An Important Announcement from the ADB

Dear Readers,

With today's ruling by the Supreme Court, it has now become financially feasible for me to seriously run for public office.

As you are probably well aware, my aspirations to become a powerful, feared member of the oligarchic elite have been stymied, partially because of those pictures of me and John Edwards' mistress, but mostly because the salary for an unsuccessful candidate is so poor. Indeed, as I have a wife and three kids to feed, I felt that I could not take the risk of running for higher office and lose, leaving my family destitute. We do have need for bare necessities (food, water, cable modem), and while the children would probably be tasty if they were slow cooked, I felt that the tradeoff was one I could not make.

Today's Supreme Court ruling, however, changes the game... and it's now an opportunity for you, the freedom of speech enabled citizenry, unions, or corporations to take advantage of me.

First, let me say that I have principles: valuable, deeply held principles that I will gladly abandon for cold, hard cash. You want an amendment to stop flag burning: for $5,000, I can be your candidate. You want to put electronic monitoring devices on liberals: for $5,000,000 I can be your candidate. You want to invade countries populated by brown people and forcibly convert them to Pepsi-Colaism... brother, for a mere $50,000,000 I can make that happen.

Of course, my real platform if totally up to you.

For a nice chunk of change I can be against gay marriage, but for a little bit more, I can be for it.
Don't like stop signs? For a generous contribution, neither do I?
Think that we need to drill baby seals in ANWR for their oil? A cool million from Exxon-Mobil would make me agree.
Want to waterboard people in contravention of the Geneva Convention? For a campaign plane, I'll hold the bucket for you.

I can be a Democrat, a Republican, a Libertarian, a Tea-Bagger, a Trash Bagger, A Stinking Badger, or anything else your greedy little hands want me to be.

This is a great opportunity for democracy. Think of me as your, squishy, pliable, political Gumby whore, willing to do anything and contort anyway that you want me too.

But wait, there's MORE!

If you are one of the first 300 contributors, I will give you the opportunity to actually vote FOR ME. I mean, literally, if you decide that I'm going to be a congressman, I will let you push the little red button on the floor of the House for me. You want to have my vote on Global Warming? Bam! You literally have my vote on global warming.

Hurry though, as there are only so many positions for sale. Contribute now before someone else buys up your democracy!

-O
The Angry Drunk Bureaucrat

A Bureaucrat's Aside

You know, if I was David Souter I would be really happy I actually had a job right now. I mean, with the economy the way it is, it's not like the guy can go off and be a Wal*Mart greeter like Sandra Day O'Connor.

And why do I get the feeling that under his breath Stevens is muttering "damned lazy kids today"?

Supreme Court Upturns Right of Habeus Grabbus

(AP) Washington - In a rare late night ruling, the Supreme Court today upturned the previously held right of Habeus Grabbus in the National Football League.

The ruling, which was largely split on ideological lines, marked a stunning defeat for the American Football Liberties Union (AFLU) and a tacit support of President Bush's policies towards defensive holding.

The case stems from a 2005 incident between the Pittsburgh Steelers and the San Diego Chargers where running back LaDainian Tomlinson was hit by Steelers linebacker James Harrison prior to a reception. Harrison was charged with defensive pass interference, although Steelers' coach Bill Cower argued that it was only incidental contact.

Writing for the 5-4 majority, Chief Justice John Roberts, "There are two kinds of holding: offensive holding, illegally blocking a player from the opposing team by grabbing and holding his uniform or body; and defensive holding, called against defensive players who impede receivers who are more than 5 yards from the line of scrimmage, but who are not actively making an attempt to catch the ball."

In a minority dissenting opinion, Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg agreed with the Majority's definition of holding, although added that a player "is not necessarily guaranteed exclusive right to the space."

In a separate part of the ruling, however, the Court ruled that the Bush Administration does not have the right to indefinitely detain players suspected of pass interference without trial.

AFLU officials were saddened by the ruling.

In a prepared statement, Executive Director Bill Hillgrove remarked, "Harrison really put the clamps on Tomlinson, and had a little habeus grabbus action on him... but that's no reason to charge him with more than 10 yards or loss of down."

The Court is expected to hear arguments regarding Bill Belichick's warrantless surveillance case later this term.

The case is Cope, Hillgrove, Illkin, et al v. National Football League.