« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Constitution 090.

By: Moe Lane (Diary)  |  January 10th, 2011 at 01:00 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

There seems to be a little confusion – to be charitable about it – about precisely why the Republican party insisted on reading the Constitution out at the beginning of the 112th Congress. It’s not actually that complicated, really. It was because of idiots like this from the 111th Congress:

That’s Phil Hare from Illinois. If you can’t see the video: this fellow was so clueless about the US Constitution that he couldn’t tell where it ended and the Declaration of Independence began.  Which is embarrassing enough, but as Glenn Reynolds noted in passing elsewhere there were a lot of idiots in Congress who were demonstrating a similar lack of elementary understanding of the actually rather straightforward document that they were operating under.  And it wasn’t just legislators: the Volokh Conspiracy discovered this gem by Dana Milbank where Milbank quite relentlessly demonstrated that he knows less about the history of the suffrage movement than the people he’s sneering at.

That’s kind of the important part, really.  Milbank was outrageously outraged that the ‘original’ Constitution wasn’t read, because as he put it the ‘original’ Constitution “denied women the right to vote.”  Which is, of course, nonsense: the ‘original’ Constitution was silent on the right of women to vote, which is why fifteen states already had full suffrage by the time that the 19th Amendment was ratified.  More to the immediate point: the average Tea Partier already knows this – and I was unsurprised in the slightest that Milbank did not.  And that’s why the GOP had the document read aloud: because our chattering classes and the politicians on the Other Side think that they’re more educated on this subject than they actually are.  This was a quick remedial class, because the Republican party can’t actually make either group go back to school.

Will it work?  Probably not: but at least the Democrats and their allies no longer have the excuse of being able to claim that they were never told otherwise…

Moe Lane (crosspost)

Tags: , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • d_lamar

    We all know that most politicians for the past fifty years know anything at all about the US Constitution. And the sad part is that the electorate doesn’t care.

    All most people are interested in from their representatives is what can they do for them.

    The days are long gone when the government was there to protect us from foreign powers and provide basic services espoused in the Constitution. And I blame both parties for this ignorance among the people. Until the springing up of the Tea Party movement, most people had no idea or had ever heard of the 10th Amendment.

    The libs (I hope that is not considered hate speech) have succeeded in so dumbing down the education system that our population has no interest in the rule of law, whether Constitutional or otherwise, but just what can the government do to take care of them.

    God help us.

  • fpete13527

    Great psot Moe. Hare represents most of the Dem Party. Let’s also not forget this oldie but goodie from Pete “The Dem Socialist” Stark.

  • fpete13527
  • Wayne

    Yes, I am disappointed in myself for being so painfully irgnorate of the Constitution, founding documents, fathers and general political rational behind them and the people that contributed to their creation. I’m trying to make up for it now, by reading and collating all of this information I can get my hands on so that I can articulate to others in an unoffending way, why they are important and sacred documents.

    I was telling a friend the other day who had just decided to read the Constitution (soup to nuts) for similar reasons that the Constitution was written to protect us from ourselves with a clear understanding of human nature. Madison (who wrote the basic foundation of the document) did copious research on every republic in history that had existed up to his time so that he could understand why they succeeded and eventually failed. This was not a task taken lightly and today we can see why it is so important to our culture.

    Regards to all…

  • bobmontgomery

    Reflecting on how Republican leaders so often and so earnestly hold forth on the courage and the legacy of Martin Luther King and the value of his legacy for ….all Americans …..imagine the moment for the ages that could have happened had someone like, for example, James Clyburn, instead of boohooing “Let’s talk about slavery; let’s talk about slavery!”, could have mustered the dignity to rise and say, “Mr. Speaker, I would very much consider it an honor and a privilege to join with my fellow Congressmen in respecting the Constitution by offering to read the …(have you guessed yet?)………….Tenth Amendment.

  • izoneguy

    http://realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/01/10/rep_clyburn_reading_of_the_constitution_egged_on_conduct_of_az_shooting.html

    WHAT A DISGRACE CLYBURN IS TO REP. GIFFORDS

  • http://www.flaliberty.org scorpio0679

    I read his “article” in the Washington Post that you linked. What an idiot. He equates redacting superseded portions of the Constitution with the “living breathing document” method of interpretation.

    How is it possible to equate changing the meaning of the Constitution through pure conjecture (because its meaning changes with the times . . . and only judges can tell us at any given time what it means) to changing the meaning of the Constitution by RATIFICATION OF AMENDMENTS (the method of change ingrained in the original document itself??).

    Again, proof not only of his ignorance, but of his stupidity.

  • edwyrd

    freedom of speech, freedom of the press. there is no doubt in my mind that even after being shot she would not condone censorship of any kind

  • http://www.theprecinctproject.wordpress.com ColdWarrior

    you will take the next step: action. I hope you will seek out and attend your local Republican committee meeting and find out about how to become a “voting member” of the Republican Party so you can become “part of the problem,” so to speak. You know, part of “the Republican Party” we all complain about for not being conservative enough but about which too many of us, sadly, do nothing about other than talk and write.

    If we want to change the Party (and thereby change the outcome of the elections), we conservatives have to get inside the Party itself. It’s not hard to do and only takes a little bit of time. And the “powers that be” have been very effective in keeping you in the dark about how to become a member of the Party and why it’s so vitally important that you do so. Why do they hide this? It’s in their self-interest to do so. They like holding the reins of power just fine.

    Please go to my little blog linked below if you’d like to learn more.

    Thank you.

    For Liberty,

    ColdWarrior

  • Wayne

    continue to study the Constitution and our founding principles. I’m afraid I abandoned the Republican Party for the Constitutional Party for obvious reasons. I voted party for principal for many years, now I vote conscious because of the principle.

    I understand the perception that gaining control of the Republican Party by true conservatives will return the it to its conservative roots. But have lost all confidence in politicians of the conservative bent. Rhetoric no longer moves me. I will vote Republican if I believe the Republican candidate is trustworthy and Constitutionally minded. The political elite have to “earn” my trust and vote again.

    I will visit your site and learn what there is to learn there.

    Respectfully,

  • itrytobenice

    Dana Milbank doesn’t have the right to look down his nose at *anyone*. The man is so utterly uninformed as to be willfully blind. No one could be so ignorant in his position unless they simply didn’t want to know or acknowledge the truth.

    And Congresscritter Hare has no business taking an oath to uphold a document he doesn’t know or care about.