February 27, 2012

a post in which I ask our Constitution directly how it feels about the way the Democrats in general, and this Administration in particular, seem to treat it

me: “So. Maybe it’s not my place to say this, but –”

The Constitution: “– Yeah, I know. That’s the last time I go for one of these fast-talking, Tweedy, metrosexual types. I mean, not even a phone call? Really…?”**

Posted by Jeff G. @ 3:07pm

Comments (47)

  1. These people are shameless. They no longer even pretend there are restraints on their whims.

  2. How soon before the Band-Aid gap becomes a crisis?

  3. “How soon before the Band-Aid gap becomes a crisis?”

    I think that’s slated to follow the circumcision crisis, but before the Tampax crisis.

  4. By the way, h/t JD

  5. I actually prefer this method on their part. The fact that they aren’t even pretending that what they are doing is constitutional is refreshing in a “we’re doomed” way.

  6. By the way, a large majority of Democrats believe Obamacare unconstitutional.

    They just support it anyway.

    These people are shameless. They no longer even pretend there are restraints on their whims.

    Yes. You can reduce anything from a revered, formative prominence into complete scorned shit if you try long and hard enough. I believe that Goldstein fellow has yet to be proved anything but prescient in this observation. It’s central to the pathology that is leftism.

    So what do you do? You wake and grow the hell up and stop giving the left any place at the table. Instead of the other way around, our tragic post modern status quo.

  7. Saw a bumper sticker on Saturday that read “The Bill of Rights is not an a la carte menu.” I laughed, though I couldn’t help but suspect it probably belonged to somebody who believed that Bush was the Fuhrer back in the day.

  8. The Constitution says it feels like a dirty, dirty tart.

  9. Went to a CLE on Friday re “Popular Constitutionalism”. One of the learned law professors ended his remarks on Obamacare saying that he believed health care was a right and he didn’t want to have to search through the Constitution to find it. Would not have believed it but for the fact that I heard it with my own lying ears.

  10. Well, the entire legal class, from Red’s Con Law professor (professing what, exactly —make it up as you go?) to the Nine have been pimping it out like a common streetwalker.

  11. I left a comment this morning, on another website which shall remain nameless. My basic point was, if you have a poll asking people if they THINK mandates are unconstitutional or not, you’re starting with the wrong premise. Either it’s in the document or it’s not, and whether any of us, including Romney and the Supremes, THINK it’s in there or isn’t in there is automatically assuming we have a right to decide whether it’s in there or not. Which is how we get these screwed up S.C. opinions in the first place.

  12. OTOH, Eizabeth Price Foley also spoke. It was clear that she gets the Tea Party and its popular constitutional principles.
    I was able to speak to her and welcome her to the belly of the beast. She wasn’t quite sure of the welcome she’d be receiving.

  13. He believes it’s a right? So it’s faith based, then?

  14. My padre just got around to distributing the bishops letter on the mandate yesterday. Its a pretty strongly worded doc. He said that he didn’t realize that the mandate included all employers, even Catholic ones.

    Anyway local lefty Catholic was in charge of the bulletins, so we found the pile of letters in one of the front pews no one sits in.

  15. Yup, Pablo. He prefaced it with a comment that he didn’t believe the Constitution defined being an American. My chin still has a bruise from when it hit the floor. I’ve been waiting to cool down before challenging him on that comment. He also compared the Tea Party to the American Liberty League of 1936 and FDR’s using it as a foil instead of the Supreme Court (as commonly believed). He commented that “perhaps ‘we’ should do the same thing with the Tea Party” instead of going after the Republicans.

  16. Don’t we have to stand back now and then to marvel that the government has been put into the hands of abject morons?

    It really is remarkable.

  17. Jeff, you would have enjoyed being there (assuming your head didn’t explode). Lots of discussion of linguistics and narratives. Best conservative professor’s comment was that the meaning of words at the time of drafting the Constitution were facts, not narratives. Good example: today, domestic violence generally means abuse within a relationship. Back then, it meant rebellion within a state.
    Accordingly, any attempt to interpret the Constitution with today’s meanings is simply dishonest as compared to originalism.

