How can Republicans claim to understand the Constitution without knowing how to read Case Law?

Have all Republicans read the Case Law surrounding the provisions in the Constitution? If not, how can you claim you understand the Constitution?
Have all Republicans studied Constitutional Law somewhere that I don’t know about?

They apparently learn their Constitutional Law by listening to imbecilic fools like Glenn Beck, and spew out their bizarre twaddle and anger–see the melodramas above!–as if it had some relevance.

They don’t even grasp that, in any "rule of law" system, the courts have the most serious burden of defining all the basic principles. This is true in monarchies, democracies and republics of all stripes, and any other sort of organized state. But they’re too confused and frothing at their ignorant mouths to grasp even the most fundamental of principles.

A citation–even a wrong one!–is WAY beyond anything they can handle or even contemplate.

Majority opinion, minority opinion, constructive argument, all the structural provisos, going back to 1789 and even the gist of the Constitution itself completely confuse the illiterate and semi-literate. That’s why they listen to propagandists and brainwashers who aren’t qualified to be bus boys in cafeterias on the Mall. They aren’t interested in how things work or how they are, they only want to hear hatred and vitriol.

Notice not one of the crackpot ultra-right wing neo-Nazis in here even grasped what your question actually is about.

Nor do they seem to have any interest.

Were these ideologues given their way, the country would be anarchy beyond anarchy, and the same kind of vicious and demented. vindictive government despots have envied for centuries.

They haven’t the most fundamental concept of how the rule of law works. And what few legitimate conservatives remain who might have some knowledge are hiding because they know how the crackpots of the lunatic fringe spew their hatred and lynch mob mentality.

Post Author: mark

15 thoughts on “How can Republicans claim to understand the Constitution without knowing how to read Case Law?

    Typical Liberal Cry Baby

    (July 7, 2010 - 5:31 am)

    Most case law was decided by liberal activist judges who never followed the constitution in the first place
    References :

    John J. S

    (July 7, 2010 - 6:21 am)

    The Federalist Papers?
    References :

    Pfo

    (July 7, 2010 - 6:32 am)

    How can you make such claims without knowing we know how to read case law. Suppose we do.
    References :

    Lib Nemesis

    (July 7, 2010 - 6:50 am)

    Presumptuous aren’t ya?
    References :

    The Ladies Man

    (July 7, 2010 - 7:26 am)

    They can’t read the Constitution either.

    They think that a person is not an American even if they were born here.

    They believe that the 14th Amendment does not apply to non whites.
    References :

    Mark

    (July 7, 2010 - 7:43 am)

    I’ve spent a LOT of time reading Supreme Court case law, and some of the opinions written by Justice William O. Douglas make it perfectly clear that he was not interpreting the Constitution at all.
    References :

    Aegis of Freedom

    (July 7, 2010 - 7:54 am)

    Because Case Law is not the Constitution. THE CONSTITUTION IS THE CONSTITUTION!!!
    Everything I need to know is right there in black and white. The founders never said "only lawyers can know the law", they wanted every man to know it, and wrote it so that everyone could understand it.

    And you wonder why people call liberals elitist jerks?
    References :

    Janet

    (July 7, 2010 - 8:09 am)

    Because they have all of those brilliant talk show hosts to explain that to them. In between weddings and divorces and drug scandals that is.
    References :

    chuck_junior

    (July 7, 2010 - 8:47 am)

    You make a lot of incorrect assumptions about people you don’t know anything about, and never will.
    The same could be said by anyone about Liberals I suppose if you think it through.

    BTW, your first incorrect assumption in your "question" was addressing it to Republicans. A lot of people here including myself are Independents. Keep pissing us off and see how that works out for you in November.
    References :

    Leslie is hot

    (July 7, 2010 - 9:15 am)

    They don’t understand the document, or even that it was intended to replace the Articles of Confederation–or at least, they pretend not to know.

    Listen to Glenn Beck spew his madness some time. It’ll be very clear. If you ask many of the more "fringe element" conservatives, they’ll say "there is no interpretation, it’s just what it means". Ask them what it means and you get a series of convulsive hissy fits and insane spewings of drivel.

