« a little help here, please | Main | making my mark on the world »

the bill of no rights

See? This is what happens when you ask people about blogs they read. It leads you to great discoveries.

Nicole included a link to BeerMary. I promptly went to her blog and found this fascinating post, which I will replicate here, but you should still go visit her blog.

Mary says:

I received this in an email (thanks, Dr. C!), and re-wrote it to more closely reflect my personal opinions. The original version has apparently been attributed to State Representative Mitchell Kaye from GA.

Now, I don't know which parts Mary changed, but I like the whole damned thing. I know I will get hate mail over this but frankly, I don't give a damn.


Read on:

We hold these truths to be self-evident: A whole lot of people are confused by the Bill of Rights and are so dim that they require a Bill of No Rights."

ARTICLE I: You do not have the unearned right to a new car, big screen TV or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything. Get off your ass and earn it.

ARTICLE II: You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone-not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc., but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be.

ARTICLE III: You do not have the right to be free from harm due to your own stupidity. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful, do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all your inbred relatives independently wealthy.

ARTICLE IV: You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes.

ARTICLE V: You do not have the right to free health care. Children should have access to it, and the disabled, and those temporarily down on their luck. But if you're able-bodied and able-brained, and you're in your 20's, don't be waving that Medicaid card in my taxpaying face, you ass.

ARTICLE VI: You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or kill someone, don't be surprised if the rest of us want to see you fry in the electric chair.

ARTICLE VII: You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don't be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won't have the right to a big screen color TV or a life of leisure.

ARTICLE IX: You do not have the right to a cushy job without earning it. All of us sure WANT you to have a job, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful. Also, just because you've completed your education, you don't automatically deserve a six-figure income. You'll have to work your way up, just like everyone else, so stop bitching about your pay, and stop bitching about having to work a job that may not be "fun". Hey spoiled brat, if jobs were fun, THEY WOULDN'T PAY YOU TO DO THEM.

ARTICLE X: You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to PURSUE happiness-which by the way, is a lot easier if you learn the Country's language and are unencumbered by an overabundance of idiotic laws created by greedy lawyers and those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights."

If you like it, go over to Mary's and leave her a comment saying so. If you don't like it, move on and don't bother with posting your opposition unless you are going to be an adult about it.

Comments

And me reading my comments leads to wonderful discoveries, such as YOUR blog :-)

It's easy to tell what I added. Basically, any sentence with a cussword or the word "inbred" or phrase "greedy lawyers". Hee!

And of course I softened up the part that originally said that no one on the face of the earth deserves free health care. I couldn't leave that harsh statement; after all, I'm a democrat! :-)

Yay, Mary! You're famous now, lol.

A-Fucking-Men

Chad, I'm used to being famous!

Only it's usually the "I saw your picture on that '10 Most Wanted Criminals' wall in the post office" type of fame ;-)

Chad, why didn't you tell me about this blog before? I hold you personally responsible for delaying my finding this. :-)

Sounds about right. I particularly like the first three .... er.... rights.

Heck, Michele's been in my blogroll the whole time! In fact, it was a post of hers many moons ago that led me to settle on 'Taco Shop Psychic'.

Don't take this as a personal attack on you Michele, but this is just another simple-minded attempt to attack things that don't really exist, or are the exception rather than the rule.

Most financially successful people work substantially less, especially from a physical standpoint than the poor or middle-class.

More government give-aways go to the richest part of the population, than the poor.

Most people do not get to their position in life because of how hard they work or how productive they are, but based on who their family and friends are, and what part of the world they are born in (and what sex, as well).

For every couch potato living off the government, I could show you many more that work two or three jobs just to try and support their family.

For every dollar given to support those truly in need, many more are given in credits to people that have never worked a day in their life because they earn money from "investments", or are targeted to gain votes or encourage consumerism that benefits the privilaged class.

More money is spent providing health care for middle class working folks who could afford the services, than to those that can't afford it.

There are always the exceptional people that work their way up from poverty to riches, or those that abuse the system and collect aid while sitting at home watching TV, but they are not even close to being the majority.