  18. sdferr, what scares me is that the associates I may hire have all been propagandized taught with this Weltanschauung.

  19. So it’s faith based, then?

    What else can penumbras and emanations be except the outward signs of an inward faith?

  20. PublicPolicyPolling ? @ppppolls
    Our Monday only numbers in Michigan: Santorum 39, Romney 34, Paul 15, Gingrich 10
    Our combined 2 night tracking numbers in Michigan: Santorum 38, Romney 37, Paul 14, Gingrich 9
    Our Monday only numbers of people who didn’t already vote in Michigan: Santorum 41, Romney 31, Paul 16, Gingrich 9

  21. also from PPP
    Romney leads among Republicans in Michigan. It’s Democrats putting Santorum over the top. We’ll see if they really show up
    Operation Copy Rush Democrats or Good God that Obama is a Socialist Democrats?

  22. I’d guess a bit of both, giving the edge to the Good God that Obama is a Socialist Tool Democrats.

    Taranto hit on that in today’s Best of the Web.

    The survey, conducted by Gallup, included two samples of registered voters: 1,137 from a dozen “swing states,” all of which Obama carried in 2008, and another 881 nationwide. The swing states included six that George W. Bush carried twice (Colorado, Florida, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio and Virginia), three that Bush carried once (Iowa, New Hampshire and New Mexico), and three that last went Republican in 1988 or earlier (Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin).

    The findings: Santorum leads Obama in the swing states, 50% to 45%, and nationwide 49% to 46%. This gives him an edge of three percentage points over Romney, whose swing-state lead is 48% to 46% and who ties the president nationally at 47%.

    To be sure, this is only one poll, and the election is still more than eight months off. One possible explanation is that voters are less unfavorably disposed toward Santorum because they don’t know him as well as they know Romney, and that once they learn how hard-core the former senator is on social issues, they’d bolt for Obama if Santorum becomes the nominee.

    Writing in BusinessWeek, Bloomberg columnist Clive Crook offers another explanation for Santorum’s appeal, while also arguing that it is limited by social issues:

    Santorum combines this proletarian stance–unusual in a hard-right conservative–with more familiar elements of GOP populism: patriotism, reverence for family, hard work and self-reliance, hostility to big government, and proud religiosity (to a fault, in his case). If not for the extremism on sexual politics, it would be a potent blend even beyond the Republican Party’s social-conservative core.

  23. Me: Man, I didn’t even know you had ankles to bend over and grab.

    The Constitution: Yeah…they’re down around Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3. Seems like for the last three years I’ve been forced to grab those ankles every 15 minutes. And, dude, the progressives don’t bother with lube.

  24. There is a 112 page pdf of crosstabs on that PPP poll here.

  25. There are some interesting things in it and also by comparing it to the one from last week’s crosstabs.

    The Dem participation in the Repub. primary has gone from 5% to 8% and the [D] that are supporting Santorum went from 1% of the total vote (20% of 5%) to 4% (52% of 8%) but that jump is only of those who are voting in Tuesday the early vote has him in last place among the crossover [D] voters (page 93)

  26. Lamont!!!

    Where ya been ya big dummy?

  27. Hey Danger. I’ve been lurking I guess. I can’t even get to this joint on my company lap top. Apparently you guys are all horribly offensive or something. I bought a new fangled thinking box (personal lap top), and my old password here wouldn’t work. Jeff re-jiggered the site, and I sneaked past the bouncer.

    Lol. Plus, with all the trolls gone, it’s better I let all you smart folk talk, and just nod my head.

    Serious about that. The depth of conversation and sharing of thought in the threads around here over the last few months has been pretty spectacular.

  28. Then you prolly heard we lost BJTex about 2 months ago.

    I did get to meet JD at the memorial though.
    Hope it won’t require anymore casualties to smoke the rest of you crackers out;)

  29. Jesus, no. I missed that entirely. I just read BJ’s post on Dan’s site, and Jeff’s post and everybody’s comments.

    The world sometimes seems to get awful small in the window these days.

  30. My wife and I got to meet BJ and his wife last summer. She initially thought it odd that I’d want to meet someone I knew from a website.

