Hunter, of this, the most popular political webblog in America, has written some brilliantly witty stuff lately. A few examples are here, and here.
Last Friday, in a piece which I only hope was mocking Larry Sabato’s idea to institutionalize our two party system into the U.S. Constitution, and have "colored ball" lotteries determine electoral voting states (or whatever his inane idea says), Hunter was in rare form. And he made several thoughtful, contemplative Amendment suggestions that would improve our Constitution immeasurably.
In a tribute unworthy of riding in the wake of Hunter’s excellent idea, I suggest looking at a few of these and others, and even propose a few additional Constitutional Amendments to add to his already excellent list myself -- that perhaps, equal to Sabato’s misplaced energies, might also be worth considering.
Two of the suggestions, in particular, were outstanding. The second itself may be worth using to replace our 4th and 5th Amendments combined, giving us a net gain of one full Amendment slot. And let’s face it, they were pretty old and outdated anyway. Seriously, it’s not like anyone really pays that much attention to them any more.
Before we consider, let‘s look at a few other laugher Amendments that were not supplied by Hunter. Take a quick look, then toss out a guess as to who could have suggested these crazy ideas, if you dare. Shocking answers just below.
Amendment proposal X: "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."
Okay, time’s up. Time to get up off the floor, where you probably are right now after falling out of your chair with laughter at that silly idea.
Who wrote it? Kos? Bill O’Reilly? Rush? Harry "Give ‘em Hell (as long as the they is, well, uh, um, pretty much nobody)" Reid? Nancy, "I am a Liberal but let me see if I can get all Liberals, and even more moderate Democrats, to hate me" Pelosi. Alex Rodriguez? Tom "Now you can see what I can do with a REAL wide receiver" Brady?
Okay, drum roll...The real answer is, it was proposed by none other than Tom Brady of the New England Patriots (co sponsored by Bill "I did not know that no videotaping actually meant no videotaping" Belichek)...wait. Hold on. There’s been a mistake. Tom’s agent informed me he did submit that one, in case it was needed. But, as it so happens, that one already exists.
Who Knew!!
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.
Turns out, it was a bunch of those old white powdered wig guys, with bizarre made up sounding names like Madison, Jefferson, Adams (at least before he dedicated himself to forming the nation’s leading microbrewery) et. al. It’s Amendment 10.
Oh wait, you guys knew that, right? I never had you fooled for a second, huh. Well then, smart alecks, how come the rest of the country, and Congress, doesn’t seem to?
Amendment 10, it seems, actually comes right after Amendment "9," which is the one that says, even more boringly...yawn..."The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
Sounds good, but, where are the colored balls? The lotteries?? A la Larry Sabato and the NBA draft? How can you even call yourself an Amendment worthy of attachment to our Constitution, numbers 10 and 9, without any colored balls or lotteries?
No wonder why this thing needs upgrading.
Heck, let’s just, for nostalgia sake -- why not -- take a quick gander at some other Amendments that don’t require colored balls or lotteries.
Amendment number 4 is a particularly interesting one. It’s like looking at an old photo of the artic ice circle -- you know, back when it was all there.
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
If something, according to the promise of the searchor, is possibly connected to trrrsm (or he or she would not be doing the search, because if it was bad, or wrong, "we wouldn’t be doing it" just like torture) then there is no such thing as an unreasonable search.
Whew, that was a close one. The 4th Amendment, unlike, apparently, the 10th Amendment, must still apply. It, and the polar ice caps, must be safe for a few more years.
But wait, you say, the polar ice caps are melting? Where do you get that from? That’s just liberal fringe anti business tree hugging and clearly you hate America and want to help the terrorists crap.
Oh, wait, we’re mostly all on board with this now? It doesn’t mean you hate America? When did that happen? Who’s not on board? (Oh, right. The Fair and Balanced Network. The same one that attacked MoveOn for calling General Petraeus "General Betrayus" because it is deplorable to ever impugn a General, then a few days later ran an article calling several Generals disgraceful, and accusing them of, yes, "betraying" our troops).
