Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Liberals Understand The Constitution Like Justin Bieber Understands Particle Physics
Townhall.com ^ | April 28, 2014 | Kurt Schlichter

Posted on 04/28/2014 4:28:13 AM PDT by Kaslin

Based upon Justice Sotomayor’s bizarre dissenting opinion in the recent Michigan affirmative action case, it seems she believes that government decisions made on the basis of race, something the Constitution expressly bars, are mandatory.

Someone has been emanating her penumbras because, to use the legal term of art, that’s Constitutional Crazy Talk.

Years ago, the liberals came up with the Political Process Doctrine. It’s the idea that if some small element of a state or local government – like a city council or a university board – is implementing policies liberals like, the people can’t use the ballot box to change things back.

It ought to be called the “Ratchet Doctrine.” You are free to make things more liberal to your bleeding heart’s content. You just can’t ever undo them. It’s right there in the Constitution. Somewhere. Maybe in the paragraph before the one that says you can have an abortion up until your fetus can drive.

Liberals like to call the Constitution a “living document.” Oh, how many activists in robes cite that mind-bogglingly misguided metaphor as they turn a foundational document into a kind of political Mad Lib where they scribble nonsense into blanks that don’t exist?

In fact, the Constitution is dead, dead as a doorknob. It has to be. Otherwise, it’s not a constitution.

The Constitution is designed not to change with the times, not to yield the ancient wisdom that flows through it to the faux-wisdom of the present. It is the foundation of our system, not something to be causally disregarded every time some politician who thinks he’s smarter than James Madison gets a bright idea.

It ensures a stable society where firm political principles keep political actors in check. This, in turn, creates legitimacy. We Americans take legitimacy for granted. Want to know what happens when you forsake legitimacy in favor of petty expedience? You end up like most of the rest of the world. Go ask a vet about how that works out – many of us have spent years in foreign lands full of mass graves cleaning up the bloody detritus of illegitimacy.

That a Supreme Court justice has such a fundamental misunderstanding of the Constitution’s purpose is alarming. She repeats the phrase “race matters” throughout her 58-page dissent, as if hackneyed clichés worthy of some third-tier MSNBC panelist constitute legal reasoning.

No, race doesn’t matter. That’s the point of our Constitution.

Sotomayor just didn’t like that the Constitution allows people to vote to undo liberal failures, so she simply invented a prohibition on doing so. Under her “constitution,” you are allowed to vote for any policy she and her liberal pals approve of. You can just never vote against one because…well, pretty much just because she says so.

To be charitable, it’s not a particularly coherent legal opinion. One can’t be sure Sotomayor was drinking when she wrote it, but one hopes she was because at least then she’d have an excuse.

Where liberals don’t totally ignore what the Constitution says, they add asterisks, each one qualifying and circumscribing a fundamental right. The right to freely exercise your religion? The right to speak freely? Those are totally, absolutely, completely inalienable!*

*That is, unless we liberals decide you shouldn’t exercise your religion or express yourself in the way you want.

You’ll hear a lot from liberal jurists and their quarter-wit cheerleaders in the pundit and social media worlds about how we have to interpret rights “reasonably.”

No, no, no, no, no.

That is utterly and completely wrong. The whole point of listing a right within our Constitution’s Bill of Rights is that it’s beyond discussion, meaning some bureaucrat cannot infringe upon it because his pea-brain has decided that it makes sense to do so. What’s a “reasonable” exercise of religion or “reasonable” speech? Constitutionally, the question makes no sense. Liberals hate that they can’t “reason” our rights down to a tiny nub that’s too small to interfere with their dreams of power and control.

Rights aren’t a favor the government extends to us in its wise benevolence. Our rights existed in us from the moment of our creation, and they are inalienable. The Bill of Rights is not there to list for us what rights we have been granted. It’s to provide the government with a partial list of our fundamental rights and to warn it to keep its grubby mitts off them.

The only thing worse than seeing things within the Constitution which aren’t there is refusing to see things that manifestly are. Only liberals can look at an amendment reading “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” and see blank parchment.

