Justice Is Blind...If Only Someone Invented A Language Of Dots To Overcome This Affliction

Ah yes, the mighty Supreme Court, the ultimate judicial body on all issues, including final interpretive authority on laws relating to technology across this great land. Hooray!

So while these nine justices--the brightest legal minds in the country--may be well versed when it comes to matters of Stare Decisis, ask 'em about Sega Genesis, and all you get are nine stumped robes with decisive stares.

During oral arguments in the case City of Ontario v. Quon, which considers whether police officers had an expectation of privacy in personal (and sexually explicit) text messages sent on pagers issued to them by the city, the savvy minds of the Supreme Court appeared to have difficulty wrapping their thick robes around all this crazy new technology, like electronic mail, cell phones, the series of tubes called the Internets, and those typewriter thingy's that come with a screen, DC's or PC's or something like that.

"The first sign was about midway through the argument, when Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.--who is known to write out his opinions in long hand with pen and paper instead of a computer (and bitch about meany black presidents not named Bush)--asked what the difference was 'between email and a pager?'"

Ummm, let's see, how shall we explain this in a way someone of his age, who still uses a legal pad instead of an iPad, will understand?

You use email for contacting the wifey (like what time she should have your dinner ready), while a pager is for contacting the mistress (like which by-the-hour motel to meet you at), and never the twain shall meet! Capisce?

Wow. Perhaps you should loosen your robe, Juris Doctor Roberts, I think it may be cutting off your oxygen supply, unless it's your W-era software that is the problem.

He must still be runnin' Windows Operating System Bush 2.0. That one was full of bugs, coding errors, and compatibility problems outside the U.S, 'cept for Poland, Marshall Islands, El Salvadore, Azerbaijan, and other 'tech-savvy' Coalition of the Willing members with no standing armies or digital infrastructures to tweet of.

Go on?

Certainly one of other spry, young whippersnappers on the high court (besides the 55-year-young Chief) are familiar with all this off-the-hook youth technology apart from electricity and indoor plumbing.

Like 73-year old Supreme Court "tween," Justice Anthony Kennedy who asked what would happen if a text message was sent to an officer at the same time he was sending one to someone else.

"Does it say: 'Your call is important to us, and we will get back to you?'" Kennedy asked.

I emailed him to ask if he was really that technologically ignorant, but just kept getting this weird beeping sound. Maybe I'll have more luck sending smoke signals or carrier pigeons!?

Perhaps sprightly 74-year-old Justice Antonin Scalia could help enlighten the rest of us luddites with all this cutting edge mumbo jumbo like service providers.

"You mean the text doesn’t go right to me?" Scalia asked.

Oh sh*t! Now everyone will see the sweet nothings me and Clary send each other while chillaxin' in our robes discussing a certain illegal Kenyan's birth certificate late night in the chambers when no one's around to disturb us.

Then he asked whether they can be printed out in hard copy, using one of them devil machines.

"Could Quon print these spicy little conversations and send them to his buddies?" Scalia asked, fantasizing about the spicy little supper wife Maureen better be whippin' up, lest she wants the spicy little belt whippin' again.

But fear not, America! It wasn't just the justices who had technical difficulties.

When Justice Samuel Alito asked Quon’s attorney Dieter Dammeier if officers could delete text messages from their pagers in a way that would prevent the city from retrieving them from the wireless carrier later, Dammeier said that they could.

Apparently, Alito still wasn't satisfied, but unlike during President Obama's State of the Union address, did manage to contain himself from convulsing violently and mouthing "No, No!"

A few minutes later, Alito gave Dammeier another shot at that question, asking him, "Are you sure about your answer on deletion?"

Dammeier admitted that he didn't know. "I couldn't be certain," he said.

What is certain however, is that these living fossils do come in color. Kind of. If you count Clarence Thomas as "black," Scalia's fat red face, or Roberts and Alito's purplish rage whenever Comrade Barry calls them out for reversing a century of legal precedent, so Uncle Ben (the rice maker) can donate as much campaign money as Ben's Uncle (with the pace maker), just like our Founding Fathers™ intended.

Either way, looks like this justice system needs to reboot, reset, and restart. Otherwise, it's Game Over for the rest of us non-Apple II GS users. But be patient. This new dial-up takes a few minutes to load.

But, that's okay, we have all the time in the world. A whole lifetime to be exact.

Hail To The Chief? The Supreme Power Of Those In Power

Supreme Court Chief Justice Jagoff, John Roberts and his famously understated, chic, side-sweep hairdo are very upset!

And not just cause ol' blue eyes misses his favoritest mentor and surrogate pop George W. Bush, who handpicked him of all the lawyers in the land to become the new, non-ancient, unqualified, straight-shootin' son of a right-wing gun the administration needed to fill the big, spit-shined shoes left by William Rehnquist upon his passage to the sweet kingdom in the clouds. Not even!

