Skip to comments.WashPo's Ezra Klein Says We Can't Understand The Constitution- Written Too Long Ago
Posted on 12/30/2010 10:56:42 PM PST by JLWORK
Via Michelle Malkin:
Heres a good piece by Doug Powers, commenting on the Washington Posts Ezra Kleins belief that the Constitution isnt understandable because it was written over one hundred years ago. Youve got to see this video, if you havent already:
Where do these journalistic jamokes like Klein come from, anyway? Who hires them? Who needs them? I can read even the English that was written a few centuries ago really. But heres what Ezra says on MSNBCs The Daily Rundown regarding the Republicans intention to read the entire Constitution aloud after the new Congress is sworn in:
Q: Is this a gimmick??
A: Yes, its a gimmick. I mean, (laughs), you can say two things about it. One is it has no binding power on anything, and then, two, the issue of the Constitution is not that people dont read the text and think theyre following. The issue of the Constitution is that the text is confusing because it was written more than a hundred years ago and what people believe it says differs from person to person, and differs depending on what they want to get done. So, I wouldnt have expect too much coming out of this.
Hey, Ezra. Listen to me, man. Ive read the darned thing a few times, myself. I dont have any trouble understanding it. The language is as clear and precise as it can be. In fact, Ezra, I think that the clarity is a work of beauty and genius.
So, whats wrong with Ezra? What is it he thinks that we regular working schmucks cant understand in the Constitution?
As Powers points out, the entire document is what- six pages in length? When was the last time in history a Republic like this one was constructed on a sixpage blueprint?
Maybe Ezra is related to some higher-up at the Post or at MSNBC. Tell you what. I dont know how he got his job, or how he keeps it with stupidity like this. I wouldnt hire this guy to flip burgers. I dont think hes qualified.
Maybe you can’t understand it, little man; but WE sure can.
Breathaking ignorance or totalitarian arrogance, take your pick.
I can’t help but think of the small fiasco of Obama’s swearing in, which was all Roberts’ fault, BTW, but no matter. Maybe it was some kind of omen. It is curious that they thought it prudent to adhere so punctiliously to the letter of the Constitution on this particular point.
I pick “All of the above.”
Um excuse me what?!?!?!
Um excuse me what?!?!?!
He must have missed the "supreme law of the land" part.
I think when he said it had no binding power...he was referring to the upcoming house period and how the reading would have no effect.
To some degree, that is correct. The guys will meet and still pass legislation that does not meet Constitutional requirements. Both parties will do it, and we will simply look on as it being ‘entertainment’ and nothing better.
Occam’s Razor says the problem lies with you, Ezra. You’re just stupid.
Unless there are two Ezra Kleins, he is indeed the one who started JList. No conservatives need apply.
But that's the problem... it is just not long enough. A proper Constitution we could all understand should be at least 2000 pages with plenty of “Whereas”es and “At the Secretary’s Discretion” clauses to fully clarify matters.
The recently passed Health Care Bill is a good example of the format a truly modern, understandable Constitution should take, dontcha think Mr. Klein?
You, sir, are absolutely correct. The US Constitution is amazing in its simplicity and brevity. It was written so that it could be easily understood by everyone. Except, it seems, liberals.
I guess this thinking should apply to leases and contracts too.
What an idiot. But the problem here is that this kind of crap is actually being taught in schools and kids today will grow up believing it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.