Almost forgot this until I was cleaning pictures off my Blackberry.
On the very day that Stanley Dubinsky thoughtfully shared this item from The Onion:
Area Man Passionate Defender Of What He Imagines Constitution To Be
November 14, 2009 | Issue 45•46
ESCONDIDO, CA—Spurred by an administration he believes to be guilty of numerous transgressions, self-described American patriot Kyle Mortensen, 47, is a vehement defender of ideas he seems to think are enshrined in the U.S. Constitution and principles that brave men have fought and died for solely in his head…
… I found myself in traffic behind the car with the bumper stickers you see above. Sorry about the quality of the photo; the light wasn’t good. Of course, I shot this when we were stopped at a traffic light. It would have been impossible otherwise, the way this guy was weaving all over the road. The sticker on the left says “Wake Up America! Read Your Constitution,” the one on the right is the standard John Birch “Get US out of the United Nations,” and the one in the middle is about the FTAA.
That Onion piece was one of those where they’re not kidding, the way I read it.
Related Posts
Maybe if we close our eyes everyone else will go away?
Although I am well-trained in the finer points of understanding the Constitution a/k/a/ constitutional law, I do have a lot of empathy for well-educated citizens who get the *foolish* notion that words ought to mean what they do in ordinary discourse. I understand well why this cannot be the case, but I have empathy for their frustration. We say “ignorance of the law is no excuse” yet make it difficult in some instances to fathom exactly what that law is.
I almost forwarded that piece to you as well. Reminded me of someone.
Like the man said, everybody has the right to their own opinion.
And everybody else has the right to laugh at it.
I saw a bumper sticker that made me laugh — U.S. OUT OF NORTH AMERICA!
We are fortunate to live in a nation where the driver can freely express sentiments such as these. Every U.S. citizen should have a working knowledge of the contents of the Constitution. To this end Civics should probably still be taught in school.
Whatever the shortcomings of the UN it is the only forum where every generally recognized nation state in the world, with the exception of the Vatican, can have a conversation (the exclusion of the Republic of China rankles). For us not to have input into that conversation strikes me as ludicrous.
Moving towards tariff free international trade seems to be the best course for all. As markets become more and more global
maximizing efficiency by allowing for the least expensive means of production makes sense.
the Constitution means exactly what it says.
Back when it was written, people meant what they said and wrote.
It’s truly not difficult to comprehend but all the legal changes made against it are.
Yes, KB — this is sort of a Lee memorial post…
Amen, Greg. I read some amazing numbers recently–beats me where–about the decline and fall of civics education in the last fifty years. I know most of the “civics” I know from law school or from reading good journalism–the kind that educates. I got very little civics in school–I graduated from Aiken High School in 1977, and, incidentally, was the president of the Political Science Club–and still knew little about civics.
Mr. or Ms. Annie–and again, I must assume that is your real name as that is the policy here after all– meaning is a slippery thing. Exactly who are we talking about when we say “people”– if you get two people together in a room and they make an agreement on anything of any complexity, and write down what they think they agreed to, even if they are trained specialists, there will be some ambiguity in what they actually agreed to or thought they agreed to.
Add to that the passage of time and the changes in society–technology, for one big thing– and it is not so clear at all what the Constitution means or ought to mean.
If the constitution (or any other part of law) was completely clear, there would be a lot of lawyers drawing unemployment. But to be completely clear we’d all have to have the same mind(s).
or we could just simplify things and have a dictator.
Even if the law were clear, you’d still have lawyers arguing the facts and appealing to emotions, and so on.
Some folks just don’t want to agree to anything, anyway….
How very true, Kathryn. Of course, any lawyer would want to be very careful to argue the same side that said dictator favored….