Sandy Hook

Sandy Hook

Monday, February 08, 2010

GOP Too Progressive

Tea Party delegate or leader - depending on who you're talking to and when - wants a candidate who is going to fight for the Constitution.

There are a couple of things that bother me about this. The Tea Party dolts are the ones who are always trying to alter the Bill of Rights, who are making a mockery of them and who are completely ignoring its principals.

A case in point can be found at Hellooo Mr President. "A coalition of conservative activists wants to throw New Jersey Sen. Robert Menendez out of office." Menedez is up for re-election in 2012 but these people aren't willing to wait.

Members of the Tea Party movement have sued in New Jersey Superior Court asking to be allowed to start collecting the 1.3 million voter signatures it needs to get a recall on the ballot.

The Sussex County group takes issue with Menendez's support of health care reform and his opposition to limiting government's control.

Not surprisingly, I can't find one word or phrase that says an elected official can be booted out of office for supporting or not supporting anything. Within the first ten Amendments to the Constitution, I can't even find that big bad word treason.
The other thing that bothers me is that Tea Party members are totally unfamiliar with this 1787 document. They probably don't even know that it was drawn up and ratified at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia. That it wasn't signed in the Washington that wasn't are grounds enough to re-write it.
Most Tea Baggers probably haven't read it or, if they have, they don't understand it. Most of them probably haven't read a history book since sixth grade. Most of them probably haven't studied civics since the ninth grade. If they took a political science course in college, it was most likely one of those remedial but required Freshman classes designed to cover what they should have learned in high school.
Rather than copying the Constitution, link to this piece I wrote on July 4, 2009 in my very early blogging days. Here's part of it:
In the Bill of Rights it says: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
In neither of these documents (Declaration of Independence) do I see words or phrases such as “excluding” or “except for” or “not allowed” or “need not apply.” Nowhere in these documents do I see a particular group of people left out because of their race or because of their religion or because of their color or their ancestry or their sexual orientation.


  1. Leslie,
    I read your linked-to post.Very well written.I don't think you were ever a dumb kid:)

    And you're right, there was no exception like both sides (as I note you also wrote)seem to feel they're entitled to.
    I personally have some discomfort with the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence;people point out it's because I apply 20th century standards to both.
    They're probably right,true objectivity is difficult.

  2. Leslie when I saw this article on I was shocked. These teabuggers are doing it in California to Barbara Boxer too. It's bullshit but even much more serious then that. They want to take away the rights of the voter just because they don't like a Senators political views! Who the hell do these people think they are? They need punched down a few pegs!

  3. Oso: The Constitution really is the
    "foundation" of our country as cliched as that may be. It's a beautiful example of how people with very different philosophies can come together and produce a document that has held up our country through thick or thin. They couldn't foresee the McCarthy era or that guns would be used for anything other than defence nor could they foresee the assassination of presidents. Yet, we have survived simply
    because of this document.

    You need to read the comments after We Shall Overcome. I hope you don't get ticked off at me.

  4. Sue: Obviously they're nuts as well as stupid. I can't imagine they will get away with this. Even with the makeup of the current Supreme Court I'm sure they'd knock this down in a heartbeat. After all, first it's a senator, next a governor, next the president and finally the judges.

    Frankly, I think people who file frivolous lawsuits should be fined and put in jail. How's that?

  5. Hi Leslie,
    No, you're absolutely right. Easy to swerve 180 degrees off topic sometimes.Sorry!
    And I still say you must've been a smart kid too!

  6. Oso, I was never a good student. Won't even let my kids see the transcripts. Am brain dead mathematically and have a little dyslexia which wasn't even recognized back then - plus I always, always had my mind elsewhere. Whenever we had to take turns reading I never knew where in the hell my place was!