It all began innocently enough. Taking a break from studying for Monday's exam in history I posted this to my facebook status.
Learning more about Shay's Rebellion and wondering if there isn't a "compare and contrast" with the modern tea party paper in there (for a future class) well many of our rebellion s actually. Wish the study of history was more important to Americans.
Which earned several likes, including one from my conservative
cat toy FB friend. He, like most cat toys (he does know I call him this btw) makes comments. There are days when it seems he can't resist commenting about anything and everything.
I don't know him IRL, he's a friend of a friend I gained through the early days of live blogging of the Stephanie Miller show. He seems genuinely nice and to actually care about me, my life and what's going on. There are also points of agreement between us. We do agree on marriage equality. But we do go at it on other issues, several Kossak friends have engaged him, and I have found out that many of my silent FB friends IRL or just over the web (here, of FB, etc.) enjoy reading the "set toos."
Anyway he had to comment:
Hear, Hear. "If we don't study out history, we are bound to repeat it". Paraphrase of Winston Churchill
I'm glad he agrees but I think, given other comments and arguments, he thinks it will be the left learnin' somethin.'
("g" drops mine, he is very articulate, he'd just fail most classes that demand his source material)
My response:
Dont assume it will always go the way of the current Republican party. It wont and Tea Partiers wont like the fact that they've been duped with their calls to return to the original Constitution while thinking it guarantees the 2nd Amendment. It doesn't.
and now we are into it
Cat Toy Conservative Friend
The Supreme Court has made numerous rulings throughout the years that it is a guaranteed right, Clytemnestra.* It would take a Constitutional Convention to remove any Amendment from the Constitution.
Me:
That wasn't what I said. I was not talking about the practicality or even possibility of their desire to return to the original Constitution. But to their erroneous assumptions of whats there, and being used as pawns by those who do. All due to their under-education and seeming desire to maintain that level.
Oh no I didn't . . . under-education?? Oh it's on:
Conservative Friend:
Under education ? What do you mean by that ? There are many very well educated individuals in the "Tea Party". Please explain your accusations ...
Me:
Yeah...because they are demanding a return to the original constitution to protect their rights which was not part of the original constitution. Hence the name "amendments"
Friend:
I don't remember ever hearing anyone wanting to remove any of the Amendments except for the 2nd Amendment and that's from the Left. Who is advocating repeal / removal of which amendment ?
This is going in a predicable direction
Me:
?? Where did I say "remove?" Me thinks you are missing the point.
Friend:
You mentioned the rights that were not part of the "original" Constitution. A RETURN to the "original" constitution .... Well, hate to burst your bubble, but the Bill of Rights IS part of the "original" Constitution. It delineates the rights of the PEOPLE. Amendments added after the 1st 10 then become part of the Constitution. Last time I looked, the 2nd Amendment is included in the 1st 10, is it not ? So again I ask again, who is trying to remove ANY of the Amendments except the left ?
Oh
THANK YOU internet gods. Or predictability muses, or whatever:
Me:
Nope the original Constitution was finally ratified when the last hold out state, Rhode Island, accepted it in 1790. The Bill or Rights was not ratified by all the states until 1791. The US Constitution was written without the Bill of Rights, and passed on to the states for ratification. The first state to ratify was Delaware December 1787. Most states ratified the Constitution sans Bill of Rights by the summer of 1788. The Bill or Rights was not even written until September 1789.
So NO it is not part of the original Constitution, these amendments did become part of it as does every amendment
As for floating the canard that the left wants to remove rights. This is horse crap floated by the right. What the left wants is responsible laws about firearms, not wild west anarchy that the person with the most firepower runs the lives of those around them. No one on the left is seeking to remove amendments. And I invite you to provide links to original, straight from the horse's mouth that any in power are.
On the other hand, there are Republicans in power like Chuck Grassley who are saying thus "Americans want and Americans deserve the real original Constitution" and then goes on to prove he has no idea what the original constitution says. Horses mouth:
Grassley-IOWA GOP Reagan Dinner 9-17-10
Oh and there is the Tea Party backed bills, and state republican platforms that call for the repeal of the 17th Amendment
And then he veers or swerves deeply around the original issue (got your seat belts on?)
Friend
Do they have ANY chance of passing ? No. "TEA Party" means "taxed enough already" ... NO mention of repealing ANY amendments. I'm not a fan if the Tea Party at all, but I really do dislike that label being thrown around right and left just to create more division in the population. Makes about as much sense as Nancy Pelosi's recent comments ( which, by the way, she made a rather feeble effort to gloss over as "she misspoke" ) last week.
Well I guess he's put me straight
Me
Again you missed the point of what I was saying. By fanning the flames of that nonsense, like its even a possibility, instead of educating, is only creating more division. If the Tea Party (or as many on the left call them the "Something for Nothing Party")thinks they are taxed too highly now, what would they have thought during the "golden" years of Reagan when their taxes were higher, or under Nixon or Eisenhower when their taxes were even higher still. Many on the right consider that period a golden age of America and American power.
His response? Acknowledgement that he was wrong and really didn't know a little US history, that he thought he knew?? ROTFLOL ... oh goodness no, we are now off on taxes.
Any original source, horses mouth links to Democrats in power who want to do away with amendments . . . that would be a "no" . . . as I've said he has a problem producing those. And liberal friends have asked . . . often.
I just thought I'd share a little bit of fun this evening.