But because of that terrible meany Barack Obama, who unlike Georgy pants, never wants to have fun or play in the sandbox with Scalia out back, or do anything cool like they used to when Bush was still roaming the Oval Office, looking for someone to arm wrestle besides Laura and Miss Beazley. He's already beat Laura like a million times, and paws don't really count as arms!

It all started when President Obama, in a break from tradition, called out the stoic black robes in the front row for their recent Citizens United ruling that allows corporations and unions to freely spend money to run political ads for or against specific candidates during his annual State of the Union Address.

"With all due deference to the separation of powers the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections," Obama said.

"Well I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people, and that's why I'd urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that corrects some of these problems."

How dare the leader of the free world suggest Congress use our constitutional system of checks and balances to attempt to put together a legislative fix to rectify the Supreme Court's reckless decision to give Pringles, Coca Cola, Exxon Mobil, Doritos, and Mr. Clean more political sway than any poor schlub with a voting card but no corporate one??

Naturally, Chief Justice John WAHberts is crying foul over President NObama's horrifying decision to single out the recent Supreme Court decision to reverse a century of legal precedent, allowing companies and other special interests to spend as much as their greedy little corporate-branded hearts desire in our elections.

Apparently, Mr. Goody Two-Shoes Obama doesn't think it is such a good idea to let Uncle Ben (of rice fame) be able to spend the same amount as Ben's Uncle (of repairman fame) in deciding who gets to be the next U.S. president. Party-pooper!

Of course, Captain of the High Court, Dread Justice Roberts believes anyone is welcome to criticize the court, and some even have an obligation to do so because of their positions. Just not the President, and not during highly publicized events like State of the Union Addresses when people might actually see the President belittle the good justices of the court, holding all nine accountable for their decisions affecting every citizen in the country.

"So I have no problems with that," Roberts said in response to a University of Alabama law student's question.

"On the other hand, there is the issue of the setting, the circumstances and the decorum. The image of having the members of one branch of government standing up, literally surrounding the Supreme Court, cheering and hollering while the court - according the requirements of protocol - has to sit there expressionless, I think is very troubling."

Except for that one robot-in-Justice-clothes, Samuel Alito, who protocol be damned, just couldn't control his petty human urges to protest being chastised by the president on prime-time teevee, and resorted to a Joe Wilson-like temper tantrum, complete with furious head-shaking and silent shouts of the words "not true, not true" in the hopes that someone would see the humanity obscured by layers of tight terrycloth and a deep disdain for the rest of the dopey public not bright enough to snag a coveted spot on the bench.

Indeed, John Roberts is shocked (shocked!) over how much the State of the Union address has "degenerated to a political pep rally." Which everyone knows is only permissible when it is Republicans doing the pepping.

In fact, Roberts doesn't even understand why the Supreme Court Justices have to attend these long, boring State of the Union speeches at all.

"I'm not sure why we're there," he said.

Of course, he could always go the Justice Antonin Scalia route and refuse to attend such things because the justices "sit there like bumps on a log" while all the attention is hogged by Mr. Hot Shot President.

And also because Scalia a total dick, second only to that other former vice presidential Dick. And as such, can't stand being around actual humans, 'cept that one beautiful reflection he sees in mirrors and windows.

Well, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs isn't about to sit back and let some mannequins dressed in legal drag say what is troubling and what is not.

"What is troubling is that this decision opened the floodgates for corporations and special interests to pour money into elections - drowning out the voices of average Americans," Gibbs said. "The President has long been committed to reducing the undue influence of special interests and their lobbyists over government. That is why he spoke out to condemn the decision and is working with Congress on a legislative response."

Whatever.

I mean why should they be held responsible for their disastrous ruling that rapes years of legal precedent, and the very democratic process this country was founded upon?

Just because they make the law, doesn't mean they have to follow it. Silly NObama, don't you know anything?

Like how their motto, "Equal Justice Under Law" really means "Every Justice Above Law."

After all, Justice For Life=Life Without Justice.

'Tis the golden rule. Unless they feel like changing it. Or doing away with it altogether.

That's what makes them Supreme.

All Hail Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khomeini

Barack Obama's State of the Union: Put Up or Shut Up! Please??

Well folks, it's been one whole year since Barack Obama rode a wave of hope and goodwill to become America's first semi-colored president before disappointing us all with the harsh reality that he is not in fact Superman, and as such, does not have the magical ability to don a cape and instantly wipe away the world's woes with a single wave of his perfectly smooth hand.

Ha ha loser!

If you're not drunk, or in the process of voluntarily losing millions of brain cells, my condolences. You should be. Makes the whole State-of-the-Union thing that much more palatable. No one wants to watch Congress act like one big retarded wind-up doll for 60 never-ending minutes; try it sober and you'll understand what torture really is (aside from having ice-cold bottles of water poured over your head in a luxurious blindfold upside-down spa bath).

So what does President Barack Obama have to say for himself nearly one year after he FAILED to transform this nation from bankrupt Bushwhacked pariah to prosperous global piiiimp?