How about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Is that melting?
Ah, as our President has stated, and resident Congressional sheep have largely accommodated him on, "It’s just a piece of paper," anyway.
Here’s another one from the glorious old days of yore. That is, B.S. No, not B.C. B.S: Before September 11. Because, while the birth of Christ some 2000 years ago changed some things, September 11 changed everything. "No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." (No. 5). I suppose an expectation of privacy in our mail, email and conversation is no longer a liberty. (I suppose you also want to know what comes after B.S., that is, "Before September 11"? Well, duh, A.S.S; "After September 11, Stupid!"
We are in the ASS years. And don’t forget it. If you do, you must hate America. If you want to kill every last terrorist with your bare hands, but don‘t want an overly secretive and undemocratic government to use this as excuse to abandon the basic purposes of the Constitution, or the principles that make America, America -- why, then, you must hate America! For don’t you know that love of America does not mean love of actual country, love of the principles for which it stands, love of the land, or love of the people? No, it means love of the government that Right Wing Republicans voted for! (Because remember, back in the 1990’s, love of America meant hatred for the government.)
This is getting pretty boring. No wonder why Congress barely pays attention to it. It will pick up when we get to the good stuff; the new Amendment ideas. But first, briefly, check out this last old one; "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech."
Now, Constitutional Scholar and staunch conservative Robert Levy suggests that there are some first Amendment issues with respect to wiretapping as well -- again, being the chilling effect on speech. But I think Levy’s just flat wrong here. It says, "Congress shall make no law.........." It doesn’t say anything about any President or Executive Branch not doing any such things. (Of course, the minor technicality I may be overlooking here, is that the Constitution don’t say nuttin bout no Prezz dent doin no leydge is slatin neither. Now that I think about it, that there is a right down homespun quandary. How we gonna catch trrrsts if we can’t spy on anybody without some other snopping branch of gobvamentt making sure that we eez actually jeest working on catchin trrrists and nuttin else? I think I’m gonna go clear me some brush -- yu kno, right quick, kinda, clear mah head an’ all.. soas I can thnk. I thnk much better whn Im clear‘n brush. Me and Bush both.)
Those were the good ole quaint Amendments for the glory days of yesteryear.
As for suggestions to update this document, personally, and with no real offense meant to Larry Sabato, I think Hunter’s are much better than his:
AS promised, my two favorite, reprinted here, unabashedly, and without permission or proper attribution, are (drum roll number two please):
Amendment 28: The House of Representatives shall be abolished...It is clear that there is no hope of finding a full 435 Americans who are intelligent enough to run a country. The Senate has less people, and is therefore proportionally less crazy. Also, Senators are also generally older, which doesn't necessarily mean that they say less crazy crap, but it at least takes them longer to say it.
If we cannot abolish the House, then...we can make it like Survivor, and vote the two most obnoxious House members out of office every week of the session. If it's good enough a system for television, surely it's good enough for the government of a country obsessed with television.
Which leads me to yet another ingenious national security idea; to use in lieu of that specific activity, known as "waterboarding," which our perhaps soon to be new Attorney General would only say is torture, "if in, fact it is torture," and which is "only unconstitutional, if in fact, um, it is torture," which we don’t know if it is, because, well, as he put it "if it is torture, then it is unconstitutional," which he then did subsequently wholly clarify, by adding "if it amounts to torture, then it is unconstitutional." (You see the difference here, right? If you don’t, you must hate America.)
Some might say this was being wishy washy and circuitous. Maybe. But I’d say water boarding is simply "very uncomfortable." And being comfortable is not a Constitutional right. (Unless one was a large campaign donor. I think that is Amendment 7A. Unlike parts of Four, Five, and One, 7A is still very powerfully in full effect.)
