Lard, I hate waking up to shit like this. Especially when I’m only really interested in the latest news about the War on Photosynthesis currently taking place in the Lincoln Memorial reflecting pool. I can’t stop laughing about it! Every new update has me in stitches.

That is some funny shit right there.

But not today. Today, I see this:

A legal error! Well gosh, I wonder which part of their much-touted and specifically-sworn-to U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment our esteemed “Supreme” court will rewrite, strike dead, or pretend not to understand? (Oooh, is Polymarket taking bets on this yet? Asking for a friend…) Because sure as shit, that court is where this “legal error” will end up.

For those who may want a quick refresher, the First Amendment to the United States Constitution 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.

That part in bold is commonly referred to as the “establishment clause,” though I have always wondered why it isn’t called the “non-establishment clause.”

But hey, I’m no constitutional scholar! And even though I’m a native English speaker (albeit one with a baaaad Philly accent when I get drunk), I may not understand what those English words in that ol’ First Amendment mean. For all I know, they might mean “all laws must respect the establishment of a few approved sects of the roughly 45,000 different versions of the Christian religion, and prohibit the free exercise of anything else.” And the really amazing part is those words will have meant exactly this for the past 250 years! I know, right? The men who wrote it, and all the judges who have taken it more or less at face value for centuries, will all turn out to have been COMPLETELY WRONGHEADED about what the establishment clause means.

Lest you think I’m being a tad histrionic, these same Supreme Assholes have already done this to the Second Amendment. That one says in its entirety:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

FULL DISCLOSURE: Just so you know what a hopelessly illiterate dingbat you’re reading right now, I must confess that there was a time, not so long ago, when I actually believed that (omg this is so embarrassing!) the words “well regulated” and “Militia” and “being necessary to the security of a free State” had something to do with… a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State! LOL! I was so confused I thought the aforementioned necessary and well regulated Militia was the context and justification for peoples’ right to bear arms.

Thankfully, the six superior intellects sitting on the nation’s highest court set me straight about that foolishness. I have come to understand that the words of the Second Amendment mean “EVERYONE CAN OPEN CARRY EVERYWHERE AT ALL TIMES.” Not only that, but the Second Amendment has always meant that! For the past 250 years! See, it’s just that in all that time, nobody else had the penetrating insight, encyclopedic historical knowledge, and time-traveling capabilities of our six conservative Justices.