Surely, he'll will hit up all the key words and phrases we Americans expect, no, make that need to hear from our leader in order to feel good about about our obese, capitalist, consumer-driven way of life once again. U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!

Words that make people burst from their seats in a wild surge of patriotic pride and affection, and also the intrinsic need to not be the one a-hole grimacing like a douchebag (think Joe Lieberman) when the President of the United States says things like "jobs creation" and "educating the youth."

Everyone, except Republicans, who only stand and cheer for phrases like "war," "terror," "Wall Street" and of course, their personal favorites, anything with the words "nuclear" or "profit" in it. You wanna see a Republican get really excited and instantly turn into an energizer bunny? Just whisper the words "oil" or "drill" into their ear and see what happens. They go nuts for it!

Unlike those Supreme statues in the front who wear their finest mumus and poker faces and DO NOT stand for anybody under any circumstances whatsoever.

Seriously, Obama can stand literally ten feet in front of the entire front-row of sitting Supreme Court Justices and call out them out for being the terrible 1,000 year old human beings that they are ('cept for that Soto chick he picked), and reversing a century of legal precedent allowing corporations and other special interests to spend--without limit--in our elections. Meaning Morgan Stanley (the investment bank) will now be able to spend the same amount as Stanley Morgan (the check-out guy at the local grocery store) to help decide the next U.S. president. Hooray!

And yet the fancy pants mannequins in the front row remain stoic and motionless, trying so very hard to not make any gestures or show the slightest trace of emotion, for fear their deep secret of being actual humans may be revealed.

Which isn't as easy as it sounds! Oh no, there goes Samuel Alito doing the opposite of "not making a gesture," by shaking his head, mouthing "not true, not true" in what can only be described as a desperate attempt to appeal to all those South Carolinians pining for another Joe Wilson-like hero with Tourettes to rescue America from these terrible NObama lies.

But, alas, those good old days are long gone, now that health care is dead and the economy is dead and Ted Kennedy is dead, and hope and change are as dead as the dickens and our miserable failure of a leader is forced to go before a gathering of hungry predators (Congress) to give some pathetic excuse about why it only took him 12 months to ruin the country when it took George W. Bush eight whole years to destroy America.

"At the beginning of the last decade, the year 2000, America had a budget surplus of over $200 billion. By the time I took office, we had a one-year deficit of over $1 trillion and projected deficits of $8 trillion over the next decade. Most of this was the result of not paying for two wars, two tax cuts, and an expensive prescription drug program...All this was before I walked in the door."

Whoa, whoa wait just a minute there, fellow! Are you implying that the presidency of George W. Bush Junior is to blame for the financial mess we're in? What a terribly impolite thing to say about the former president of these United States! How dare you even mention the great #43, let alone use something as RUDE and ELITIST as actual facts.

"Too many Americans have lost faith in our biggest institutions: our corporations, our media, and yes, our government...It's time to try something new: let's invest in our people without leaving them mountains of debt."

Hmmm, go on?

"By the time I'm finished speaking tonight, more Americans will have lost their coverage." Wooohooo!! Oh wait...that's a bad thing, right?

"Here's what I ask Congress, though: Don't walk away from reform. Not now. Not when we are so close. Let us find a way to come together and finish the job for the American people. Let's get it done."

Okay, now everyone cheer for America. And freedom! And diversity! And working together to solve problems and make America a better place! YAY!!!

Wonder where he's going with all this hippie-dippie, love your neighbor crazy talk?

"This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are. It's the right thing to do."

Arrrrggghhh! Oh no, not more freedom and equality sh*t like letting the gays also have a chance to die in war. It makes the military brass very uncomfortable and everyone knows their comfort is far more important than constitutional rights or having military personnel with the ability to translate Arabic into a civilized language like English. Heterosexual English, that is.

"From the day I took office, I've been told that addressing our larger challenges is too ambitious; such an effort would be too contentious...our political system is too gridlocked, and that we should just put things on hold for a while."

"You see, Washington has been telling us to wait for decades, even as the problems have grown worse...Well, I do not accept second place for the United States of America."

You hear that people? Silver is for losers like the Chinese or British. Gold is for winners like Glenn Beck and the rest of the Fox News team head over heels for the shiny metal of champions.

"I campaigned on the promise of change--change we can believe in, the slogan went. And right now, I know there are many Americans who aren't sure if they still believe we can change--or that I can deliver it."

"But remember this--I never suggested that change would be easy, or that I could do it alone. Democracy in a nation of 300 million people can be noisy and messy and complicated. And when you try to do big things and make big changes, it stirs passions and controversy."

"We have finished a difficult year. We have come through a difficult decade. But a new year has come...We don't quit. I don't quit. Let's seize this moment--to start anew, to carry the dream forward and to strengthen our union once more."

In other words, Democrats: thank you, and please continue trying to solve problems. Republicans: drop dead. Problem solved!

Now, that's change we can all believe in!