You have nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide. You have nothing to hide if you have nothing to fear.
So fear nothing and you need not hide. Hide nothing and you need not fear.

The motto of the Department of Homeland Decency

Monday, January 3, 2011


The Winds of Change are blowing. First, Tea Partiers in the House of Representatives are going to do what they have never done: read something not written by Glenn Beck. In this case, the Constitution. They are going to do it to start this session of Congress. Of course, maybe they are hiring someone to read it, so they might not actually be reading it. But close enough.

Second, someone in the Obama administration actually criticized Republicans. Really. Said it would be insane of them to let the U.S. Default. Of course, that's not the same as calling them insane, but it's not a bad start. Can Obama keep this up? The suspense will be intense.

And the last thing we want to bring up: our favorite Supreme Court Justice Of All Time, A. Scalia, will be educating House members on the Constitution. He will be giving Michele Bachmann's colleagues in the Constitutional Tea Party Caucus To Save The Constitution And The American Way Of Life From Atheists, Scientists, EPA Bureaucrats, and Liberals, or whatever she's calling her group, important insights into the Constitution, ones that they might not have gotten just from reading it during the opening House session.

And here's what's really exciting: We were lucky enough to find in the trash a copy of A. Scalia's draft notes for this important talk. Really!! That's another big change this New Year has brought: we actually got up, went outside, looked around and found something important to write about.

Of course, some of Scalia's notes were torn and others were covered with food stains, so we can't reproduce these draft notes with complete accuracy. But we think we came close. We used the best methods known to reproduce these and believe in our heart of hearts that the following is what Scalia actually wrote in his draft.

We are very proud to print them here. We all can learn from this learned judge. So read it, think about it, and act accordingly.

by Anton Scalia,

What is constitutional? What makes something constitutional?
Judges do. Judges get paid very well to do this. It makes us important. It's why we are called “judges.” Man judges, that is. Important to stress that. Constitution does not mention women. Screw Kagan. Why doesn't she have kids? And Sotomayor . . . I still can't pronounce her name.
Why wasn't I appointed Chief Justice. Should I bring that up? I'm the man. Damn frat boy president. I should have laughed at his fart jokes way back in the 90s, when his dad was prez. That's why I'm not Chief Justice. How was I to know he'd get so far? Should've laughed at his fart jokes. Damn. I hated frat boys in college. Still hate em, even if they do get to be prez.


Make it short. Short is good. Easier for judges to figure out and understand long things. Or remember what was on page 1084 or whatever. Roberts and Alito are always missing things on any page after 10. They can't keep up. Damn pretty boys, not an original thought in their heads. Their eyes glaze over as soon as lawyers start using those Latin terms. Or big words. They hate big words. In fact, most judges do and just use them because people expect it. But we hate them.
So keep laws short and use small words.

Is income tax constitutional? Everyone wants to know this. Is the 16th amendment constitutional? The original constitution didn't let you tax income the way we do now. We should go back to that.
Why should an amendment take precedence over the original Constitution? That doesn't seem right. The founders wrote the original, not the amendment. Shouldn't we honor that?
Plus: tax discrimination comes into play. We don't give equal protection to different rates of pay. Do we want to live in a world where discrimination is OK, even discrimination against billionaires? I don't know if I do. Equal protection for high income tax payers -- I hope to make that happen. Damn. I'm the man.

We have to man up and face this. Women aren't special, why treat them special? If you stop and think about it, there's one reason and one reason only: we're thinking with our Johnsons. Nothing says they get equal protection, not even the equal protection clause. It never says “Women” in it; it doesn't say “all women are created equal” in the Constitution, either, so why does everyone think they are special?
It's onerous, that's what it is. A burden on good people everywhere to have to put up with women at work, play, school, even the bench here. Sotomayor never shuts up. Maybe some of you have noticed that. I can barely get a word in!

Really important point here, one my whole career is building toward: is the constitution itself unconstitutional? I've been waiting for something like the Tea Party for help here. Bring me a case and let's call it unconstitutional and start over. I'm sick of doing it bit by bit. In case you haven't noticed, I'm not getting any younger. So let's go after it and really make liberals mad. There goes their free speech, their separation of church and state, their voters' rights, equal protection, clean air and water, everything. I can't wait! Bring me the case!!
Hey, there aren't any reporters here, are there? I better make sure. Can't let this get out before I'm ready.

No comments: