Look, the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights is like a trumpet. It is a gorgeous shiny precision instrument made from the convolutions, curves, and turnings of fine materials. There are sliding devices for tuning and refinement of the tone as influenced by the circumstances, and there are pistons used in various combinations at various opportunities to hit the note called for at any moment; resulting in potentially exquisite and exhilarating music!

Our government is that good and that repectfully designed. Is it the perfect instrument? ...Is there such a thing?

But there is one more feature that matters, and is not so commonly considered as important: the spit valve.

It is extremely important to use the spit valve when the trumpet is in constant use. Not doing so prevents the best players from performing at their best! The "King of the United States" concept, is the United States' spit valve. It is a cleaning mechanism, to be used only when needed, in order to discharge the undesirable body fluid that has accumulated through prolonged, sloppy usage.

But, you say, you do not want a king. You do not want that kind of totalitarian, monolithic governing body. "As a king, an individual could seize everything and take control of everything."

I would argue, I (as your King) am not the one who is scary. It is the current trends, and the current repitition of patterns of failure which is genuinely scary.

I will tell you what I will NOT do as your king: I will not continue this seemingly unending trend of examining and scrutinizing for any avenue of taxing your money out of your pocket and into the governments. I will not impede private business as it seeks solutions to national predicaments. I will not sell off our assets to foreign interests simply because it makes me rich. I will not nationalize the airline, transportation, energy, and healthcare industries. And I will not wait for the Arab nations to solve our domestic energy and financial problems.

Energy - crisis #1.

Look, we haven't had a sensible energy policy IN MY LIFETIME! A significant portion of the population has been pursuing a course of madness intentionally, almost antagonistically; almost taking a stance of defiance against common sense and goodwill. Listen, If you own a Hummer, you're mad. You're a nut. Don't worry, I don't want your vote! I don't want to be associated with your segment of the population. You're the problem. You're why we need to drill in ANWAR, not George Bush. We didn't go into Iraq for oil, George Bush didn't go into Iraq for oil -- but you did. You put us there. Thanks. I'm comfortable with the image of you with your head in your hands weeping at the gas pump. I actually had a fool at a cocktail party screaming in my face that "by not voting for John Kerry, I wanted to ruin the pristine sanctuary which is (supposedly) ANWAR". He owned an SUV...in the city of uber-flat Chicago...not the mountains. And he had no children. His gas guzzling SUV was simply a status symbol, and an inability of his mind to perceive any alternative, except what was trendy. He's yelling at me; it's amazing. It's not George Bush -- It's the guys like him!...Fine, I'll fix it!

Let me hit on a bit of a tangent: Chris Mathews (MSNBC), you are an idiot. You are completely retarded. I will never ever forget my jaw hitting the floor when I watched you interview Ralph Nader, and you ridiculed him for considering a run for the presidency though he didn't own a car. For you, that was inconceivable. Owning a car in your mind, apparently, is the fundamental prerequisite for eligibility in any office of leadership, character, and vision. You ridiculed him for this. You are ridiculous, fundamentally ridiculous. I have everything which is the complete opposite of respect for you. You are the lamest thing in the US. You are the worst kind of election ruining bullshit. You're a man with a spot of influence who is full of it and himself, and has his head so far up his ass that our nation should consider imprisonment for sucking. That would give us remedy from your presence. Since you just don't get it whatsoever, let me explain; we WANT a president who doesn't drive! OK, hooray for Al Gore for scaring everyone into caring about the carbon issues, but that little mega-hypocrite "drives" -- boy, does he ever "drive". The president or candidate who doesn't just TALK conservation, but actually practices it willingly, on their own, as a course of sacrifice, is in an entirely different league from the Gores, the Kerrys, the Bushes, clintons and Obamas..

It isn't always possible not to have a car. Where it isn't, the modes of public transportation must make enormous leaps. We want this! More importantly, we need this. There are many situations in this nation, however, where it isn't necessary to own a car. In this situation, the person who doesn't possess a private gas burner is brave and commendable. Qualities Chrissy Mathews can't grasp.

