constitution – Moe Lane

Klein’s Crazy Constitutional Commentary.

(H/T Instapundit) This comment is going to haunt Ezra Klein for the rest of his career as a ‘wonk:’

…as it should, because it was an incredibly stupid thing to say – even considering that it was said on MSNBC, which means that almost nobody saw it anyway. For those without video access, Klein (in the process of sneering at the GOP’s plan to start the 112th Congress with a reading of the Constitution*) rather bravely admitted that he has a learning disability which makes it difficult for him to read English properly:

The issue with the Constitution is not that people don’t read the text and think they’re following it. The issue with the Constitution is that the text is confusing because it was written more than a hundred years ago.

At least, I assume that’s what he’s admitting. Because the alternative is to take seriously his notion that there really is something difficult to comprehend about a document so simple and straightforward that its mere existence argues strenuously against the notion that nothing well-written ever comes out of committee.

As you might have guessed, I am not taking seriously Klein’s notion.

Moe Lane (crosspost)

Continue reading Klein’s Crazy Constitutional Commentary.

#rsrh Congress Keeping it Constitutional.

(Via Hot Air Headlines) David Weigel got a copy of the new guidelines for establishing the Constitutionality of all new laws in the 112th Congress, and I suspect that the Democrats have not yet grasped the magnitude of how nasty this is going to be for their side’s operating methodology. What is particularly entertaining is how the Republican House leadership gave a comprehensive glove to the Left’s Constitutional scholar community: they recommended that those looking for help use the Federalist Papers; the Congressional Research Service; the Heritage Foundation; a site run by the Liberty Fund; CATO; and the Federalist Society… with the American Constitutional Society clearly tacked on as an afterthought, or possibly to cut down on the whining*. I’d call this ideological grouping ‘lopsided,’ except that if we could trust Democratic legislators to create Constitution-friendly legislation then we wouldn’t have this new rule in the first place.

I would seriously recommend, by the way, that Congressional staffers take this new requirement seriously, for the most practical of reasons: whether or not you agree with this rule, it exists – and it puts the official writers of legislation on the record… and on the spot. Anyone inclined to treat this like a joke would be well advised to remember that most jokes do not age well, and that no Member of Congress wants to appear to be not taking his or her job seriously. Particularly when there’s an election coming up – and in the House, there’s always an election coming up.

Moe Lane

*They also included the Brookings Institution, but nobody can reliably predict what side those guys are on any given day.

#rsrh QotD, Humor us edition.

Doug Ross, on the Democratic leadership’s reaction to being told that from now on they’re going to have to demonstrate a working knowledge of the US Constitution and how it permits their particular bills if they want to introduce said bills into the House:

Say, I wonder if Nancy Pelosi would approve? Oh, wait. I don’t give a crap. The American people kicked her dimpled butt out of the Speaker’s seat and back into Coach.

I am about as unsympathetic as Doug is, myself. Sure, it’s embarrassing to treat grown legislators as if they were not particularly bright children; but not nearly as embarrassing as when said legislators demonstrate that such treatment is warranted.

More to the point: elections have consequences. And may I say that it is a pleasure to be on the other side of that saying, for a change?

Moe Lane