For Teabaggers, it seems, the older the law, the better. Everything we need is in the Constitution, because it was written at the beginning . Even though back then, people had no idea what America was going to look like or, really, what it should be. And even though the beloved founders failed miserably at their first attempt at a constitution, the Articles of Confederation. Why aren't the Teabaggers reading that document instead? Don't they know the Constitution was actually an illegal intrusion by a bunch of elites that violated the beautiful Articles, the ORIGINAL Constitution of our land? Also, Teabaggers, you will remember, actually don't like a lot of the Constitution they are supposed to adore so much. Which Teabagger is going to be forced to read the Fourteenth Amendment
A little political theatre from the Repubicans. Otherwise, the sub-text is "we need a Constitution cram session because there will be a test on this later in the session."
If the Founders were such God-inspired geniuses and the Constitution is second only to the Bible in infallibility why the hell are there any amendments to the thing, huh??
*From the Hill article on the reading of the constitution.*
"Goodlatte said there will be no ad-libs permitted. “[Members] will not be allowed to” editorialize, Goodlatte said."
That is too bad. I'm sure the Teabagger version is much more entertaining.
&quot;We&#039;re being inclusive! We said <i>Judeo</i>!&quot;
I want to find a video clip from today of when they read Article 6 and see if anyone was paying attention.
Equal Protection? WTF? Who put that in there? Oh, the 1860s Republican Party.
So basically they say Ohio didn&#039;t have a birf cert? These guys need some new material.
A little political theatre from the Repubicans. Otherwise, the sub-text is &quot;we need a Constitution cram session because there will be a test on this later in the session.&quot;
If the Founders were such God-inspired geniuses and the Constitution is second only to the Bible in infallibility why the hell are there any amendments to the thing, huh??
*From the Hill article on the reading of the constitution.*
&quot;Goodlatte said there will be no ad-libs permitted. &ldquo;[Members] will not be allowed to&rdquo; editorialize, Goodlatte said.&quot;
That is too bad. I&#039;m sure the Teabagger version is much more entertaining.