Myself, I have owned one car thus far. I no longer have it. There came a time when I felt I could do without it -- and I made that sacrifice. I'm proud of it. An effective king (or even president) will need to be in tune with the reality of what is happening to us, and what we as individuals will need to do to respond to a global competition that isn't going to give us free lunches or even peanut-snacks.

~ "BUT - BUT, THIS WHOLE KING SCHEME VIOLATES THE CONSTITUTION AND THE BILL OF RIGHTS!" ~

Well, when did that begin to matter? Sorry for the sarcasm, but its too late to pretend it is an uholy practice to meddle with our foundational texts.

Speaking of "unholy"; the Bill of Rights article 1 protects the right to free exercise of religion. (verbatim: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof") Not freedom FROM religion - NOT the luxory of never having to see a cross or such symbol in any public venue. QUITE THE OPPOSITE!! And the prohibition on "establishment" of religion literally defines the MAKING OF LAWS regarding such establishment - NOT the utter ban of occurrances of religion and other such hysterical concerns.

Article 2 provides pure and simple: "the right of the people to keep and bear arms"...What can you not grasp about that Obama? Where's the nuance?? This article is already institutionally violated in Washington, New Orleans, Chicago, etc.

Article 3 prohibits the government from using private homes as quarters for soldiers without the consent of the owners. Is not some contemporary attrocities of "Eminent Domain" practises little more than seizing your home as refuge for soldiers of private commerce?

I want alcaeda dessimated too, but it IS uncomfortable to see Article 4, guarding against "searches, arrests, and seizures of property without a specific warrant or a "probable cause" trampled. Lets just fullfill repectfully the "probable cause" part, OK?

Article 6 guarantees a speedy public trial for criminal offenses....But ONLY for the accussed, I guess. Not for the jurors...or the victims...or the witnesses. They must put up with WHATEVER obstructionism/crawl forward an unethical defense can imagine...Is that really how the trial system was suppossed to function?

And article 7 assures PUBLIC TRIAL BY JURY...Unless you want satisfaction from the banks, or other large brutal institutions that have buried fine print in all their contracts limiting you to "arbitration" in a NON PUBLIC COURT! Isn't that lovely for them?

Article 8 forbids excessive bail or fines...Ever got a speeding ticket in Maryland, a parking ticket in downtown Chicago? Ever have a fine slapped on you by the IRS? Please, this article means nothing to anyone in government; It might as well not be there.

Article 10 provides that powers that the Constitution does not delegate to the United States and does not prohibit the States from exercising, are "reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." ...Now, this endowment of powers "to the people" is FULLY barriered at the level of local government. In other words, YOU have NO inherent rights; if Washington doesn't control it, and your state doesn't control it, then your local government does. NO "POWER" whatsoever "are reserved" in your "castle". Be assured of that...Maybe its best, maybe not - but it is truth.

Then in our more recent foundational-text "updates", we enjoyed article 16, (Authorizes unapportioned federal taxes on income. )...Now THIS one is taken seriously, and at its word! And is practised zealously! ...Yippee.

- In fact, from 1910-1919 "we the people" got THREE amendments to the constitution: INCOME TAXES, ALCOHOL PROHIBITION, and 17th amendment disabling some states rights...Lets just negate that whole decade and try again! We ALREADY came to our senses with the alcohol part.

And be prepared for more perversions! The Constitution sec. 9 declares, "No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State". Well...then Al Gore invented the internet - and they've just GOT to fix that prohibition now, and they intend to.

And surely there must be something somewhere regarding an obligation of government to defend our borders?

...So don't sweat it that a KING would violate the founding father's beautiful frameworks. They're already quite beat up. Ironicly, a good King might be the only speedy way to RESTORE the broken and dismantled framework.

KING DAVID CAUL for KING OF THE UNITED STATES!