else does? what the FUCK is the "organic moral order?????????????" sentence 6: elections are binding. that sounds REAL tyrannical to ME……. truth is arrived at "by other means" - not explained save for one; studying human experience. well, there are a lot of those, does it include taking a shit? That's a human experience. sentence 7: i cant make any sense of this one. "On this point…" -  on what point? the point of discovering Truth? its bewinderingly blubbering. Who the fuck knows what it means. But to Conservatives this is plain and righteous English, filled with profound meaning and pious illumination. Conservatives are mental patients in other words, saying things that make THEM feel happy. But conveying no actual facts or meanings or references to life here on earth as regulated by the laws of physics and chemistry, the only laws that actually matter and cannot be broken without automatic punishment that are provided tax free.

2 hours ago

Like

Right Wing Assholes And Left Wing Vermin

 

   The difference between the right wing and the left wing is, as I have said often, the right wingers are stupid and the left wingers are evil. The Constitution's existence brings this out very clearly.
   To a Right Winger the Constitution is never being interpreted properly. Or whatever word they are using at the moment; it's not being understood properly, or it's being tromped upon or it's being ignored or it's being usurped or it's being blasphemed or sullied or corrupted or warped or brainwashed or socialized or communized or muslimized or paganized or dechristianized or unSanforized…..it's fucking endless. If you ask them for specifics on how the Constitution has been led astray usually what you get is that Obama - a Muslim now running this "Christian Nation" - is not a citizen. Which he probably isn't. In my opinion he's not even close to human, forget about being a citizen. He's barely at bacteria level as far as I'm concerned. But this is not about me. It's about Right Wingers and the Constitution. If you ask them "Well how is the Constitution being….whatever it's being?" They'll say "Obama is not a citizen!!"
   The Constitution says you have to be a citizen, you see.
   And I will say "Well if he's not a citizen and the Constitution says he has to be a citizen I guess he is more powerful than the Constitution because he just told it to go fuck itself, didn't he."
   This is not a remark a Right Wingers deal with well.
   Before they can shake off the cobwebs from this I will strike again: "Maybe the Constitution isn't worth a fucking shit if a dumbass fuck like Obama can walk all over it. Ya think?"
   This usually throws them into a complete state. This usually causes them to growl - and I mean actually growl - and then storm off and walk away from me. Their backs to me they show!
   Left wingers should actually hire me. I could defeat every Right Winger in the land in a debate. But, alas, Left Wingers, unlike Right Wingers, are intelligent enough to see that  there is something about me that does not add up to them: I am a browbeater of Right Wingers but I do not address the Left at all. This puzzles them. The reason I don't address them is the same reason I don't address maggots crawling through the wet eyeholes of  dead, still-moist roadside cats.
   I will let you speculate as to why I don't speak to maggots crawling through dead cats. All your guesses will probably be more or less in the ball park.
   The same with Left Wingers.
   Getting back to the Right Wingers, they all want to return to the Constitution but they ONE never know exactly what portion of it they want to return to, usually its just "the whole thing," and TWO since no Right Winger has ever actually read the Consitution, they of course have no smidgeon of a clue as to why is it being so easily wrenched into something they don't approve of from whatever it used to be that they did approve of, which they can never seem to articulate (what it was they used to approve of) and they can never give the reason it (the Constitution) can be so maleable and liquid and basically spineless. But were they to read it they would discover that the reason the Constitution is so changeable and fluid and "living" - is because it has created its own alteration mechanism! It's called the legislative, the judicial, and the executive branches!!!!!!!
   In other words, the Constitution is idiotic, self-destructive, bogusly authoritarian nonsense that for some reason that will likely forever elude all Americans except me take very very very seriously. Even though it's Way Beyond Bizarre. And it's not just the contents that are bizarre; it's the concept of a written essay and an all-powerful, unstoppable edict-machine being created out of paper in the first place…..by people not authorized by any constitution to undertake such a task. I mean….who are these guys? "Excuse me, gentlemen, did any of you have any experience in creating a Country before this one? Is this your first attempt at Nation-Founding? And this stack of papers you have handed me….what do you call this?…..did you call it 'a constitution'?…..was that it?……is this 'constitution' imbued with some sort of magic power that makes it - on it's own volition - the law of the land? What law of the land authorized a constitution to be created? I mean if this is the law of the land…did some higher law of the heavens create it? I'm getting confused, walk me through this."
   Unfortunately for some reason that Q&A never took place. If it had we would not be finding ourtselves in this mess today.

