So, I know I promised a rant about Scooter Libby, but I have something else to do first. Seeing as this is the 4th of July, and 231 years ago a bunch of white guys got together in Philadelphia to set out their beliefs about government and humanity; and since that little meeting has become the basis for our system of government today, I thought I would do a little analysis of the Declaration of Independence.

Now, I don't know the last time you actually read Mr. Jefferson's little note to King George, but if you're like most Americans, you haven't. Oh, sure, you've seen the thing, and you might even know that it says "In Congress, July 4, 1776" at the top. You might even recognize the opening ("When in the course of human events...", not "We the People..." That's the Constitution.) Aside from the first sentence of the second paragraph ("We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.") you probably don't know any other words from the whole document, other than John Hancock's huge signature (sorry Mr. Farley, it's not Herbie Hancock.)

So where am I going with this? Well, the first paragraph speaks of the dissolution of political ties. Jefferson speaks of the rule of the British crown over the American colonies. Can we take the meaning into a modern context and say that the Federal government needs to be dissolved? I think that's a bit much, even though the system as it is is grossly inept and needs to be rethought. And I will say that there are certain political ties in our government today that do need to be dissolved. But we'll get into that later.

Paragraph two is the most famous, and the one which applies most to our current government. In it, Jefferson speaks of "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness," three unalienable rights which no government may curtail. In fact, Jefferson says that it is the purpose of government to protect these rights above all else. Government is created by the consent of the people; and it must be removed when it violates that trust. Jefferson goes on to say that the complete removal of government is a messy thing, and should only be undertaken when absolutely necessary. In fact, he observes that humans are more likely to suffer small abuses than change a broken system. But at what point do the abuses become too big to suffer? Apparently, it is after a "long train of abuses and usurpations" shows a pattern of "Despotism" and "Tyranny." Have we seen anything like despotism or tyranny from the Bush administration? Have they done anything in the last 6 years to violate the pursuit of life, liberty, or happiness? Where to start? Let's use Mr. Jefferson's words, from the Declaration itself: ("He" of course being King George. Which one, the Third or the Bush, is up to you to decide.)

"He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good."

- there's a long list here, including stem cell research, funding for the environment and public schools, sex education, the Kyoto treaty, the START treaties, and so on. But this accusation can be leveled at any president and his administration. It just seems like this guy has some real no-brainers on his list.

"He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only."

-Now, here, Jefferson was talking about the American colonies and their lack of representation in the British Parliament, which was a cornerstone of the American Revolution. While the President has not tried to make anyone give up representation in Congress, the phrasing here could apply to two current events that would have benefited a large number of people and only inconvenienced few: the funding for the Iraq war and Social Security "reform." Now, as far as funding for Iraq goes, we all know how Congress was ready to pass a bill calling for all US troops to be out of Iraq on a set schedule, and Bush said he would veto such a bill. He then went on to veto a spending bill with a time limit, effectively leaving our soldiers in a war zone with no money to buy bullets. Since no Congressman (and, I would hope, no person) in their right mind would allow such a thing, Georgie got his appropriations bill passed, and the war drags on. Second is the Social Security debate, which went something like this: Bush and his administration decided that Social Security needs to be reformed to make it last more than 40 more years. But he never laid out a plan to do it that didn't involve his buddies on Wall Street getting fatter and richer off of our retirement money (which they already are). His plan was to basically go to Vegas and bet all of Social Security on red. Great idea George. And what happened when Congress said "We believe you. We'll work with you. Just give us a plan that makes sense"? The response was "We have a plan, but you have to agree to it before we tell you." So, long story short, the Bush administration has refused to pass laws affecting a large number of people, unless those people agree to unreasonable demands.

"He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures."

-now, this one is a slight detour as well, but in the same vein. You see, our legislative branch hasn't been holding meetings in strange places; but the justice department has. And whenever anyone has asked about it, the answer has been "USA Patriot Act." "9-11." and "Terrorism."

"He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people."

- While Georgie hasn't dissolved any houses lately, he has allowed some redistricting to go on that is questionable at best. His Attorney General should have investigated and prosecuted someone over the redistricting in Texas that created 5 more Republican Congressmen and eliminated 2 Democrats.
On a side note, I'm not really sure what Jefferson meant by "manly firmness," but I think it's safe to say that's not meant to be as gay as it sounds. Moving on:

"He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands."

- I think that one's pretty cut and dry: he wants to build a fence along the Mexican border, after all.

"He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers."

- Finally, we see what Scooter Libby has to do with this whole thing. Now, while Georgie has no say on the laws for "establishing Judiciary Powers," he has done lots and lots of obstructing "the Administration of Justice." Commuting Scooter Libby's jail sentence is just the latest and greatest hit from that group, which includes Mr. Cheney Doesn't Have to Tell You a Damn Thing, We Don't Have to Have a Reason For Firing Federal Attorneys, Who Cares If She's a Mindless Sycophant, She's Perfect for Chief Justice, and that all-time classic, Yes, Iraq Really Does Have WMD, and Saddam Planned 9-11. The fact of the matter is that this administration has never really had a need for truth and justice, so long as they had 9-11 and a mandate from a higher power, they were good to go.

"He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance."

-Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you, the White House Office of Faith Based and Community Initiatives. Separation of church and state my butt.

"He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power."

-I'm not even gonna touch this one. If you've been paying attention at all, you know.

"For protecting them (soldiers), by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:"

- Now, while we haven't seen too many murders on "Inhabitants of these States" by our own soldiers (though a few PTSD cases have trickled into the news); we have seen gross violations of international law by American soldiers in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo Bay. And have we seen one trial that wasn't a farce? Has even one officer gone in front of a court martial for any of it?

"For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:"

- Again, not us, but alleged "terrorists." If we expect the rest of the world to play by our rules, then WE need to play by our rules too.

"He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us."

-While he's not waging war on us, I have to wonder how many victims on Hurricane Katrina fell like the government is protecting us...

"In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people."

The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States 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." The American people have been using that right to free speech to petition the government for a redress of grievances for at least 4 years now. Bush's approval rating peaked at 90% in October of 2001. This is the highest number since Gallup started the poll in 1938, and probably the highest number since the other George W.; General Washington himself. Today, Bush's approval rating is 27%. Since his reelection in 2004, his approval has gone from 51% to 27%. If that doesn't meant that most of the country (65% at the time of this writing) is looking for a "redress of grievances," then I don't know what does. How has the President responded to these low polls? By ignoring it. Acting like he still has a "mandate" from the people to do whatever he thinks is necessary. Well, guess what, George: you don't. You work for us. For a guy who is 3% points from Nixon, you sure don't seem to care.

Well, after all this rambling and ranting, I'll close it up. We live in a world that is so much smaller and faster than it was 10 years ago. We cannot even begin to imagine what life was like in 1776. Yet, 231 years later, we still celebrate an act of courage that we cannot even fathom. And even though our government and way of life is beginning to take on the same bad habits that have felled every human empire to come before; we can still do something about it. Our system allows for an orderly and bloodless change of government; the type of revolution that makes documents like the Declaration of Independence a wonderful piece of history and not a necessary political tool.

"But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever."

John Adams (1735 - 1826)