It's easy to say you hate lazy, violent, dishonest people. Doesn't everyone? But many people use those as code words for people who are of a different race, nationality, ethnicity or religion.

It's the same thing the Klan has said for years about the Jews and the Asians, Africans, and Latins. Basically everyone who isn't like them is to blame for whatever they don't like.

I know it's fun having lots of white middle-class, moderately educated Americans coming here and agreeing with you about how stupid and evil everyone else is (and I'm a white, middle-class, moderately educated American myself), but spreading anger and hatred at a poorly defined group (other than they're generally not white, middle-class Americans) seems like an unworthy use of your substantial writing skills.

That's all just my opinion, of course, and I'm probably wasting my time writing it here, but I do appreciate that you allow it.

Thanks to Michele for the lead,and thanks to BeerMary for the treat.Rockin' cool babes the bunch o'yuz.

Ken, this - for me at least - has nothing to do with race.

I know way too many "white Americans" that fit in the above categories.

If you read it as racist, then that's what you are putting into it. When I orginally read it, race, religion or ethnicity never entered my mind. Instead, I was thinking about some of my neighbors. Those damn white Americans.

"But many people use those as code words for people who are of a different race, nationality, ethnicity or religion"

Oh my God, could you have possibly read more into it than it didn't say wKen?

It's easy to get offended by something someone says, if you put your own offensive things into the message that weren't there.

I think it was pretty clear that the "bill of NO rights" was addressing ONLY the people who are burdens to society because of their own lack of ethics. If YOU thought that spoke of race, then maybe you should look at your OWN prejudices.

"White guilt" is one of the more ridiculous notions to come out of the left in recent years. So glad to see it still has vocal proponents. [/sarcasm]

I like Mary's version, but thought I'd post the link to the original (had it bookmarked for a while).
http://www.thelastcool.com/dh2k/html/norights.html

I dunno... the first time I read it, I took it as some of us Americans [of any age, sex, religion, race group] sometimes feel we're entitled to something, and this sets the record straight. It talks of tolerance and that others have the same rights we do.

If I want something nice, I have to get up off my ass and get it.

And I will. Someday.

Thanks for posting the original link, Kathy. The version I got in my email didn't have the article that said "You do not have the right to demand that our children risk their lives in foreign wars to soothe your aching conscience". That's the first time I saw it.

You know, I just love how people insert their OWN prejudices into something that describes what has traditionally been a put down of a race, creed, color or religion. I find that very amusing and very sad. I LOVED the No rights........even if a couple of them did hit close to home. I am a student, but I will never have to work for a living. I will always have an income from investments.............but you know what? I pay almost 33% of my income in taxes. A tremendous amount! And I buy a lot of things that keeps the rest of America earning an income. And I do not feel guilty for it. I feel very lucky for it.

But as I said above, I think people look at things like this and insert their own prejudices that they are trying to ignore!!! Like my grandpa starting one of his rants with "I'm not prejudice, I had several black friends but.................." Same thing really.

wKen:

"Don't take this as a personal attack on you Michele, but this is just another simple-minded attempt to attack things that don't really exist, or are the exception rather than the rule."
It's a humorous look at things which do really exist and which some of us would like to keep as exceptions!

"Most financially successful people work substantially less, especially from a physical standpoint than the poor or middle-class."
I'm very financially successful and I work my ass off. Most financially successful folks will work their ass off going through years of schooling and training on the way to achieving their success -- which also comes as a result from hard work. If my chair has buttcheek imprints from all the time I spend in it designing new and better ways to do something, instead of performing physical labor, does that make my contribution any less anything on my part? At what point do I transition from a hard working but not financially successful person to the opposite?

"More government give-aways go to the richest part of the population, than the poor."
The richest part of the population pays most of the taxes that result in those "give-aways."

"Most people do not get to their position in life because of how hard they work or how productive they are, but based on who their family and friends are, and what part of the world they are born in (and what sex, as well)."
This is outright offensive. Hard work and dedication does nothing to improve your lot in life? -- it's all a matter of where and to whom you were born? You can do almost anything you want in this country if you try, make the right choices, and work hard.