Now, my brilliant new plan, inspired by Hunter’s excellent proposal, eliminates all such wishywashiness. It is torture. And I sanction it. And it would apply to all suspected terrorist suspects......(which is kind of like "suspects," only it refers to "suspected suspects," which means that they don’t get habeas corpus or anything silly like that, for those who missed my earlier series "everything we do is good by definition because we don’t do things that are not good"). It could be used, again, instead of waterboarding, or even in addition to it: And that is to make trrrst suspects have to watch our House of Representatives, in session. Non stop.
While clearly this amounts to "cruel and unusual," as well as -- as acknowledged -- outright torture, not this "torture light" crap we counterproductively pussy foot around with (when ping pong actually works better), you have to think it would have to work. I mean, give up one’s most dearly and fanatically held secrets, or be forced to watch 72 hours of C span non stop? It seems like a no brainer to me.
But my absolute all time favorite constitutional Amendment, is without a doubt, Amendment number 29. Here, produced, free of charge, with no commercial interruptions (beer and popcorn is extra, however) is, drum roll number three please....
Amendment! Number! Twenty Niiinnne!!!! Squaring off against number five, it’s no contest. Hell, Amendment number 29 takes five, four and ten, all together, with one hand behind it’s back.
We institutionalize the Thunderdome. Any American or foreigner who wants to can enter the Thunderdome and beat the crap out of anyone else there. Waterboarding and other "enhanced" interrogation, butchering people with advanced weaponry, whatever you like -- no laws, anything goes. The only catch is that anyone else in the Thunderdome can do the same to you. The advantage of this plan is that it is one of the few strategies for planetary depopulation that self-selects for both violence and stupidity(link).
I’m not the brightest bulb on Kos. Hell, I‘m not even the brightest bulb in the room at this moment (and at this moment, it’s only me and the dog). But I’m pretty sure that Hunter was kidding on this one.
Wasn’t he?
Unlike number 28 where he was clearly being serious (getting rid of the House of representatives, he had to be serious on that one -- unless we decided to institute my excellent torture idea of making suspects watch the House in "action") he had to have been kidding. But the idea is actually very good. And certainly Amendment worthy. But the problem is, no foreigner would enter into the Thunderdome ring; this is America baby, we’d dominate. However, if we took out that loophole, maybe it would work. No, wait a minute. The wheels are churning. I’m feeling like Richard Clarke at this moment I’m so damn good at this national security stuff. Maybe. Maaaaaybe, we make it just foreigners! And let’s also do away with this namby pamby "volunteer" idea.
There we go. Now it is working. Thunderdome: Where we solve the world’s overpopulation problem, one suspected suspected possible suspected suspect at a time.
So, now, to finish off our non Larry Sabato non colored ball splendiferous constitutional convention, here are my own erudite suggestions. But first, a few from the dog. I say, if Bush can be President, and Brittany can dance naked (wait, that was actually a good thing), then there’s no real reason a perfectly smart and normal dog can not make a few additions to our Nation’s founding and guiding document.
So, drum roll number four, please:
Amendment 30. No more cats.
Amendment 31. No more fleas.
( Note. I really think I’m on to something here. Please, I urge you to pass these suggestions on to our Senate, to consider adding these Amendments. These are very good. And may solve the gay marriage and partial birth abortion problem at the same time. Which leads me, as Fido impassionately "grabs" at my leg to tell me he has more (he speaks dog. I brought in a translator), to, drum roll five:
Amendment 31. No gay dogs.
Woops. I have just been informed that that is wrong. Apparently, "gays are dogs too." Not that there is anything wrong with that. Amendment 31 is hereby changed to; "no gay dog marriages."
Amendment 32. A repeal of Amendment 31, no gay dog marriages, as that writes discrimination into our Constitution. And it dictates as the Supreme, virtually unalterable law of the land, what our social and quasi religions conventions are to be. And only far right wing zealots in the Senate want to do that. Jeez, even the dog knows this. (He had to remind me though).
We are all thankful that that one didn’t last as long as Amendment No. 18.
Yes, 18. Which did what!!!?? Yeah, I still can’t believe it myself.
But according to the history books and the Constitution itself, 18, glorious number 18, abolished liquor. How could you ever get through this piece right here without the stuff? And for you history buffs out there, guess how long 18 lasted? That’s right, 14 years. And it took us a full three years to realize that lack of alcohol actually caused the great depression. (Or made it worse. One or the other. People are still arguing.)
Fido’s grabbin’ at me again; so, it’s time to proceed with the Nation’s most solemn business:
Amendment 33. All dogs shall be allowed to drive.
Okay, that’s enough for this dog silliness, as this dog clearly does not know how to think like our visionary forefathers. Sheesh. Everyone knows dogs already drive. And don’t tell me that is ridiculous, that dogs don‘t drive, bla bla bla.. Don‘t even. You’re just helping the terrorists if you do. Or you must hate America. Or dogs. (It says it right in the "Go Dog Go book." They drive. Nice sports cars, too.)
"What. What, whaaaat, does that have to do with helping terrorists?!!! And it’s not even funny. It was a stupid amendment. It was a stupid idea to have your dog amend our Constitution. And it was even stupider to say that we don’t need an amendment allowing dogs to drive 'because they already do,' when we all know dogs can‘t drive. And it certainly has nothing to do with hating America."
"Hey, shut up pal. You just hate America. Stop preventing us from catching our enemies."
Which leads me to my very own, humble, constitutional Amendment proposals: Aaaand (drum roll number six):
Amendment 34. No hating America.
Amendment 35. If there is any doubt as to whether or not something is hating America, all decisions therein shall be referred to that hereby anointed grand poobah, Sean Hannity, and his declaration shall be final.
Amendment 36. Slavery is to be reinstituted. But not of African Americans, which was hideous, but America haters. This includes anyone who went to, rented, watched, or otherwise talked about in a non condemnatory fashion, any movie by Michael Moore. In fact, saying the name Michael Moore without immediately stroking one’s chest and rinsing oneself of the seeping America hate said declaration induces, and proclaiming one’s love of country by reciting the three B’s; Broads, Buicks, and Buckley (if you’re a gay non gay Senator it is permissible to substitute "unfettered men’s room access" for broads) and immediately donating 5 percent of your weekly salary to pat Robertson’s "God will punish us with climate change for our sins (wait, Pat Robertson actually said that? You mean he got one of his hate speeches correct?) campaign for heaven" may result in enslavement, for three time offenders. Unless you’re Black or Hispanic, in which case you are presumed to have said "Michael Moore," even if what you actually said was. "ooh, I gottta get me some more..."
Amendment 37. No more opining in any constitutional Amendments, prior or subsequent. Unless it’s the second Amendment, which always gets a free pass, as in "a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state." Therefore, Amendment 36 now reads, "Anyone who recites the name Michael Moore shall be immediately enslaved," effective immediately.
Amendment 38. Anyone who does not realize that Fox is "fair and balanced" shall be required to have dinner with Bill O’Reilly, with duct tape over one’s mouth for the entire session. Proof of said realization can be established by tuning one’s TV set to the fox news channel for an average of 3 hours a day, 4 hours on weekends. Fox NFL Sunday does not count. Even when they do their snide little anti Kerry skits, or anti Hillary skits next year.
Amendment 39. In so much as it is unAmerican to keep people from being able to pray, from Feb 1, 2009 forward, all school children must now pray, five times a day.
Amendment 40. Amendment no. 37’s ban against opining in Amendments is hereby removed. At the same time, for clarity, the phrase "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State," also hereby removed from Amendment no. 2, which now simply reads in its entirety; "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. "
Amendment 41. Opining now being permissible in our constitutional amendments, A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State," is placed back in, with the further addition in No. 2 of being "and which needeth good rock music, to secureth its security securing duties therein." And it further being the opinion of Amendment 41, that the last few Amendments to our glorious Constitution have instituted a rather strict societal order, our national anthem shall now be replaced by "For those about to rock, WE SALUTE YOU!!"
And by the way, for those of you in Congress who actually stand up in the face of a very slowly, almost imperceptibly creeping autocratic national imperialism, for our actual Constitution itself, We salute you as well. All three of you.