The "If You Don't Like It Here Why Don't You Leave" People Discussed

 

   Since I started railing against the Constitution I get a lot of "Well, if you don't like it here why dont you leave!" advisories from - exclusively - right wing conservative types. And I don't even have to explain why I detest the Constitution, I just have to say I don't like it. I don't even have to subsume the entire Constitution into my remarks either, I just have to object to anything in it at all. For instance the Bill of Rights. Oh dear.  If you have a problem with even one of the ten things all hell breaks loose, forget about repudiating the entire ten. It's like saying to a Catholic Jesus is not in the host. Or telling a Jovie Jesus is God. Or telling a Scientologist L. Ron Hubbard was a twisted Satanist devoted to a systematic method of demonic torment if not complete infestation and possession. Or telling an ecologist activist plants and animals and terrain do not have rights. Defenders Of The Constitution are not only stupid and obtuse and clueless and exhausting they are combative. This is why Left Wingers never engage them physically. Because Left Wingers are not combative. No, they like to debate. They want to win you over. Right Wingers do not debate. They would need to know what they re talking about in order to debate. Right wingers only like to fight. Left wingers prefer to have the Law do their fighting for them. Surprise: the Right Wingers are losing the war. Because the Law wins out over brawling every time.
   Right Wingers also detest me. Even though I am not a Left Winger. Right Wingers insist I am. Left Wingers are pretty convinced however I am not. Left Wingers know their own. They know I am not one of them. Unlike the Right Wingers I am more than happy to "debate" Left Wingers. They also realize this. They do not debate me. They go around me and deal with Right Wingers. I am a party of one. Constitutional Democracies deal with numbers, not individuals. The Left Wingers know I am all alone and that I cannot ever muster enough votes to "defeat" them in an election. They also know that the Right and the Conservatives and the Libertarians are not my army of comrades. So they don't worry about me. They go around me. They don't need to waste their time losing debates to someone who will not have an effect on things ever. The Left Wingers are political beings: their enemy is other political beings called Republicans and Conservatives and Libertarians. And they know their enemy is at a disadvangate because their enemy - the Right -  is comprised exclusively of Left Wingers Who Don't Realize They Are Left Wingers. Not that they look upon The Right as "the enemy." They look upon The Right as a voting block that needs to be whittled away into extinction. Which is what is happening. The Republicans not in office are disgusted with their own party members actually holding office. Because elected Republicans immediately ally with the Democrats in office. Because they see no reason not to: they both have ultimately the same common goal: ordering people around who they never met.
   Getting back to the right wingers ordering me out of the Country: this always happens when I become abusive or critical of any of their false assumptions, which are legion. I don't even have to be talking to them: I can be talking to Bob way over there and they will run up and start yelling the sentence, Hey, if you don't like it here, fucking move somewhere else!! My response to this always goes as follows: "Ok, but before I leave and go somewhere else I want to make sure I have all this clear: I have a problem with something that is not you. I have a problem with that thing way over there that is not you. I don't even know you and so I have no problem with you; I have a problem with that thing way over there that is not you. You, on the other hand, have a problem with me because I have a problem with that thing way over there…..so you…want me…….to move:
and you expect me to obey you. Do I have that right?" "You sure do, asshole!" "How about this; since you have a problem with me; but I dont have a problem with you and don't care if you move or not, in fact i dont give a shit if you live or die, actually…..why don't you move. Cause my problem is not with you, at least it wasn't, my problem is with something I am trying to fix. And the problem I am trying to fix is where I live. I am trying to fix a problem. Where I live. I don't want to move from where I live because I am encountering a problem where I live. Even though you want me to. I can only assume my fixing this problem is going to cause you a problem. So: what problem are you going to have if I fix the problem I am having." No Right Winger I have ever said this to has ever continued the conversation. Nor have they taken any action that might encourage me to think, "Gee, maybe I better move after all." And if they did, it isn't likely I would move out of the United States, even if I did move. This is what I'm a citizen of. Becoming a non citizen of the United States is a lot more difficult than becoming a citizen or even remaining an alien invader here. And I sure don't need any more bureaucratic shit from the United States than I am wallowing in already. So telling me "why dont you move" so far has not caused me to move. And even if I did move I would still be a citizen of the United States but in another Country. That seems even more stupid than being a citizen here. Being a citizen of a country you moved out of is too convoluted for me to even imagine being involved with, no matter what country you're in or moved out of.
   But here's what really galls me about a Right Winger ordering me out of the Country: it's the feeble-minded solution the Right invariably suggests regarding everything. In fact, "why don't you move" is actually pretty insightful for a Right Winger. Usually they just say fuck you without any offering of a solution - such as moving. I mean "why dont you move" is - compared to most Right Wing positions and platforms and suggestions and ideas - almost elegant. Still, it's annoying.