"For every couch potato living off the government, I could show you many more that work two or three jobs just to try and support their family."
I used to work two and three different jobs to support my family. I also made choices and put forth the hard work which enabled me to better support them.

"For every dollar given to support those truly in need, many more are given in credits to people that have never worked a day in their life because they earn money from "investments", or are targeted to gain votes or encourage consumerism that benefits the privilaged class."
I like the scare quotes around "investments". What do you suppose is the percentage of folks who have "never worked a day in their life" while still receiving investment income? .5%? .05%? Less? Does working hard and slowly building a portfolio of investments count toward this? How exactly do dollars supporting the needy relate to dollars from investment income? Is there an ideal ratio I've missed?

"More money is spent providing health care for middle class working folks who could afford the services, than to those that can't afford it."
No argument out of me.

"There are always the exceptional people that work their way up from poverty to riches, or those that abuse the system and collect aid while sitting at home watching TV, but they are not even close to being the majority."
Why not? I am one of those people who worked from poverty to riches. Maybe, instead of complaining about how unfair the system is, or how rich kid down yonder has an easier time, or staying in dead-end but secure jobs, or worrying about what other people have, we need to take some risks, and make the choices, and put forth the work needed to get where we want to be.

"It's easy to say you hate lazy, violent, dishonest people. Doesn't everyone? But many people use those as code words for people who are of a different race, nationality, ethnicity or religion."
Ever since Trent Lott made an ass of himself, I've been reading about "code words". Is this what the left has come to? How do I get the Pelosi/Moore secret decoder ring? I truly have no idea how you read any of that into the Bill of No Rights. You know what I, and probably most of the people here read? "Be responsible for yourself, work hard, you'll get to where you want to be." That's it. No code words. No hidden messages.

"It's the same thing the Klan has said for years about the Jews and the Asians, Africans, and Latins. Basically everyone who isn't like them is to blame for whatever they don't like."
My brain started to melt trying to figure out how the Bill of No Rights had anything to do with this sentence.

"I know it's fun having lots of white middle-class, moderately educated Americans coming here and agreeing with you about how stupid and evil everyone else is (and I'm a white, middle-class, moderately educated American myself), but spreading anger and hatred at a poorly defined group (other than they're generally not white, middle-class Americans) seems like an unworthy use of your substantial writing skills."

I went from being a 20 year old with no college education, no money in my pocket, with all my worldly possessions in the trunk and back seat of my dying car, to owning my own business and becoming very financially successful. Along the way, I lived in a low income neighborhood because it was all I could afford. Many other people in that neighborhood cared more about driving a fancy car and wearing fancy clothes than I did -- all of us living in shithole houses. While they spent their money on fancy clothes and cars, I saved mine and moved to a better neighborhood. Wash, Rinse, Repeat. Moral of the story: making choices, hard work. When I see and read about people -- from the thug on the corner of the street all the way up to the politicians -- who want to take the fruits of my hard work because they're not willing to do what it takes, I get angry. And that's what the Bill of No Rights is about.

So much for a little humor.

Representative Kaye's original has been circling the Net for a long time, but it's always pleasant to be reminded of it.

Thanks to Mary and Michele, and best wishes to all for the New Year, even the suspiciously code-word-minded wKen.

Psychiatrist One to Psychiatrist Two: "Good Morning!"
Psychiatrist Two to himself: "I wonder what he means by that?"

In point of fact, the vast majority of millionaires in the United States are self-made, and came up from the middle class or from poverty. Examples such as Donald Trump and Bill Gates are easy to point to, but extensive research has already shown that they are typical, and not exceptional.

Also, most government "give aways" are not to "the rich" at all. Unless you take the Orwelleian view that tax cuts are "giveaways."

But let's not let facts get in our way, shall we?

According to snopes.com, Kaye did not originate the email. It was Lewis Napper, a Libertarian Senate candidate. See here.

