For Peter*

The Unanimous Declaration
of the Thirteen United States of America

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. —Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.

He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.

He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislature.

He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states:

For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing taxes on us without our consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury:

For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses:
Click Here

For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule in these colonies:

For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments:

For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends.

We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

Massachusetts: John Hancock, Samual Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Connecticut: Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York: William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey: Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Pennsylvania: Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Delaware: Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean

Maryland: Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia: George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina: William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina: Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton

Georgia: Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton

Source: The Pennsylvania Packet, July 8, 1776 

*Not as impressive on Tumblr, I guess

The More Things Change

Celebrating Sarah Palin’s patriotic withdrawal from public life at the ‘rents. Going through my exhaustive Spy collection. A sampling of headlines from the 1993 Most Loathsome People Issue:

2. The Clintons
4. Michael Jackson
10. Late Night Nutfest
13. NBC’s Death Wish
19. 1980s Undead
26. Great Britain, Basket Case
38. Pro-Death Pro-Lifers
44. The New York Time’s Desperate Attempts to Seem Hip
48. Barry Diller, Visionary
49. George Bush: Why Isn’t This Man in Jail (refers to 41)
58. Queers Like Us
60. Maureen Dowd, Dean of Journalism
78. Emoticons
89. Bret Pack
100. Madonna

youngmanhattanite:

This is a website about a fake show starring an fake actor (played by the actor Jason Schwartzman) who is a character in a movie about standup comedians.

And I asked like three weeks ago what was up with ‘Yo Teach’ and no one cared enough to help. Also! I would be impressed if they got IMDB to allow them to do a fake entry. But they did not.

Reblogged from Young Manhattanite

If so, sex—with an intern no less—would have been a reasonable escape.

Notes from a future Newser column. No, I’m not linking to it (via).

California issues IOUs for Tax Refunds

The governator wanted them to go out with a 1.5% rate and a redemption date of next year. Isn’t that inflation arbitrage? This is awesome. I’m going to send the Feds an IOU for my quarterly tax payment. I’ll let you know how it goes.

youngmanhattanite:

“‘Where everyone’s a loser,’ he blogged on a group Tumblr” he blogged on a group Tumblr. (Sorry)

This looks like the beginnings of a book deal! Recursions, Losers and Heebs: My Life in a Tumblr-hole.

Reblogged from Young Manhattanite
It’s entirely understandable that I read this as “Heebs and Spice and Everything Nice”, right? Right.

youngmanhattanite:

Let’s not lose sight of the real issue: Dan Abrams is still a shady motherfucker.

Is Mediadate ever going to launch?

Reblogged from Young Manhattanite

youngmanhattanite:

Actually, I thought this looked more like this thing. Cue unpaid media-critical hairsplitting.

Yeah, because access to the Gawker commenting community is of incalculable value. I do like the part where a lobbyist was complaining about the ethics. Which you should read as ‘a lobbyist was complaining about the price’.

Reblogged from Young Manhattanite

But you can say that there was a tiny part of Michael Jackson in quite a few children.

alexbalk:

“No one’s excusing Sanford’s behavior. But as we slog through another week of the Jackson postmortem-paloooza and wonder at the fact that we’re also still hearing about the South Carolina governor’s love for certain tan lines, maybe it’s worth asking ourselves why. Is it because we’re uncategorically appalled? Or is it because maybe, just maybe, there’s a tiny bit of Mark Sanford in, if not all men, quite a few of them? And that’s more than you can say of Michael Jackson.

Who is this person, and why are they so stupid? I’ll stop talking about Sanford when they start talking about impeaching him. Not before — and not because I pity him. And, yes, I made a Chappaquiddick joke when everyone thought Ted Kennedy was dying. Because, you know, Mary Jo Kopechne is still dead.

Reblogged from Alex Balk
Elmo *is* glad to see you!
Elmo *is* glad to see you!
Wait — what? You mean I spent all day on this for nothing? What do I look like, Andrew Sullivan?
Wait — what? You mean I spent all day on this for nothing? What do I look like, Andrew Sullivan?

There is no chance this will fail.

Swedish couple refuse to share the gender of their child because social expectations around gender might damage its psyche.

Soup is the new Foster.

youngmanhattanite:

(via madeupmemories)

…which makes Elizabeth the New Rachelle! (Westchester, anyone?)

I guess someone wasn’t in the 99th percentile on the analogy section of their SAT.

Reblogged from Young Manhattanite

youngmanhattanite:

“Honduran President Manuel Zelaya, removed from office Sunday in a military-led coup, addressed the U.N. General Assembly in New York on Tuesday and said he would fly back to Honduras on Thursday, accompanied by the head of the Organization of American States.”

Showdown Looms in Honduras: Rival Vows to Arrest Ousted President on His Return

Why the hell is the media calling what happened in Honduras a “military-led coup”?  The president was breaking the law.  His own Attorney General said so.  The Congress said so.  So did the Supreme Court.  Someone had to force him out, and it would seem that only the military had the actual ability to do so.

I don’t get it.

(via mikehudack)

Mike, the reason they call it a coup is because it was the military that ousted him (albeit with the full support of congress and the supreme court). The fact that Zelaya was trying to pull a Chavez is lost on the US media. Because the liberal media thinks the military is inherently evil or something like that, I dunno; ask Peter Feld.

Or maybe because the liberal media, you know, understands language. Gah, a quote from Wikipedia since I can’t get Tumblr to parse graves (or is that acutes?)

Linguistically, coup d’état denotes a “stroke of state” (French: coup [stroke] d’ [of] État [state]).[1] Analogously, the looser, quotidian usage means “gaining advantage on a rival”, (intelligence coup, boardroom coup). Politically, a coup d’état is (usually) violent political engineering, yet, is different from a revolution that effects radical change to the government (who rules), not to the form of the government (the political system). Tactically, a coup d’état involves control, by an active, minority of military usurpers, who block the remaining (non-participant) military’s possible defence of the attacked government, by either capturing or expelling the politico-military leaders, and seizing physical control of the country’s key government offices, communications media, and infrastructure.
Reblogged from Young Manhattanite