« Be still now and listen, for your chance may not come again. | Main | The Brakes On Their Truck Didn't Work »

Tuesday, November 27, 2012

Illiteracy In Defense Of The Constitution Is No Vice

My 3 regular readers (including my 1 AWOL troll) know that I hate how people glibly declare stuff 'unconstitutional'.  I guess now I also hate how they declare stuff 'constitutional' without, you know, being able to actually read what's actually in the actual Constitution.  But really, Electoral College...House of Representatives...what's the difference, anyway?

Truth be told, we've always had disagreements over the Constitution's meaning.  And we've fundamentally always had partisanship (well, perhaps better described as factionalization/sectionalism until the party system developed in earnest).  And we've always had crackpots.

Whilst researching House rule changes in 1842 that essentially got rid of filibustering in the chamber, I came across this tidbit in the Congressional Globe:

Bless their secesh hearts!  If only they'd had a website back then to submit their petitions so that "the government" could have more efficiently been able to indignantly frown upon them.

ntodd

November 27, 2012 in Constitution, Schmonstitution, Suffering Fools | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c525c53ef017c340bd143970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Illiteracy In Defense Of The Constitution Is No Vice:

Comments

Especially seeing your comments about Ron Paul and the Paulites:


The question of whether Congress had the power to annex Texas in any manner, and especially by joint resolution, would simply be “decided by the will” to do so. “The Constitution is a menstruous rag,” [John Quincy] Adams wrote in his diary in disgust, “and the Union is sinking into a military monarchy.,” The passage of the joint resolution consummated “ the heaviest calamity that ever befell me and my country.”

http://tinyurl.com/bsaabtq

I've come to see the constitution far less as the legal anchor of the United States than as a thing to be used the way so many people use scriptures, to create excuses to do what they really want to. I learned that from watching the "strict constructionists" on the Supreme Court. "Constitutionality" is largely a fiction, the pretense that the most nearly inerrant Founders were uniquely wise and good when history shows they were anything but. The cults of the Founders and the Constitution have been most widely asserted by the supporters of racial segregation and state nullification of the post-Civil War and other amendments that have made the rather awful Constitution tolerable.


Posted by: Anthony McCarthy | Nov 28, 2012 8:32:49 AM

Amen. Flawed people who disagreed on almost everything created a flawed document, and now flawed people try to tell us there's some monolithic meaning to the thing. Scalia and his Fake Originalists should be strapped to a chair and forced to listen to dramatic readings by Samuel L Jackson of the first few Congresses' records.

Posted by: NTodd Pritsky | Nov 28, 2012 10:26:42 AM

Those same ignoramuses that declare "stuff they don't like" unconstitutional will also call "people they don't like" communists or Nazis, depending on the phase of the moon.

I'm sure that a few years back they were doing the same with the term "poopy-head", with the same level of mature reflection and judgment.

We share 99% of our DNA with the chimps. And, it seems, lots more.

Posted by: Snarki, child of Loki | Nov 28, 2012 10:33:01 AM

'tis true, I like to fling my poo.

Posted by: NTodd Pritsky | Nov 29, 2012 10:10:06 PM

Post a comment