That windy hack John Paul Stevens is back, making the rounds proposing an awesome solution for the “problem” with the Second Amendment. The problem to liberals, of course, is that it ensures that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Stevens’ solution is to amend the Second Amendment to nullify it, and at least his current campaign seeks to change the Constitution the right way – by amendment. Of course, he’s only doing that because his reflexive liberal attempt to impose a “reasonability” test on this fundamental right, and thus transform it from a right into a privilege, failed.

The mainstream media loves the idea of a former Supreme Court justice railing against flyover state rubes presuming to exercise rights without the permission of their liberal urban betters. But having this elderly jurist on television, even while being tossed the softest of softballs, is doing him no favor. It’s painfully clear that Justice Stevens is utterly ignorant of the last two decades of detailed and careful legal scholarship on the Second Amendment’s origins and history. It’s frankly embarrassing to see him on a public platform when he clearly has no idea what he’s talking about.

While we can forgive Stevens, we should not be so charitable about those still on the bench who either do not understand, or do not care about, our Constitution. Our Constitution, and the legitimacy it fosters, have created a uniquely just and stable society. Let’s not throw that away just to check off a few items from the progressive bucket list.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS: johnpaulstevens; liberals; livingconstitution

1 posted on 04/28/2014 4:28:14 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Judges, even on the Supreme Court, can be impeached.


2 posted on 04/28/2014 4:32:07 AM PDT by Former Proud Canadian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The hated EXEMPT Congress and the EXEMPT SCOTUS
are ONLY EXEMPT because of their violations of
the Constitution and Law.

America with all Equal under the Law is DEAD.


3 posted on 04/28/2014 4:33:25 AM PDT by Diogenesis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
We should not be so charitable about those still on the bench who either do not understand, or do not care about, our Constitution.

While this column is accurate, it misses the fact that Scotus has amended the constitution dozens of times, such that the written constitution is not the supreme law. No, the supreme law is embodied in our Frankenstein Constitution.

4 posted on 04/28/2014 4:50:04 AM PDT by Jacquerie (By their oaths, it is the duty of state legislators to invoke Article V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Sotomayor's statement that AA is still needed because racism still exists is a non-sequitur. It's like saying the government needs your property because someone else doesn't have a home. Your answer is: so what? Why do you have to take my land because somebody else is homeless?

In short, she and her leftist allies have no pertinent point to make. What they want is simply to get more people who look and act like them into positions they are not qualified for. Like Sotomayor.

5 posted on 04/28/2014 4:57:38 AM PDT by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Liberals Understand The Constitution Like Justin Bieber Understands Particle Physics

Kurt is all wrong. The UNDERSTAND the Constitution and have been using the "nuances" in it to destroy it for decades.

Okay, maybe he didn't write the headline. But. Any assertion that those devils don't understand what they are doing is naive at best.

6 posted on 04/28/2014 5:04:29 AM PDT by raybbr (Obamacare needs a death panel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Pretty unfair to Beiber. I don’t recall he ever made any claim to understand physics.


7 posted on 04/28/2014 5:07:57 AM PDT by wastoute (Government cannot redistribute wealth. Government can only redistribute poverty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Former Proud Canadian
Liberals Understand The Constitution Like Justin Bieber Understands Particle Physics

Liberals(socialists/communists)understand our Constitution is a big impediment to their agenda.
For success, they have to eliminate or erode at least 3 things.
-The constitution- the family- and personal property rights.

And you can see this attempted erosion on a daily basis now, in all 3 areas.-tom

8 posted on 04/28/2014 5:10:37 AM PDT by Capt. Tom (Don't confuse U.S. citizens and Americans. They are not necessarily the same. -tom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jacquerie
Actually the way I understand it is not the SCOTUS that amends the constitution but Congress

Source 1

Source 2

Source 3

Source 4

9 posted on 04/28/2014 5:15:29 AM PDT by Kaslin (He needed the ignorant to reelect him, and he got them. Now we all have to pay the consequenses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: raybbr

Read the title again and then think about it. He is exactly right. That does not mean the rats don’t know what they are doing.