Still, it's great - especially the abridged version.

race? the only people i know who fit the majority of those descriptions are white. who else thinks they deserve the sun and moon by default? especially if they can't read "this coffee is extremely hot" or feel the overpowering need to attempt to win the darwin awards and blame someone else.

i have to keep reminding myself daily of ii and ix, and i'm about as white as you can get without being albino.

very nice, mary. this is going in my "wiser than i" section.

wKen said:

It's easy to say you hate lazy, violent, dishonest people. Doesn't everyone? But many people use those as code words for people who are of a different race, nationality, ethnicity or religion.

---

So what about when you are using those words to simply describe behaviour that you disagree with? I know somebody who fits two of the three perfectly, and she has none of my respect--but I don't ever think of her in terms of her race or religion or even her politics. It's a fallacy to say that I am judging her on any of those simply because I judge her by her actions first.

I get what you're saying, but I think that people who tend to stereotype race, gender, religions, etc with those words generally start of with something pointing directly to the particular population they are slagging. There is a difference between saying "Person X has these qualities" and "Person X has these qualities because they belong to this group."

And I don't think the Bill of No Rights really falls into this category. At least not Mary's version. (I haven't read the original yet.) It simply says that you don't deserve to have things you didn't work for, for example. Not that if you work for something, you are guaranteed to have it. (That would be a right, not an un-right.) It doesn't guarantee that all those poor hardworking shmoes will get the lifestyle they deserve. That would be nice, but that's not the actual focus of the Bill of No Rights. The Bill of No Rights is saying you don't have a right to step on others and squish your way to the top, or that you don't have the right to whatever you want in life WITHOUT working for it. Small distinction, I suppose, but not one that screams "Racism" to me. Or even one that screams "Let's ignore the proletariet while the bourgeoisie dance on their backs."

Yes, I saw this via e-mail when I was a student at ASU - somewhere around '95 or '96. I've heard about 15 different stories about who wrote it - senators, representatives, journalists, laymen, muisicians (Ted Nugent specifically). I still have yet to see the difinitive version of who originally wrote it.

None of which means a darned thing.

It's still good writing and it still kills me how it offends some people. "Code words" indeed. Give me a break. Most arguments begin "while there may be a few exceptions.." - now, why do you think that is? It's because there are no "race rules" that every person has to follow - we all have the same opportunity to make something of ourselves. Exceptions to the rule prove the converse - that there is no "rule."

Wisdom in action and persistence will get you very far. Luck will get you a little farther - or not.

Myself, I think I'm going to "keep it real," to use another racial "code," and keep working hard, paying off my substantial student loan debt, playing with my kid, going on dates with my wife, hiking in the desert mountains on the weekends, eating right and exercising regularly.

Word.

I appreciate everyone who pointed out the ridiculousness of wKen's rather self-righteous "you're prejudiced!" fingerpointing. I can usually defend myself pretty well, but when faced with such blindly illogical and twisted interpretation of meaning as wken did, I'm left speechless and sputtering in what can only be described as amazement, frustration, and just a slight dash of wishing to live in a cave for the rest of my life so as not to run across that kind of person again. :-) I'm sure wken is a lovely person, but for him to accuse someone as being racist for saying that no one should expect a handout is, in itself, offensive to minorities, because it implies that wken believes only minorities expect a handout.

(not fun having your words twisted, is it wken?)

I especially liked this, which I believe Mason said:

"It's easy to say you hate lazy, violent, dishonest people. Doesn't everyone? But many people use those as code words for people who are of a different race, nationality, ethnicity or religion."
Ever since Trent Lott made an ass of himself, I've been reading about "code words". Is this what the left has come to? How do I get the Pelosi/Moore secret decoder ring? I truly have no idea how you read any of that into the Bill of No Rights. You know what I, and probably most of the people here read? "Be responsible for yourself, work hard, you'll get to where you want to be." That's it. No code words. No hidden messages.

One last question: how did wKen know that I wasn't a minority myself? Did he go to my site and see that I was white, then come back here and make the racist accusations? It would be fascinating to know . . .

Michelle, sorry I sparked so much trouble for you! Your site kicks ass.