The 13th Amendment: LSD Mind-Alteration In Word Form

   "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."

   This is the 13th Amendment. This is the spoils of the Civil War: universal slavery.
   I call the 13th Amendment the LSD Mind-Opening Gateway To Satan's Sense of Humor. In case you have not noticed I consider government in all it's synonyms and locations to be the visible form of its invisible Deity: Lucifer. Or maybe just one of his cohorts: government is SO shallow and transparent even a low-level demon can operate it and yet still keep it's slaves blind to its actual nature, convincing them it's a deity of order and progress rather than an infallible machine for ruin and pain and loss and despair.
   Now keep in mind that no Ordinary American has even ever read the 13th Amendment until they read it here - the most unread blog in global blogging history. They also dont know that the Civil war has as it's only consequence, other than the corpses, the 13th Amendment. 
   Amazingly, not everyone who reads the 13th Amendment sees that it is an edict establishing everyone within the "jurisdiction" of the United States as a legal candidate for slavery, to be owned and operated by those entities and agencies and departments and bureaus and cities and States and counties and Districts of Columbias that have as part of their job description the power to "duly convict."
   They just don't see this. What they see is "Negroes on plantations south of the Mason-Dixon line shall not be bought and sold and worked and operated as slaves."
   This is what they see. They see "neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for a crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction" as being "the negroes are now free." That's what they see. They see negroes leaping and jumping happily away from the cotton field and down de rodes ta freedum. Yassuh. They don't see "You are now all slaves." They see "There is no more slavery." In other words, they see the exact opposite of what is there. Why do they see this? I have no idea. It could be because they do not understand vocabulary. I don't know what the reason is. You would have to ask them. Or just ask yourself. You probably think the same thing. You probably think the words in the 13th Amendment says no more slavery. Even though it says slavery has been expanded to include you. If you are duly convicted. Whatever that means. Duly convicted at the moment means when the cops puts the handcuffs on and puts you into the car and drives you to a cell. That is the In Reality meaning of duly convicted. In Constitutional gobbledeegook it means whatever the present-moment official legalistic meaning of duly convicted means. Which can change upon a vote or decision by the people who are in charge of duly-convicted definitions.
   To return, that's not what I see when I read it: that slavery is over. I do not see that. I see something else. I see the exact opposite. I see "you are now all eligible to be made into slaves of the all legal authorities of all 50 States and the District of Columbia." People see "duly convicted" as meaning "the bad guys: murderers and rapists and thieves." But that's not what is expressed in the words "duly convicted." Only "duly convicted" is expressed in the words "duly convicted." And mind you, another thing not expressed in the words "duly convicted": and that is; anything involving any notions of "guilt" or "innocence:" These things are also not mentioned. People think "Well, it's implied." But, no, it's not implied. It's not anything. It's not mentioned. It's not even considered. It is in fact ignored. Which is very far removed from "it's implied." No: it's not implied. Nothing is implied. Something is in fact stated: and stated quite clearly, so you can't get them for sneakiness; and what is stated is the "duly convicted" are the only slaves allowed in the United States. This means only American government entities can own slaves. And you qualify. Negro or not. 
   That was some war to fight in order to establish slavery as the law of the land.
   Meanwhile all the combatants thought they were killing each other over Negroes, or some such. No; they were killing each other for the amusement of the people handing out the uniforms. While "States Rights" is sometimes blathered-about as being the "real issue" in the Civil War, the outcome of the civil war - the 13th Amendment - gives, to me at least, a clear conviction that the real reason for the Civil War was to find out which side was the most evil: the side that wanted just Negroes to be slaves, or the side that wanted everybody to be slaves. Unfortunately for white people, the South lost.
   It goes without saying that before and during the Civil War the Northern combatants were being assured that they were fighting for a Just Cause and a Humane Cause and a Noble Cause and a Great Cause and a Holy Cause and a Righteous Cause: which would be uttered in different ways -  freeing the slaves, freeing the Negroes, preserving the Union, quashing rebellion, ending National division - because no one was going to fight "to establish universal slavery."
That would be crazy. So they fought for something else. Something else that even today is being hahaha "debated"….. 
"Well, now, ya know, the Civil War was not about slavery: it was about States Rights." "Well, ya know, the Civil War was not really the South fighting the North: it was about the South defending itself from a Northhern invasion by its armies."
"Well, ya know, the Civil War was fought to fill the coffers of the European Rothschilds." "Well, ya know, the Civil War was fought to cement into eternity the destiny of the United States as God's Own Nation of the Armies of the Lord." "Well, ya know, the Civil War was fought to see if this nation or any other can long endure." And on and on and on, even to right now! Ask someone right now about the Civil War - Why was it fought? Not one of them will say "In order to establish universal slavery within the United States!"  Even though the 13 Amendment -one of the things that orders us around - says different.
   That's why I call the 13th Amendment the mind-altering amendment: you either suddenly see behind the curtain or you don't. If you don't then you continue to believe that the 13th Amendment frees Negros from the plantation and makes them free just like us. This is what you see, this is what you believe, this is what you proclaim. If you on the other hand have your eyes opened, you not only see what the 13th Amendment really states…you also see that it is not just an accidental blunder of some sort of Blundering Mechanism Thing. You see that's it's really blatant in-your-face ridicule of your idiotic gullability in thinking bureaucrats and government assholes are wondrous divine beings keeping everything orderly. Well they're  certainly working on keeping everything orderly - by putting everyone behind bars! Which, if you understand human government societies at all, is they way they all keep order: by imprisoning everyone and then ordering them to bring them coffee and happy endings.
   There are no noble bureaucrats. There are no noble Senators. There are no noble Congressmen. There are no noble Presidents. And there are certainly no noble police officers. You should at least have learned that by now unless you are a dominatrix patron, and all they learn is that being humiliated and fucked-over causes ejaculation. If you like cops and government, then you're one of those. You're a creep, in other words. Hi, creep.

   

The Horror The Horror. And Cops Are The Ones Who Make It All Possible

 

   There can be no Constitution, there can be no government, there can be no legislation, there can be no Congress, there can be no Agencies, there can be no Bureaus, there can be no laws, there can be no Anything Weird And Unnnatural……..without cops to make it all work.
   The American Police Officer is - if America is the best country in history - the worst human being in history: because it is his job to be at war with Americans.
   Law and order are the two historic destroyers of Mankind and they are universally cherished by the species law and order were created to destroy. I call this the Jew Virus: the need to be destroyed resulting from some profound sense of guilt and fear that is more terrible than death itself, and thus death must be hurried-along, welcomed and embraced.
   Cops are the ones who facilitate this suicide. Without cops even if all the rest of us were Authorized Lawmakers, "writing" "creating" "introducing" - whatever you want to call it - New Legislation at the rate of a billion laws per second per man….without cops to arrest the violators - - - it would all just be papers with words on them, like newsprint composed by people with very high salaries and very deep pension plans that ended up wrapping fish in America and wiping asses in Russia and China.
   The cop is the sadistic monster, devoid of intelligence and overflowing with stupidity, that makes tyranny work.
   It is almost impossible to get a soldier to engage in combat with his own countrymen. It is almost impossible NOT to get a policeman to do it. Policemen the world over will attack and arrest and incarcerate and loot their own countrymen all day and all night, 7 days a week, if you don't have their commanders order them to take days off once in a while. Even then they slap on their weapons and go out on the town, anxious to intercede in a law violation if the opportunity arises, if for no other reason than some on-duty cop will have to write-up all the paperwork in the aftermath, not them. And a day off from paperwork is always enjoyable to a cop. A day off from arrests and confiscation, not so much, in fact, not at all. But a day off from the tedium of writing and filing: ah; it is Nirvana itself. Better to be piling-on with your fellows in a swarming maneuver against a fellow citizen - or in the case of Los Angeles, against a gringo, since the LAPD is now being inhabited by illegals -  than filling in the blanks of a form and using one's meagre creative-writing skills to deceive the readers of the report down the line.

This Blog's Purpose Reviewed

   The purpose of this blog is to demonstrate the observable truth that the Constitution is the cause of America's problems, not the solution to them. And to also demonstrate in a parenthetical sort of way the not-so-observable hypothesis that this is not just a slip-up of the creators of the Constitution but an intentional act of diabolical evil designed to destroy Mankind.
   I know what you're saying: but what about cat photos: will there be cat photos?
   No. I am very sorry to say there will not be any cat photos. This is an anti-Constitution venue. Not a cat-photos venue. You're looking for Facebook. They can help you find your way.
   To review, the premise of this blog is the declaration and assumption and assertion and utterance that the  Constitution is a cult deity. One way to know that you know this is to tell a Conservative that the Constitution is a cult deity and he will have a seething sudden desire to kill you with his bare hands. The reason he will have this reaction is because for one millionth of a second after he hears this it will register as true in a blinding flash of insight: that means his whole life has been in dedication and defense of a lie. That will be his NEXT flash of insight. Then he will realize that you just rendered his entire political life into a monumental waste of energy. He will blame you for this, not himself. And so you must die. Having a very-badly written essay comprised solely of edicts and false assumptions for a deity makes even the statue-worhippers of Moloch look more sensible than you: at least statues are kinda bitchin'; but a pile of shoddy paperwork for a deity?……that's just weak.
