The Constitution According to Kos, or How Conservatives are Like Earworms

| March 7, 2012 | 7 Replies

What it is with progressives and the Constitution? I don’t mean the usual progressive problem with the supreme law of our land, namely that it doesn’t let them render Republicans into a bland but nutritious gruel with which to feed the unwashed masses who will live in their Shining Utopia. I mean the problem with those tricky little black marks on the page that we call words.

Remember this little bon mot from Washington Post super-columnist and MS-NBC hired gum-flapper Ezra Klein not a few months ago? He was positively flummoxed that people could actually understand the words of the Constitution because they were written over a hundred years ago. Seriously. Hit the link and see for yourself. Despite that, the WaPo actually gave him his own staff of writers over which he exercises some level of control, possibly a level that ensures they only use language invented after 1913. I’m not quite sure how he found such a full stable of writers fluent in Esperanto, but it sure is a relief that he gets their newfangled language translated into English.

Tonight, another progressive has met the Constitution and been found baffled. Markos Moulitsas, better known at Kos, is what you might call a kingmaker in Democratic circles. Well, you might call him that if he had any great success with winning candidates. He has, however, written a book or three and did start the largest progressive-leaning website in the universe. His Netroots Nation convention draws the cream of the Democratic crop every year and it’s pretty much routine for would-be Democratic officeholders to pay obeisance to him.

Last night, Kingmaker Markos bestrode Twitter like a colossus as he watched the Super Tuesday returns and speeches roll in — a horribly confused and angry colossus who just couldn’t restrain himself from jumping onto twitter and delivering a proper civics lesson to the world:

Wha…? Why the gall of Rick Santorum to interpret the Constitution in that way! And if we didn’t quite understand his meaning, he extended and revised his remark.

Now, I know what you might be thinking. Wha? God? “We the people”? What the heck is he talking about? Why are you making me pay attention to this, Jimmie? I hate you! Let me see if I can help out. See, Markos is a progressive, and they believe that the government is the people and the people are the government. So when, for instance, the government rifles through a little girls lunchbox, confiscates her home-made nutritious lunch, and substitutes it with a processed cafeteria special, that’s a good thing because it’s really not the government doing it to us, it’s us doing it to us and we’d never do anything to us that’s wrong. The only exception to this rule is if Republicans run the government. In that case, the government is still us, but it’s a bad part of us, like cancer or that part of our brain that can’t help but sing along when Escape (The Piña Colada Song) comes on the radio. So we have to fight it, like white cells fight Rupert Holmes or something. It gets a bit hazy, but it boils down to this: the government is us, so whatever it does is good, unless it does something progressives don’t like, then it’s bad.

Of course, there’s the bit where Markos think he’s one of the brilliant few who should run the government because we the people aren’t quite bright enough to figure things out for ourselves, but never you worry your pretty head about that. He’ll take good care of us when he’s in charge.

The extension of this thought is that, as Moulitsas said, we don’t have any rights that the government doesn’t give us. This makes a weird bit of sense when you think about it (but, please, don’t think about it long. I can’t be held responsible for any lasting brain damage). The government has to give us our rights because if it doesn’t, who else will? Some strange Sky Being? A “Creator”. Don’t be silly! It only stands to reason that the government must give us rights, and since we’re the government, then what’s really happening is that we’re giving ourselves rights, which is quite nice, when you think of it.

Unfortunately for Moulitsas, though, that flies directly in the face of what our Founders actually believed when they wrote the Constitution. In order to get a view of Constitutional rights as exactly backwards as his, you’d have to believe the Declaration of Independence which, acting as the Preamble to the Preamble outlined exactly what power “we the people” had, was unconnected to the Constitution in any way. I won’t quote all the relevant parts of the Declaration of Independence that backstop “we the people”, but Sooper Mexican did a very nice job of finding the good parts so check out his post (or better yet, forward it to Moulitsas because he obviously hasn’t read it in a while). Really, what Moulitsas wants you to believe is “the governed” of the Declaration of Independence who give their consent so that governments may have just power to secure their rights are not at all the same as “the people” of the Constitution.

That’s simply a bizarre view of history that only a committed (and by that, I mean one who has been struck sharply on the head by a brick) progressive could hold. But never let it be said that ol’ Kos isn’t completely committed to his ideology, no matter how brainless it appears.

I know. That “brainless” bit seemed a bit unfair, didn’t it? Well, let me leave you with one more Kos tweet, this at the end of his little Constitutional lesson.

If anything, I went too light him. Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have a song in my head…something about getting caught in the rain.

Tags: , , ,

Category: Uncategorized

About the Author ()