Skip to main content

In a fit of typical Constitutional inconsistency, the right-wing followed up its filibuster of the widely popular gun purchase background check measure by clamoring to toss out a half-dozen other Constitutional amendments following the Boston Marathon bombings. I guess the Second Amendment is the only one they really like in their beloved game of Cafeteria-style Constitution (cousin to Cafeteria-style Bible): Just pick the parts you like and ignore the rest.

With his usual comedic brilliance, Jon Stewart calls out the right-wing hypocrisy in this must see 7-minute montage entitled "Weak Constitution":

"Following the Boston bombing, the freedom lovers at Fox jettison Constitutional amendments like Han Solo dumping his cargo at the first sign of an Imperial cruiser."
For bombing suspect and American citizen Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, down goes the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination, down goes the Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial and the Eighth Amendment against cruel and unusual punishment. Down with the Fourth — Let's wiretap mosques. Down with the First — Let’s have a religious litmus test for foreign student enrollment. And down with the Ninth — Let's imprison people for their fashion choices.

Hey, the last I checked our legal system was "innocent until proven guilty" no matter how intense the media coverage. And never mind that in the last 30 years, terrorist attacks have accounted for only 3,400 tragic deaths, but gun violence has accounted for over 900,000 deaths (or over 300,000 if you’re counting only homicides). So the Neocon rule goes like this: When it comes to guns, the price of anarchistic freedom can never be too high; but when it comes to Islamic terrorism, the price of complete security can never be too high.

Stewart sums up the Constitutional hypocrisy:

“Yes, it turns out there’s only one amendment in our constitution’s pantheon that is exempt from statistical analysis or emotional freak-out-itude, and it is the Second. So god help us if the Muslims ever decide to form a well regulated militia.”
Such hypocrisy is not just reserved for bombing suspects, however. As we've seen in state legislatures across the country, the same right-wingers who wail about the imposition of a 5-minute background check are quick to require all sorts of hoop-jumping from millions of law-abiding citizens when it comes to exercising the Constitutional right to vote or to an early abortion.

And here in gun crAZy Arizona, law-abiding citizens are regularly subject to questioning and searches at drug/immigration checkpoints as far as 100 miles from the actual Mexico border. Praise the Second, but screw the Fourth.

Originally posted to ConnectTheDotsUSA on Sun Apr 28, 2013 at 06:47 PM PDT.

Also republished by Shut Down the NRA, Repeal or Amend the Second Amendment (RASA), and Community Spotlight.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  You Can't Derive the Conservative Constitution (6+ / 0-)

    without the Articles of Confederation, which is the actual Original Intent of our founders (as opposed to the framers, who only included a number of the founders).

    It's in the Articles where you will find state "sovereignty" and "rights," and where you will not find "general welfare."

    Basically, if we wrote an amendment slapping the 2nd Amendment onto the Articles of Confederation, replacing the Constitution with that combination, it would probably have 85% conservative support.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Sun Apr 28, 2013 at 06:54:20 PM PDT

  •  ConnectTheDots - It wasn't a filibuster (4+ / 0-)

    The Senate vote regarding universal background checks was not defeated using a filibuster. The attempt at a filibuster had already been overcome.

    Instead, Sen. Reid passed by unanimous consent a requirement that all amendments, including the Background Check Amendment (it was technically an amendment, not a bill) be passed by 60 votes. (He could have asked for 51 or 52 votes.)  He set the bar at 60 votes for all amendments (including what you called the gun purchase background check measure) because he did not want pro-gun advocates to be able to pass THEIR amendments.  

    "let's talk about that"

    by VClib on Sun Apr 28, 2013 at 09:37:04 PM PDT

    •  This is an important point about the current (0+ / 0-)

      policy proposals.

      There were some really shitty policy proposals that went down with this legislative defeat.

      My favorite example is the reciprocity proposal. It would allow anyone with a concealed carry license from any state to have their license honored in every other state.

      There are RKBA group members here who seem to sincerely think that is a good idea. None of them have been willing to acknowledge that it would effectively repeal concealed carry laws nationwide, as states would race to the bottom for the easiest carry laws in order to attract licensing revenue.

      Then, everyone living in restricted concealed carry states, such as NY, would get a license from some state that doesn't even require residency and carry their gun where the really live, in New York state, completely defeating New York state law.

      "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

      by LilithGardener on Mon Apr 29, 2013 at 10:57:26 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  LG - does any state grant concealed carry (0+ / 0-)

        permits to non-residents? I don't think so. It would be an easy add to any legislation to block states from cross-border licensing.

        "let's talk about that"

        by VClib on Mon Apr 29, 2013 at 11:04:34 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes, ask any RKBA member how many permits (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          they have from different states.

