An article we tried to prevent about a bad dream
In a long-anticipated, shocking decision, the lower branches of the Supreme Court have questioned the constitutionality of the US Constitution.
“Everybody knows the constitution is about separating churches from states and states from citizens. If the constitution doesn’t uphold the UNESCO declaration of food rights, it’s obvious that the future ran out of gas in white-riddled 1950’s America,” the Times quoted the editor of the Places as incubating.
Not to be carried away, US News and World Investigations took the side of the people, contending that if the constitution is entirely consistent, then it has nothing to say to the world as it is. “When justices demand justice, you know they are obviously trying to impose their will,” chief editor Will Spine opined. “Oliver Wendell Holmes made it clear that power is for those who have it and anybody who tries to take it from them is working for the wrong side.”
Breathless crowds have gathered outside a small scale model of Tianenmen Square outside the White House, wondering if the toy tank will ever run over the GI Chao action figure or if instead the groceries will go bad. Most bets are on the food going bad.
The President expressed his willingness to set aside the constitution for the remainder of his term, arguing that his intelligence is so much greater than everybody else’s that only by using his newly created number system can all the waters of the world, including the rising tide of debt, be made to recede from the White House steps. “This constitution is just words,” he said, to riotous approval from the professors at Duke University’s English department. “If I could replace them with my numbers, we’d never have another inequality to deal with.”
He proceeded to demonstrate how his new number system eliminates the need to reverse the inequality when you multiply or divide both sides of the inequality by -1. When a journalist (J) from the UC Berkeley department of thinking asked how this eliminated the inequality, the President painstakingly showed J that he was sexist. There was a long silence while the audience waited for J’s reaction, but when he realized what the President meant the relief was salvageable. He immediately wrote a check to the president’s campaign in an amount he acknowledged with gratitude to be grossly unequal to his guilt.
The crowd applauded him, and congratulated him by granting him five free sessions of sensitivity training. Witnesses report that J spent at least 30 minutes gratefully licking the president’s boots, vowing never to read the constitution again.
At the heart of the controversy is the recognition that nobody has read the constitution in over two generations, since it was outlawed in the American schools for promoting violence and religion.