10 posted on 04/28/2014 5:18:27 AM PDT by Kaslin (He needed the ignorant to reelect him, and he got them. Now we all have to pay the consequenses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Why would you need to “understand” something you believe is blocking progress?


11 posted on 04/28/2014 5:44:01 AM PDT by ThePatriotsFlag ("There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide." - Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The payoff line:
“Liberals hate that they can’t “reason” our rights down to a tiny nub that’s too small to interfere with their dreams of power and control.”

Cha-Ching! We have a winner!


12 posted on 04/28/2014 5:47:07 AM PDT by PubliusMM (RKBA; a matter of fact, not opinion. 01-20-2016; I pray we make it that long.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wastoute

Nor did he ever use physics, when convenient, to justify imposing legal policy on other citizens.


13 posted on 04/28/2014 5:49:04 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: PubliusMM

Liberals, being evolutionary humanists, assume that the “elite” of today far surpass in morality and intellect, anyone that has existed before,

and therefore shouldn’t be restrained by the writings and laws written in the past.

Reminds me of the monkey whacking Simba on the head with a stick. Simba asks what that was for, and the baboon responds with “it doesn’t matter, it was in the past!”


14 posted on 04/28/2014 5:51:25 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin; 2A Patriot; 2nd amendment mama; 4everontheRight; 77Jimmy; A Strict Constructionist; ...
Just a quick reminder ping. linda graham voted for Justice Sotomayor's nomination to SCOTUS.

South Carolina Ping
Send FReepmail to join or leave this list.

Keep up with what our Congresscritters (House and Senate) are doing. Sign up for the free MegaVote email service here.

15 posted on 04/28/2014 6:07:05 AM PDT by upchuck (Support ABLE, the Anybody But Lindsey Effort. Yes, we are the ABLE!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Wow - Sonya sure looks like lumpy potatoes in that picture!


16 posted on 04/28/2014 6:08:24 AM PDT by KosmicKitty (WARNING: Hormonally crazed woman ahead!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Capt. Tom
Cap, it wouldn't be so bad if all it was just "attempts" to erode freedom. The problem is that they are succeeding in eroding your freedoms on a daily basis, beyond their wildest dreams.

Just look at two recent events of "racism" involving Clive Bundy and the owner of the Clippers. I am not getting into whether or not these men made "racist" statements or hold "racist" views. I don't really care if they do or not.

Let's assume they do hold these views, and they express them. So what? Have the thoughtcrime statutes been passed? Is free speech illegal? And, what should the punishment be for such a crime? Loss of all rights and property, of course.

Truly, the United States has descended into a perfect hell of political correctness run amok. Say the wrong thing and lose everything.

The question is, why haven't Louis Farakhan, Jesse Jackson, Snoop? Dog?, Obama, Holder, Al Sharpton and on and on lost everything?

17 posted on 04/28/2014 6:11:52 AM PDT by Former Proud Canadian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Leftists DO understand the Constitution...and why they utterly hate and despise that sacred document.

Why do they reject the Constitution? It does not allow them to transform America to their communist “utopia”.


18 posted on 04/28/2014 6:13:50 AM PDT by newfreep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KosmicKitty

She sure does


19 posted on 04/28/2014 6:20:16 AM PDT by Kaslin (He needed the ignorant to reelect him, and he got them. Now we all have to pay the consequenses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: newfreep
Leftists DO understand the Constitution...and why they utterly hate and despise that sacred document.

That is true. Thinking about the way the Constitution is stored and venerated at the DC National Archives building, it makes me think that one day the people of this country will protect and defend the words of the Constitution they way it is protected and defended in the bullet and bomb-proof enclosure filled with nitrogen.

Just a thought but wouldn't that be nice?

20 posted on 04/28/2014 6:44:44 AM PDT by Slyfox (When progressives ignore moral parameters, they also lose the natural gift of common sense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Did you read my link to the Frankenstein constitution?