   If the Conservative does not try to kill you or gesture hypnotically to put some sort of curse on you he will tell you to leave the United States. Usually this - in fact - is the only thing they do overtly that you can actually catch wind of; their instruction to you to leave the United States. This work-order usually comes to you in the form of a false conclusion; something Conservatives excel at making; "Well, if you don't like it here, why don't you fucking leave." 
   Even though you have not said you dont like it here, the fact that you have tried to help a Conservative by showing him the false path he has been on all his life, forces him into using his mind in order to respond with words, since he probably won't actually kill you for ruining his belief system. Since his mind does not actually function he will decide that you have not declared him to be foolish, no, you have declared that you don't like it here. "If you don't like it here why don't you leave." What he should have said was "If you think I'm an idiot why don't you leave." You see, to a Conservative, if you find fault with them…..YOU have a problem. So you have to leave. They - the stupid one - they get to stay. You - the one with your eyes open and a heart willing to enlighten a fellow citizen - you have to leave. This is Conservative Logic. It's also called Extreme Narcissism To The Fucking Almost Majestic Max.
   This voracious riposte, this feral-like hate-filled snarl, this hi-energy telegraphing of their most sincere wish to kill you in cold blood……Liberals flee from this. They run off immediately. Liberals are not combative. They prefer the law: and they spend their lives actively seeing to it that the number of laws increases as fast as possible. Me, on the other hand - I used to be one of these Conservative short-fused lunatics, snarling and spitting wishes of death and dissolution to the Liberal Enemy. I still consider them the enemy. But I do not waste my time interacting with them. Unless it were to be on the battlefield. With them and me on opposite sides. That would be quite acceptable. I do waste my time interacting with Right Wing Conservative Christian Jingoistic Hate Mongers, however, because I used to be one of them. In fact I still am a Christian, and as far as mongering hatred, I am convinced I will never have an equal. However I only interact with them briefly: long enough to explain to them just once what I have learned about how they - and at one time I myself - have been deceived. 
   So far I have not made even one convert. Nor is that my wish or interest or concern. My wish and interest and concern is merely to do what I would call my Christian Duty to at least tell them once, "Dude: you're heading for a cliff; I don't know you and I don't think your death or ruin will affect my life. But I am a Christian: and you are a human; some remnant of Species-Specific tribal somethingorother compels me to at least warn you once."
   Like I say, I have been a total failure at enlightening any of my Right Wing brothers. And I do not need to enlighten my Left Wing adversaries, they know as well as I do that the Constitution is a pile of nonsense. do you ever hear a Liberal screaming "We need to return to the Constitution!!!" No, of course not. Liberals know we are fucking soaking in the Constitution and they don't have a problem with that because it has been doing a fine and splendid job of putting not just Americans but the whole world into the chains of "democratic socialism" since the day it was first signed by a roomful of -probably gay - Anglophiles 300 years ago.   