    I read Marbury v. Madison to just such a crackpot a while ago, and his response was, "Wasn’t that a long time ago?"

    Oh, well, you can lead a stupid horse to water, but you can’t keep a moron from drowning himself.

    I have to admit, I miss genuine, honest, sensible conservatives. There used to be some, and I liked a lot of them, and found a lot of common ground. But those who are too lazy or ignorant to grasp basic concepts in government and how things work are some special kind of dangerous. No wonder legitimate conservatives are basically hiding!
    References :
    A lot of background and credits in the law, and a lot of courtroom experience…and a very thorough understanding of the Constitution.

    James

    (July 7, 2010 - 9:58 am)

    Case Law is merely what The Supreme Court has said about the Constitution in the past.

    If you honestly believe that all Case Law gives you an accurate picture of the Constitution, I recommend that you read the Dred Scott Case and get back to me.
    References :

    Not your Momma

    (July 7, 2010 - 10:41 am)

    They apparently learn their Constitutional Law by listening to imbecilic fools like Glenn Beck, and spew out their bizarre twaddle and anger–see the melodramas above!–as if it had some relevance.

    They don’t even grasp that, in any "rule of law" system, the courts have the most serious burden of defining all the basic principles. This is true in monarchies, democracies and republics of all stripes, and any other sort of organized state. But they’re too confused and frothing at their ignorant mouths to grasp even the most fundamental of principles.

    A citation–even a wrong one!–is WAY beyond anything they can handle or even contemplate.

    Majority opinion, minority opinion, constructive argument, all the structural provisos, going back to 1789 and even the gist of the Constitution itself completely confuse the illiterate and semi-literate. That’s why they listen to propagandists and brainwashers who aren’t qualified to be bus boys in cafeterias on the Mall. They aren’t interested in how things work or how they are, they only want to hear hatred and vitriol.

    Notice not one of the crackpot ultra-right wing neo-Nazis in here even grasped what your question actually is about.

    Nor do they seem to have any interest.

    Were these ideologues given their way, the country would be anarchy beyond anarchy, and the same kind of vicious and demented. vindictive government despots have envied for centuries.

    They haven’t the most fundamental concept of how the rule of law works. And what few legitimate conservatives remain who might have some knowledge are hiding because they know how the crackpots of the lunatic fringe spew their hatred and lynch mob mentality.
    References :

    me

    (July 7, 2010 - 11:07 am)

    That would involve reading, thinking, and understanding.

    Reactionaries don’t do those things, and as you can tell from their ravings in here, they hate anyone who can do them.

    Their whole world is about hatred and spewing contrived madness. Just watch the "three stooges" and you’ll see what I mean–endless, spurious, borderline insane assertions, no facts, no quotations, no real references, just murmurings from other psychos.

    Again as you’ll note from their answers, they not only don’t want to change, they will threaten those who propose they should enter the world of reality, which they find offensive.
    References :

    Gorgeous George

    (July 7, 2010 - 11:48 am)

    They are offended that you even ask.

    It would be like asking a pig to wear high heels…completely beyond them.
    References :

    Arminius Victorium Germanicus

    (July 7, 2010 - 12:27 pm)

    C’mon, is this a joke? The clowns spend time slandering the courts and the legislative branch, and are too stupid to even grasp checks and balances.

    And you think they should learn the functions of the courts and how to read important precedents?

    That is NEVER going to happen.

    That’s why almost all their "scholars" and the jerks who call themselves their "thought leaders" have no record of service, military or civilian, no academic or practical credentials, not even a record of real jobs or meeting payrolls, and yet will proffer up insane advice to all their minions.

    People who do those sorts of things are called "psuedointellectuals" and "evasive" and "godless liberals". Most of them aren’t even aware that there are conservative jurists who know the ropes, and if the workings of the system are explained to the "faithful conservatives" (they’re really reactionaries!) they just get annoyed.

    Look at these answers! How revolting!
    References :

Leave a Reply