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.