Here is a sample of constitutional amendments from nine Scotus blackrobes:

Helvering v. Davis. Congress can collect and distribute taxes to promote the general welfare. It opened the floodgates to income redistribution.

Wickard v. Filburn. Blew the commerce clause to pieces. Congress can regulated just about anything.

Whitman v. American Trucking Associations. Administrative agencies can pass regulations with the force of law.

Baker v. Carr. One man one vote democratized state legislatures in a fashion similar to the 17th Amendment.

There are probably dozens of other Scotus rulings that have effectively rewritten the constitution.

21 posted on 04/28/2014 7:10:23 AM PDT by Jacquerie (By their oaths, it is the duty of state legislators to invoke Article V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Jacquerie

Yes I did, but the link in post#4 leads to your opinion to which you have a right of course


22 posted on 04/28/2014 7:24:56 AM PDT by Kaslin (He needed the ignorant to reelect him, and he got them. Now we all have to pay the consequenses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Jacquerie

I’ve been meaning to praise you and your efforts for some time, now. I apologize for not doing so sooner. You’re doing great work and it is really critical work.

Hayek said this to Antony Fisher when Fisher told Hayek of his intent to run for politics and set Britain right:

Fisher: I share all your worries and concerns as expressed in The Road to Serfdom and I’m going to go into politics and put it all right.

Hayek: No you’re not! Society’s course will be changed only by a change in ideas. First you must reach the intellectuals, the teachers and writers, with reasoned argument. It will be their influence on society which will prevail, and the politicians will follow.

That’s a major part of what FR and people like you do. Talk radio is another outlet and now so are the various conservative blogs, twitter accts, Twitchy, etc. The Left understood this earlier than we did and took over the media and the schools. We can undo that, but we need to capture and shame the intellectuals with intelligent, well-reasoned argument.

We’ve crushed them on the 2nd Amendment such that you’ll not find a majority of legal scholars against our view of an individual right. They’re using a defensive withdrawal by simply working to limit that individual right, but nobody pretends that it isn’t an individual right. That victory alone, reopens the debate on the Bill of Rights and who or what is limited by it.

Brilliant job. Keep up the good works. You are making a difference. Don’t let the whiners slow you down. It’s easy to fret at your screen and hard to do something. You’re doing something and thank you!


23 posted on 04/28/2014 9:46:11 AM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

She is the face of liberalism. I cannot think of the last conservative woman of her generation I’ve seen that looks like that.

Does anyone know of a conservative woman with that much inflammation?


24 posted on 04/28/2014 9:47:46 AM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD
Well, thanks. Doing the same thing over and over will result in . . .

How goes your efforts against nitwittery in Illinois?

25 posted on 04/28/2014 9:57:00 AM PDT by Jacquerie (By their oaths, it is the duty of state legislators to invoke Article V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Yes, it was a very well-received Freeper Editorial.
26 posted on 04/28/2014 10:00:50 AM PDT by Jacquerie (By their oaths, it is the duty of state legislators to invoke Article V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Jacquerie

Small progress. The nuttery is strong in this one. You might not believe it, but there are days, many days, I wish I lived in Michigan.


27 posted on 04/28/2014 11:05:05 AM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Former Proud Canadian
I am not getting into whether or not these men made "racist" statements or hold "racist" views. I don't really care if they do or not.

What we are reaching in this country is a banning of prejudicial views. To me not all prejudices are bad.

For example if I go out in my driveway and there is a dog there and he looks friendly I would go and pat him.

Because of my prejudice against coyotes, if I saw a coyote in my driveway I would not try to befriend it.
Now some would say that is not a good analogy because people are different than animals.
But my life experiences and documentation show to me some groups of people and neighborhoods are more dangerous to me than others. -Tom

28 posted on 04/28/2014 12:01:04 PM PDT by Capt. Tom (Don't confuse U.S. citizens and Americans. They are not necessarily the same. -tom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD

<>there are days, many days, I wish I lived in Michigan.<>

Yikes!


29 posted on 04/28/2014 2:44:10 PM PDT by Jacquerie (By their oaths, it is the duty of state legislators to invoke Article V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson