Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Where We Screwed Up

They tried their best to save us from lawyers...

I was responding to something on IMAO, which is one of my favorite websites, when the thought hit me like a lightning bolt: I haven't really written anything about lawyers. Which is kind of crazy considering, if I were ever to write a book about politics in the United States, lawyers would be the main theme and probably take up almost every chapter. Because lawyers are the devil...when it comes to politics.

Just to say up front, I don't think lawyers in general are bad people, or that it is a bad profession. On the contrary, they are necessary for society. However, when lawyers enter into elected office, they become a detriment to society. And it is because of the very nature of lawyers that we have such a morass of inane laws and just about every other mess in government.

Contrary to popular belief, lawyers aren't liars by trade. They are truth-benders and word twisters. They know more about the English language than most English teachers. They are neither interested in truth or reality. Their only interest is in perception. And as such they can take the most simple statement and convolute it into anything they wish, in order to argue their case.

A long long time ago in a colony not far away, there sat a bunch of guys sweating to death and wearing wigs and way too many clothes for summer weather in an non air conditioned building (imagine the smell!) who made it their goal to come up with a simple document, a constitution, that the newly independent states of America could agree upon. To do this, the document had to be written simply and precisely. Basically, they knew it had to be lawyer-proof. Because many of them were lawyers, and they knew how the whole lawyering thing worked. 

So they wrote a document so simply and so plain spoken that anyone who could read could both understand and interpret it. It was so simple, the Supreme Court was an after thought. Just one added layer of protection against the meddling of lawyers. Because even then, lawyers knew how to twist a sentence until it bled. 

And lawyers haven't changed since. And now you're wondering...well what happened then? If the Constitution was lawyer-proofed, how did we get into this fine mess we're in? By giving lawyers a back door, that's how. We started electing them to Congress. Making them president. Lawyer presidents choosing activist lawyers with a chip on their shoulders to be Supreme Court justices. Making Washington D.C. into lawyer city. Lawyers lawyers everywhere and not a drop of sense.

Ever read a bill out of Congress? It will confuse you. It isn't in English. It is in lawyer-ese. They don't use the standard paragraph or the standard sentence. Every three words is interrupted with a "congruent to article 43, part 5, subsection d and f", and on and on and on. You can read the Constitution. It makes sense. You cannot read a bill. 

I read the ObamaCare bill. Took me weeks to sort through that thing and then come up with a summary for my friends and family. And I know I didn't understand all of it. No law should be in a code that the average citizen cannot understand. That is utter hogwash.

But that is what you get when you keep voting lawyers into office. You get a government of lawyers. Is it so surprising then, that this lawyer government has twisted parts of the Constitution beyond comprehension? Is it any wonder that such horrible laws can get passed? Is it any wonder that our government is completely and utterly inefficient and swimming in paperwork and red tape? Lawyers don't know anything about how the real world works, because their trade isn't in reality, but in perceptions. About the twisted word. About semantics.

So if you want to fix government...stop putting lawyers in charge. Leave them in the courtroom.

7 comments:

  1. You have a pretty good handle on the English language, yourself. I think you should write that book. I'd buy it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks. I've written three...unpublished as of yet. And in the fantasy genre, not politics.

      I don't even read political books, why would I write one? Too boring. No swords and stuff in them. Gotta have swords and stuff in a book. Or at least explosions.

      Much like movies.

      Delete
    2. Silly. Can you pass on the fantasy ones? You have my email. I think they would make great metaphorical diamonds. I'm serious, btw. I quite enjoy your style of writing.

      Delete
    3. Lactose the IntolerantNovember 1, 2012 at 2:10 AM

      She's very good at proofreading and helping shore up plot holes, etc, btw. I would take her up on her offer.

      Delete
    4. Oh I need to do a lot of editing before I ever let anyone see it. I just haven't had the time. If ever I do, then I'll look to getting some other editing eyes on it. At this point it's just one of those life-long projects that may or may not ever see the light of day. I've never aspired to being a writer by trade, so I'm not in any hurry to publish something.

      Delete
    5. Ok, Keln, here's the deal. I'm around here so much because I am in a place in my life where I need DISTRACTIONS. Preferably happy, somewhat social, funny distractions. I can tell that the three of you are all too busy to entertain me as I'd like...so...you should give me something useful to do. You don't know me from Adam. Or Eve, rather. I can just read it with friendly eyes. I'll only edit if you'd like. C'mon, Keln. Take a chance. You don't have the time to edit them before you send them...that's no problem. Let me read them as is. I won't show them to anyone. Just look at it is as though you'll be doing me a service. Giving me something useful and entertaining to do. Lactose, Walkingdead? Don't you think he should send them to me?

      Delete
  2. Man Mountain MolehillNovember 1, 2012 at 1:47 AM

    What's interesting is the Swiss constitution of 1848 (not the current one from a few years ago which is politically correct drivel). The Swiss were familiar with out constitution, but thought it had weaknesses which would lead to its protections deteriorating over time. Thus the Swiss one is much longer than ours. Not because it covers more material, but because each clause has a LOT of explanatory text to make sure it couldn't possibly be misinterpreted, twisted, folded, spindled or mutilated. Good thinking on the part of the Swiss.

    ReplyDelete