…that Ezra Klein is intelligent, I present Exhibit A:
By the way, in case it isn’t clear, the reason these two liberals want people to believe the constitution is impossible to decipher is because they despise the constitution. Liberals want the government to have limitless power and that is in direct contrast with what the founders designed the constitution to do. Of course the constitution allows for its own amendment but liberal policies simply aren’t popular enough to garner constitutional amendments thus simply ignoring the constitution is the next best step.
This is even stupider than when John Conyers said that there was no point in reading the bill, because he wouldn’t be able to understand it. Conyers isn’t competent to legislate, and Klein isn’t competent to pontificate or at least, no one should be giving him such a big soapbox. As Glenn says, he’s credentialed, but not educated.
[Update a while later]
Well, that was quick. But it is Iowahawk, after all.
What the Constitution means to me:
The next part of the Constitution, the middle, is considered by many people to be the main most important part. However, there are other people who disagree with this interpretation, which has led to controversy and conflict. I have to say that I personally side with the people who think it is the most important, because the middle is where the main crux of the Constitution happens. For example, e.g., the middle is the part where we find the Woman’s Right to Choose and the Miranda part, which is a critical issue still today. In the middle you will also various parts about African-Americans, and especially journalism.
Finally there is the last part of the Constitution, which, as many people have noted, can be juxtaposed with the earlier parts. For people who haven’t read the Constitution, I recommend reading it all the way too the end to see how it is juxtaposed in a very important way. I don’t want to give out any “spoilers,” because it’s really amazing.
Because the Constitution is so old, it is written in the “old-timey” language of people of more than one century ago, which leads many modern people to get confused and frustrated by it. “What is this stupid boring thing?” they will ask, then go back to playing Super Mario Cart. These modern people could not be any more wrong, because hidden underneath all the “so-called” confusing words is an exciting story with twists and turns everywhere. Fortunately, and most importantly, the Founding Fathers also invented the Supreme Court which does a good job of translating the Constitution into modern words and juxtaposing them for all of us, the American people of the United States.
Oh, to aspire to be as wise as Ezra Klein. Actually, it sort of reminds me of Anne Elk’s theory about brontosauruses. Which was hers.
[Update on Friday morning]
Heh. Why is it called a Klein bottle?
That’s not really fair, though. I know other Kleins, who are probably embarrassed by Ezra.
The origin of the quote is a bit unclear, it’s from Stephen Gutowski in reference to the discussion between Klein and his interviewer.
And yes, Klein is an arrogant young fool, a lot like somebody else we know.
Memo to Ezra Klein: the WaPo is 133 years old.
Listen carefully to the discussion and read the transcript, Klein can actually be heard at one point, and the transcript confirms it, asserting the constitution, “isn’t really legally binding on anything. Now that is one committed Liberal.
No, you are wrong yet again. Liberals do not favor unlimited power for the government, at all. What liberals mostly want is for the government to serve the general welfare of all the people.
Now what conservatives seem to want is for the government to serve the interests of corporations ahead of mere living persons, and the larger corps the better.
And conservatives do seem a bit dim on separating religious organizations from the government. I see lots of confusion on these matters.
Further, conservatives took a very long time to understand most of the Bill of Rights, and that that it really should apply to everyone, not just them.
Yes, there is plenty of confusion regarding the Constitution.
I see lots of confusion on these matters.
Do the dead people make you confused?
Excellent parody of a leftist troll, Kevin. I mean, you got the vacuous boilerplate down and everything.
The leftist boilerplate reveals one of the common political debate fallaciesw: focusing on intentions rather than results. Good intentions gave us Cabrini-Green, no-knock raids, the Kellogg-Briand Pact, plastic grocery bags (look what saving the trees did to the landfills), and Alt-A loans.
“And conservatives do seem a bit dim on separating religious organizations from the government.”
I’m sure he meant “liberals” here instead of conservatives. With the separation of church and state, the state cannot order the church to allow homosexuals to adopt children, supply abortions, or any other moral teaching (which isn’t the state’s business) in conflict with the church’s teaching.
I’ve oft heard forgiveness (which should include laziness and forgetfulness) is easier to get than permission, so of course anyone who charts a course of action that will create a new future, any future, will act without regard for the law, whether it’s the Louisiana Purchase or emanations & penumbras. The Constitution cannot fix human nature; but it can be adapted to supply the best government possible within nature’s limits.