          People who travel and want to take their firearms with them, will get a permit from any state they plan to travel to or through.

          Sorry, I don't have a specific link.

          "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

          by LilithGardener on Mon Apr 29, 2013 at 11:06:17 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Thanks LG - I wasn't aware of that (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            "let's talk about that"

            by VClib on Mon Apr 29, 2013 at 11:18:22 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Here's a link that can give you a glimpse (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              of how convoluted it gets, with respect to reciprocity of gun carry licenses.

              E.g. Vermont does not require any license. Any gun owner can carry.

              But Vermont residents can not carry in Florida because FL law requires those who are NOT Florida residents to carry a valid permit from their state of residence when they carry in Florida. Since VT residents have no license, they cannot carry when traveling to or through FL.

              For states that issue permits, its a reliable source of state and local revenue, and I don't see any state ever giving that up.

              "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

              by LilithGardener on Mon Apr 29, 2013 at 11:33:44 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  I don't know about this specific law, (0+ / 0-)

        But previous versions specifically exempted non - resident permits from reciprocity.


        "It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees." -- Emiliano Zapata Salazar
        "Dissent is patriotic. Blind obedience is treason." --me

        by Leftie Gunner on Mon Apr 29, 2013 at 06:59:25 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Why not, we have cafeteria style sequestration. (7+ / 0-)

    If the cuts offend the wealthy and powerful they are uncut. We can surely do the same with the constitution.

    "Remember, Republican economic policies quadrupled the debt before I took office and doubled it after I left. We simply can't afford to double-down on trickle-down." Bill Clinton

    by irate on Mon Apr 29, 2013 at 02:35:17 AM PDT

    •  Hooray for Democrats (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Thank goodness we have a democratic administration.

      With our democratic administration, we have loss of constitutionally protected rights, unlimited guns, AND sequestration.  Oh, AND death penalty by presidential fiat, drone bombings of civilians in countries with which we have no declared war, unsustainable energy policy with increased destruction of the planetary habitat, and a permanent extra-judicial prison at Gauntanamo Bay.


      "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

      by Hugh Jim Bissell on Mon Apr 29, 2013 at 08:33:04 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The only valuable parts of the constitution (4+ / 0-)

    Are the parts where the rotten 1% can rape, rob & pillage us. Hence the only important amendments are the first & second.

  •  One cafeteria (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MadGeorgiaDem, VClib, Shamash

    If they choose the 2nd and skirt the rest, and we skirt the 2nd and embrace the rest, that's just two different diners at the same cafeteria. What I have yet to see here is a principled defense of rights that shows the grounds for choosing any given right over another, or an explanation why free speech and protection from double jeopardy are rights but bearing arms is not. After all, if something is a right, it isn't given to us by the Bill of Rights, it is merely recognized there.

  •  Gooserock has it right. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, madcitysailor, mali muso

    Add the 2nd Amendment to the Articles of Confederation and 85% of the conservatives would support it as the governing document.

    A lot of people down here in the South believe the country is supposed to be a small government confederation. What they will not accept is that the system failed, first in the Articles of Confederation, and second at the Constitutional Convention. The Framers could have kept a modified version of the Articles under the New Jersey Plan, but rejected it in favor of the Virginia Plan, with some modications.

    The conservatives, in all reality, only like the Constitution when it serves their purposes. The rest of the time they foam at the mouth trying to figure out how to circumvent it.  

    Guns are never the principle in the commission of a crime, but they are usually an accomplice

    by MadGeorgiaDem on Mon Apr 29, 2013 at 07:31:33 AM PDT

  •  Gotta love first amendment freedom of speech (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    auctioned to the highest bidders only. When money talks there is no having to say you're sorry. Money in politics buys the ruling class insurance against voter grievances when it crashes the system, no more FDR's. No more Democratic Party, with its history of bank regulation, demand for eased credit and debt forgiveness. The dumbed-down electorate asserts its sovereignty each election day to consent to the latest despotism. Tocqueville saw this coming in 1840, but it didn't stabilize until Buckley in 1976, to which the Roberts Court is the favored heir.

  •  Not sure what the argument is here (0+ / 0-)

    It sounds like "since Republicans are scum who want to keep some amendments and toss the rest, Democrats can be equal scumbags without losing any moral high ground".

    I thought we were supposed to support all of the Bill of Rights, not just the parts we like.

  •  Is this anything like (0+ / 0-)

    "cafeteria Catholicism"?

    I'm part of the "bedwetting bunch of website Democrat base people (DKos)." - Rush Limbaugh, 10/16/2012 Torture is Wrong! We live near W so you don't have to. Send love.

    by tom 47 on Mon Apr 29, 2013 at 03:21:45 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site