The Anti Constitution Book

    I went into the arena of self-publishing once. I created a book called When Bikers Meet Humans. I had it designed and printed and illustrated and proof-read and edited and registered with Congress even had the price a permanent part of the cover, thirteen dollars and thirteen cents. It seemed like an appropriate price for a book with a target audience of, and about, people who worship the number 13.
    Once it was done and i had 500 copies, I was quite pleased with myself. Normally such an undertaking would have cost - according to the book I read on how to do this and other peripheral research materials I studied - upwards to 15,000 dollars. I managed to get it all done, including paying an illustrator, for about five. Or five large as we say in "I sure wish I was in the Mob" parlance. I still have 75 copies. I gave 75 copies away that I  remember, who knows how many others I handed over just in a spirit of incredible magnanimity. I have no intention of actively trying to get rid of the remainder. I like them, why not keep them, it will never be reprinted because it's a money pit. A small one and one that served its purpose of getting it all out of my system, and served its purpose really really well - but not one I ever want to repeat.
   But suddenly I have been struck with an urge to create an anti Constitution book: one dark and sinister and rife with satanic imagery and symbols, and caves and skulls and bones and shapes in robes standing in the shadows and the bodies of children, headless and limbless off in corners, and a kind of pale greenish bluish pallor over everything like in the Underworld first movie and a Lovecraft desolation combined with an HR Giger revoltingness and that sense he communicates of an unstoppable majesty of ruin and an overflowing, almost inundating, emptyness of soul that takes an almost unemotional delight in sadism and relentless slow torture in a depressing and unnerving environment. That sort of thing, ya know? And which to me is the Constitution in a nutshell, basically!
   I realize that among my Fellow Americans, my view of the Constitution is not part of the mainstream view of it. But always keep in mind that these fellow Americans of mine have never actually read it. Because to them the Constitution is not something you read. It's something you adore. Like a golden calf. Like a gigantic sculpture of Moloch. To them the Constitution is not a badly composed, poorly written and oppressive essay dictating in detail how you will be subjugated and controlled and governed and enslaved and ordered about and arrested and punished and fined and taxed and sent to war and how all of your possessions will be properly confiscated and how your life and soul will become the exclusive property of people the Constitution authorizes to own you: no; to them the Constitution is magnificent and delightful bunny hoppity-hopping across the grass; it's a gentle maiden in a gossamer gown in the forest offering you a peach as you pass by; it's a boon to all mankind; it's a beacon and a guidepost to liberty and freedom and prosperity. Even though so far none of that has actually been the case. Despite that so far the opposite has been the case; that so far the Constitution has done nothing but make itself stronger, make the people holding the government jobs it has created stronger; and made you paying for all this against your will, weaker.
   The average American and certainly the Conservatives and the Christians and the Republicans don't see it this way. In fact they see anyone even slightly criticizing the Constitution as the enemy. You would think Washington DC and the ten million Federal agencies with more soul and body-crushing power than Stalin could have dreamed of would be a lot nicer to the Republicans and the Conservatives and the Christians, for these are their strongest allies. But, what the hell, maybe DC realizes that abusing them is a lot more fun and since they don't mind it at all, why change things now? Just to be charitable? HAHAHAHAHA! Just to be Christian???? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
 

