we get it... daily
February 25, 2004
Constitutional Amendment?
In this whacked-out weapons of mass destruction, National Guard deserting, Mission Accomplished, be very afraid, world-leading, Europe ignoring, Halliburton awarding, rights relishing and relinquishing world we live in today, should it come as any surprise that demands for "less government" translate into a constitutional amendment about restricting social unions? Come on! The constitution doesn't ban incest or polygamy, but this is necessary? Is this blatant pandering to the religious right really worth that many votes Junior? We really shouldn't be surprised here, but we're not totally numb yet.
How about a constitutional amendment that elected officials found to be working against the benefit of the people, ignoring real problems in their realm and focusing on non-issues to assure their own re-election, can be sent to jail without possibility of bail? Damn, you people wanted to send Clinton to jail about lying about a blow-job, you'd think lying about starting a war might be reason enough for time behind bars. OK, compromise on a similar amendment about how all statements made by Government leaders must follow a perceivable logic, or at least follow the laws of physics. Maybe just a total ban on justification via metaphor? That would be a start.
It's like any day now he's going to announce the CIA has proof that the terrorists were gay.
|
|
Head spinning, logic failing, is 8:30 too early for cocktails? |
Read the Lies
Read the Shouts
Read the Archives
Read the Static
Read the Financials