Cant Keep Quiet!

On January 26, 2006, Bush said

…the FISA law was written in 1978. We’re having this discussion in 2006. It’s a different world.

Bush apparently feels the same way about the Constitution. After all, it is over 200 years old. We are in much different times now.

Since many US citizens don’t seem to give a flying flip about the rights given to them by the Constitution anymore, I decided that the Constitution needs to be rewritten to reflect our world today.

Let’s start with the Preamble

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Well, we’re no longer worried about establishing justice so that one is crossed out. No, I’m not talking about the sentence given to Moussaoui. Moussaoui’s trial was simply a distraction from the fact that the government has in its custody 3 men who were actually involved in the events of September 11, 2001. They weren’t a wannabe whose knowledge of what was going on was peripheral at best.

Who am I talking about? Khalid Sheikh Mohammed who was the "the principal architect of the 9/11 attacks", Ramzi bin al-Shibh, who collaborated with Mohammed Atta, and 9/11 financier Qualli bin Atassh. All three are being held by the US government and none of the three will ever be brought to trial. Why? Because our government decided to use aggressive interrogation techniques (aka torture) on these three and the government knows that would come out in a trial.

We’re no longer concerned about the general welfare of the people in this country. If we did care we wouldn’t allow Congress to cut benefits to our soldiers. We would also be much more upset about the so-called "War on Poverty" that seems to have started and ended in the same week last year.

Corporate welfare, though, is still going strong.

Oh yes, let’s not forget that we are more than willing to throw away our freedoms for the illusion of security. Please don’t try and tell me that this illusion of security is real. If it were real we wouldn’t have been witness to the Keystone Kops performance by the government right after Katrina. Nor would we now be able carry small scissors with blades less than four inches long and tools like screwdrivers that are less than seven 7 inches on planes. An awful lot of damage can be done with those items. And let’s not forget the wonderful security measures not being taken in our ports and on public transportation.

So I’ll rewrite the Preamble to now read

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more less perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense but only overseas, promote the general Welfare of Corporations, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the President United States of America to change at will.

Hmmm, it looks like this will take a lot longer than I thought. For today I’m going to just bypass the rest of the Constitution (after all Bush does that) and go straight to the Bill of Rights.

Amendment 1 addresses freedom of religion, press, and expression and currently reads

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Well, Congress and Bush&Co have sure been trying to figure out a way to make laws about religion or the free exercise of religion. People don’t seem too worried so we can kill that from the new version.

Whenever the press publishes something that Bush&Co doesn’t like, they claim that the press is helping the enemy in the war on terror. Since many citizens seem to agree, lets get rid of that part as well.

I’m sure that the government would love to be able to get rid of the right to peaceably assemble and the right to free speech. They’ve already placed numerous restrictions on it (creating a free speech zone, etc) so we might as well drop that part, too.

The Bush administration redressing a grievance? Yeah, like that’s going to happen. Well, maybe if it was a grievance of a corporation against a group of people.

So here’s the rewrite of the first amendment

Congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion, or and prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech as long as the government approves, or of the government controlled press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble in their assigned, fence enclosed area, and for Corporations to petition the Government for a redress of grievances brought about by people getting in their way.

Amendment 2 is the right to bear arms. That one seems to be untouchable so I’ll let it be.

Amendment 3 deals with quartering of soldiers in private homes. As long as the military keeps missing their recruitment goals we don’t need to worry about changing this one.

Amendment 4 needs a lot of work. Amendment 4 deals with search and seizure and reads

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.

As long as we’re fighting this "war on terror" the Bush administration doesn’t feel that they need probable cause to get a warrant. Hell, they don’t even feel they need a warrant. Many people have been seized as suspected terrorist or just having gotten a phone call from a suspected terrorist, so that part of the amendment is outdated as well. Bush’s nominee to take over the CIA, Gen. Michael Hayden, doesn’t even know that the words "probable cause" are in the 4th amendment.

Let’s just toss out the 4th amendment. After all, it’s just getting in the way. We don’t need it since the "war on terror" is much more important than our rights against unlawful search and seizure.

Let’s look at amendments 5 and 6 together.

Amendment 5 deals with trial and punishment. It currently reads

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment 6 deals with the right to a speedy trial and for an accused person to confront witnesses. It reads

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Both of these seem to be okay as long as the government doesn’t suspect someone of having ties to terrorists, no matter how slim. They definitely don’t have to be followed if someone isn’t a recognized citizen of the US.

Amendment 5 should read

Unless they might have connections to terrorists, no person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. Portions may be ignored for non US citizens.

Amendment 6 should now read

In all criminal prosecutions, unless they might have connections to terrorists, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence. Portions may be ignored for non US citizens.

Amendments 7 (Trial by Jury in civil cases), 8 (Cruel and Unusual Punishment), and 9 (Construction of Constitution) seem to be okay as they are currently written. They aren’t getting in the way of Bush doing his job yet. I’ll let them stand.

That leaves us with Amendment 10, Powers of the State and People. It reads

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.

This just needs a simple fix. It will now read

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 until the president decides otherwise.

Wow! I didn’t realize just how out of date the Constitution had become. From now on I’ll just stay in my home and wait for the president to tell me what I can and can’t do.

Who needs freedoms when we have an administration that has our best interests in mind?

Cross posted on Bring It On