Dealing With The Idiot Right Wing

   
   I made a peripheral remark about the Constitution on a biker blog today. And I think I also remarked that the Declaration of Independence had a lot of false assumptions in it. And that it was more a declaration of war than of independence. And that it was addressed to England not to us. And that if the writer was to come back to America today he would find his "outrageous acts" and "intolerable conditions" nothing like what Americans are putting up with now under the government that replaced England's. Well. One of the more literate denizens of the site said why don't I move if I don't like it here. And this was followed by a long stupid lecture about why I am "just like those anti-gun nuts." Talk about a dipshit. I should mention this astoundingly unastute glob of confusion makes a ton of comments on this site, all of which have a sort of tone more of dominion than of information. So anyway the Dominatrakon tells me I should move if I have a problem with the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. I said ok let me see if I have this straight: i have a problem with something that is not you: and you are telling me that therefore I should move. I have a problem over here in this corner: and you, way over there in that corner - who has nothing at all to do with my problem over here in this corner - you are telling me that I should move to another country. I said why is it I am not telling you to move?….you tell me to move, I tell you to move, what difference does it make, shall we flip for it? I also said if it was up to me I don't really care if he moves or not. In fact if I am such a problem for him maybe he should be the one to move. I said "Why does the Right Wing Idiot always get to be the one who doesn't have to move? I would think considering the damage being done to the gene pool by you oafs that you would all volunteer to move regardless of my opinions on the Consitution and the Declaration of Independence." None of this has seemed to energize him into a response as yet. It is not likely he has any idea what I am even talking about. If I have not immediately moved I don't suppose he is going to consider me a legitimate entity. Because if I have not obeyed him then I must not exist because up to now he has always gotten obedience: everyone he has told to move has actually moved. And I have not. Therefore I must be an illusion. I tell ya, dealing with the Right will either drive you nuts or else it will convince you you are a genius.
   There is also an interesting sidelight to this - even though the Right Winger tells people to move - they never actually do. Not once has this solution to things ever been carried out. Not once. And yet the Right Winger will nonetheless keep offering this up as a way to fix the matter. It is apparently their only weapon in their arsenal: an eternally-ignored suggestion. You would think that sooner or later two or more of them would put their heads together and admit "This telling people to move ain't workin'. We need to try something else." But nope. "Hey, if you don't like it here why don't you move!" And you say "But I never said I didn't like it here. Don't you mean 'Hey, if you don't like the Constitution why don't you move.'?" That would at least make some sense insofar as the discussion is concerned. Somewhat. Maybe. Also if I had originally said "I don't like it here" that would be a good reason to suggest moving. "Well, hey, if you don't like it here why don't you move?" See?….it makes some sense, that response. It's the proper reponse to "I don't like it here." It's not the proper response to "I don't like the Constitution." "Well, if you don't like it here why don't you move." See? It's the wrong response.  But it's like talking to people who are highly invested in van&storage and transportation stocks: they can only see packing-up and moving as an answer to problems. The problems being, apparently, criticism of something that does not even include them themselves. It's a wonder the Right even exists in such numbers, based on their ease of confusion. How do they manage to breed? "Honey? I think it's time we began a family and had children." "Hey, bitch, if you want children why don't you move?"