    But after he recieved his final marching orders she suggested we go to the memorial without any prompting from me.

    BJ was a great man!

  31. G’nite all,


  32. I’m glad you & the better half met him (& his wife) while he was up & running, and glad you, your wife & JD were there in the end. For a supposedly “political web site” this place has always been pretty goddamn unique.

    And I’m glad to know he was celebrated and loved by those that knew him. Even by people he never personally knew. Those with he just shared his insightful opinions, great sense of humor, & funny ass back-and-forth around here.

  33. @ppppolls just tweeted – 55% of Santorum Democrats in Michigan like him, 40% don’t. Looks like mix between sincere votes and Operation Hilarity

    @ppppolls “55% of Santorum Democrats in Michigan like him” should have sphincters tightening in WH. If battle is in MI, WI, PA Obama loses

  34. Heh. I prefer to just keep it simple motionview.

    I.e.: Obama loses.

  35. Article on Democrats voting in Michigan [R] primary.

  36. I liked towards the end, when questioned about Band-Aids, where she basically said they wanted to go much further, and that this was a starting point. Maybe she meant something else, but given her words, that seemed to me what she was saying.

  37. Santorum combines this proletarian stance–unusual in a hard-right conservative–with more familiar elements of GOP populism: patriotism, reverence for family, hard work and self-reliance, hostility to big government,

    i’m confuzzled is santorum a big gov’t guy or not?

  38. Q: So why don’t we provide free access to Band-Aids and cancer screenings? Why is it contraception? Aren’t those more important to health care than contraception? [Applause]

    HOCHUL: Well, clearly more work needs to be done … [laughter]

  39. Pablo, I forgot to mention that the session opened with our worthless junior senator, Seldom Righthouse, railing against the Citizens United case. Funny thing, he never once mentioned that unions are corporations,too.

  40. The first time I saw Shelly take the floor was a double facepalm moment. He was arguing in favor of embryonic stem cell research funding by pulling heartstrings over the case of a very sick Westerly girl whose life was miraculously saved by an autologous stem cell transplant.

    We’re so embarrassing. But on the bright side, did you catch the WPRI poll on Cicilline?

  41. Need any more evidence that Joe Biden is an idiot?

    Justice Whitehouse? Biden floated the idea

  42. Ha! I love the smell of roasting RINO in the morning.

  43. geoffb says February 28, 2012 at 12:28 am

    Article on Democrats voting in Michigan [R] primary.

    Can somebody explain to me why the taxpayers have to subsidize this lunacy?

    And why the parties don’t realize how fucked this system is?

  44. Really stand up for people being crushed under a theocratic dictatorship? Not so much:

    “So now, at this pivotal point in time, it is up to the countries of the free world to make up their mind,” states the opposition memo dated Nov. 30, 2009. “Will they continue on the track of wishful thinking and push every decision to the future until it is too late, or will they reward the brave people of Iran and simultaneously advance the Western interests and world peace.”

  45. Amy Winehouse woudl have been a smarter option than Sheldon Whitehouse.

  46. is santorum a big gov’t guy or not?

    I would describe Santorum’s views this way: Government created the problem, so government is going to have to play a role in fixing it. Not because gov’t is the only solution, (how liberals think), but because so much damage has been done to all the old subsidiary institutions (the family unit, churches, charitable organizations etc.), that you can’t abolish the social-welfare state and expect things to get better in the newly created vacuum.

    I think Santorum’s idea here is that we replace government programs that don’t work (except to create more dependency on government —and thus grow the gov’t) with programs that rebuild and strengthen the social capital found in those old subsidiary institutions so we can get gov’t out of peoples lives. Then we start eliminating programs as the need for them shrinks.

    Think of Santorum’s program as a new cancer drug that shrinks government tumors.

  47. Seriously, the only oath I’ve taken as an Anerican was to support and defend the Constitution. That part of the oath comes BEFORE obeying the orders on the CiC and my officers, which tells me it supercedes the latter. If the President and his bunch are shredding and/or ignoring the Constitution, don’t they qualify as enemies of the Constitution? Follow that out to it’s logical cnclusion…