Presumed Arrested Until Declared Not Guilty

 

   The bleated ape-call of the average American Idiot White Man is that "you are presumed innocent until proven guilty." These people are very very very adamant about this. These people - even if they are not remotely involved in government chores and tasks and paperwork and stealing time on the time-clock - will get very very angry if you - before the jury has rendered a verdict - if you declare "guilty" or "not guilty" on someone heading for trial or already on trial. These people do not want you having an opinion on someone else's culpability in a legal matter, especially if it's a capital crime. "We don't know, we weren't there, we have to give him his day in court. We have to ASSUME he is innocent."
   Meanwhile the fucker's in jail. Someone thinks he's guilty.
   There is nothing in the constitution regarding the presumption of innocence. Most of the "rights" in the bill of rights have to do with you getting arrested: what needs to happen before you are arrested and what may or may not happen after you are arrested. The preumption of innocence anywhere at all in the constitution is a needle you can hunt for if you want to, but I left that foolish search long ago.
   It's basically - the assumption of innocence until proven guilty or words to that effect, or attitude to that effect, or unicorn to that effect - it's basically a tradition that came from, I believe, ancient ancient ancient ancient Rome. Washington DC does a lot of things ancient Rome did, including but not limited to architectural design, because……actually I have no idea why DC imitates Rome. Probably it's because modern bureaucrats revere ancient bureaucrats since they both are like kin-assholes separated only by time. The kinship of assholeship, a thicker bond than the bond of blood and a species that never varies or undergoes alteration or mutation down through the epochs of time.
   The presumption of innocence, not being actually articulated anywhere in the constitution is, then, basically a custom. It's the custom in American jurisprudence and cracker barrel blathering, both of which are synonymous, to say the arrested guy locked up in a concrete cell is presumed innocent until the jury comes back and says he is not innocent anymore he is guilty. What the imprisoned innocent man thinks about all this "assuming" is never considered by anyone. He is the least important person in the debate.
   Where this is all going is, "innocent until proven guilty"is merely a saying. It's a saying that those involved in the arrest and incarceration of the people paying them permit to persist since it does no real harm: it's not anything defined in the legalese and in fact it is completely facetious: if you are arrested then you are guilty as far as the arresting officers and the people at the jail and the guy who schedules trials is concerned. If the idiot general public - and this would be you, sir - want to go around blubbering "He's innocent until proven guilty, goddammit!" that's fine, you go right ahead, you just keep saying that proudly while we in the various departments of "justice" smile and laugh at you quietly amongst ourselves.
   Also, regarding this "until proven innocent" business……defendants are never proven innocent or proven guilty. They are pronounced innocent or pronounced guilty. Reality and facts are not an issue. And this is not sarcasm, what I am now saying here, it's just a truth. A simple truth. Guilt and innocence is never an issue for the Law. Only a pronouncement or a declaration of either by someone authorized to make such a declaration. And it is not you, usually. Even though you might have shouted "Innocent until proven guilty!" a thousand times through a megaphone. As far as the law is concerned he is neither innocent or guilty, he is just arrested or released. Guilt or innocence is not a factor. He is either in jail, or temporarily in abeyance due to having paid a time-purchase called a "ransom," or he is "free" to be arrested later for a different reason. Not the same reason. A different one. And there are thousands, maybe millions of things you as an American can do that can legally result in your arrest.
    To review, "you are presumed innocent until proven guilty" is not a constitutional edict. It is a - I dont want to say a wives tale - it is an urban myth. Giving it a maximum of courtesy, it is a useful misleading custom that is encouraged by the State.  Like most thing Americans think are constitutional and aren't, this is one of them.
   Feeling stupid yet? You read this entire blog, you will. For one reason or another. And that's its magic!