Ezra Klein (and his newbie troll here) In The Cross-Hairs Of ZOT!

Double Dutch Politics ^ | 12/31/2010 | Ryan Colpaart

[RyanC1384]

As we reported yesterday, Republicans plan to read aloud the Constitution of the United States when the 112th Congress kicks off on January 6th, 2011.  Many find this to be a political tactic, a gimmick of sorts.  Republicans are attempting to hold support from the Tea Party and are howling for Congress to follow the Constitution word for word.  A firm skeptic of this Republican stratagem is Ezra Klein of the Washington Post, one of the most astute minds when it comes to procedure within Congress and fiscal concerns. Yesterday he appeared for an interview with MSNBC's Nora O'Donnell to discuss the matter:Returning To The Constitution

Conservatives have fired back with venom and a touch of sarcastic vitriol. The site Iowahawk was even moved to create a satirical essay of Ezra Klein applying for work at the Washington Post.  The rambling text portrays Klein as a buffoon who is unable to string multiple thoughts together or think critically.  Others, like EyeBlast's Stephen Gutowski, have employed a less ambiguous tactic by outright blasting him. Gutowski firmly asserts that Klein's stance on the Constitution is a liberal plot for power:

Make sure you watch that again to get what hes arguing here. Hes not saying that he can’t understand it because its over 100 years old. Hes saying that nobody can understand it because its over 100 years old.

By the way, in case it isn’t clear, the reason these two liberals want people to believe the constitution is impossible to decipher is because they despise the constitution. Liberals want the government to have limitless power and that is in direct contrast with what the founders designed the constitution to do. Of course the constitution allows for its own amendment but liberal policies simply aren’t popular enough to garner constitutional amendments thus simply ignoring the constitution is the next best step.

Plus who cares about rule of law when it comes down to it? We’ve got a liberal utopia to build!

This narrative is all too familiar coming from the right wing of the American political spectrum.  They insist that all liberals are power hungry, anti-constitutional socialists, who have an overarching goal of destroying what this country stands for and the foundation she was built upon.

As with much of the political discourse these days, both sides make reasonably valid points. Unfortunately the urge to paint your foe as "Anti-American", and utilize hyperbolic rhetoric is blinding to any rational thinking.  The best way to preface my point is by planting a quote by Salman Rushdie during his interview on Wednesday night with Charlie Rose.  During a lucid discussion around religion and their holy books, Rushdie said this :

You can find in these books (holy) the texts that justify the point of view you happen to have already.

Klein was suggesting exactly this: the Constitution is akin to a holy book. It was written hundreds of years prior, so individuals are unable to derive exactly what the original writers were intending, while at the same time mapping their existing political philosophy onto the text.

This shows that conservatives have a point, but they are misguided in their need to monopolize the urge for power to the liberal side of the isle.  The plain truth is that because certain portions of the Constitution can be interpreted and construed, this void is filled in by politicians.  Politicians with their own limitations, corrupt inclinations, and agendas.  Contrary to the belief of each political party, this proclivity is not confined to one side of the power structure in Washington.

Apparently Klein got wind of the right wing outrage, he responded to his detractors in a post this morning:

The Constitution was written more than 223 years ago, and despite the confidence various people have in their interpretation of the text, smart scholars of good faith continue to disagree about it.

I remain cynical that his attempt to clarify will be framed in any other way than weak by his opponents.  When conservatives invoke the Constitution they speak with an air of ownership.  It is does not demean the document to recognize that over time it can lose its contextual meaning. After all, we do have amendments for a reason.

[Seven plus One]

Huh?

[FlingWingFlyer]

What is this guy’s “claim to fame”? Recently graduating from High School? I’ve never heard of him. Appearing with Nora O’Donnell on PMSNBC doesn’t impress me.

[narses]

IBTZ

[FrankR]

Actually, I think ol' Ezra is getting just what he wanted...fifteen minutes of attention..

[Clint Lippo]

IBTZ no.2

[Admin Moderator]

[rollo tomasi]

"...smart scholars of good faith continue to disagree about it."

Good faith my a$$, they deconstruct the Constitution in order to promote their self-interests.

[tumblindice]

In after Ezra and Ryan relegated to:
http://www.rathergood.com/gaybar

[silentreignofheroes]

“despite the confidence various people have in their interpretation of the text, smart scholars of good faith continue to disagree about it.”

Us Idiots and them there smart folks.

Happy New Year People,,The 2nd keeps us 1st

[cripplecreek]

This is the guy that admits liberals are too stupid to understand the constitution.

[radpolis]

If there is one thing I know for certain in this world is that we conservatives have conceded to much to the left.

They control the conversation of the national discourse, because we have conceded the media, the academy and the law schools to them.

THE CONSTITUTION IS NOT DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND.

What has happened is we have allowed left-wing kooks to twist the meaning of the US Constitution to suit their nefarious political agenda.

When it comes to the plain meaning of the US Constitution and original intent, we conservatives are on the right side every time. We are on the rational side. We understand the political theory that gave birth to the US Constitution.

There is no reasonable debate over its meaning.

We believe in what the Constitution says and we believe in the genius of the Founding Fathers.

We understand the corrupt and totalitarian nature of state power.

Liberals believe in one ideological father: Karl Marx.

They despise everything the US Constitution stands for because it didn’t emanate from the ideas of their father.

[Da Coyote]

Astute?

Just beclowned yourselves, MSM.

I’m sooo glad I went to a real college.

Try it sometimes.

[Retain Mike]

He has thrown a high hanging curve ball for all the talk show hosts who return on Monday. With just a modicum of scholarship, these people should be able to destroy him. They should be able to contrast the inherent natural rights embodied in the Constitution, with the refusal to understand the document based on it being in conflict with various theories espoused to justify oligarchy or totalitarianism.

[Jet Jaguar]

[digger48]

That’s him??? What is he? like 22???

[FlyingEagle]

IBTZ

[Jet Jaguar]

[Pete from Shawnee Mission]

IBTZ

Good bye Ryan!

[Oceander]

The Constitution was written more than 223 years ago, and despite the confidence various people have in their interpretation of the text, smart scholars of good faith continue to disagree about it.

What a stupid, moronic, liberal, thing to say. Notice his cutesy little (liberal) rhetorical move: he doesn't characterize the sort of "disagreement" these so-called "smart scholars" have about the Constitution. Why? Because most smart scholars of the Constitution do not have a whole lot of disagreement over the meaning of the Constitution - they have arguments, mostly along the lines of "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin," that involve mostly moot or academic points, and they have some disagreements over just how far the scope of a particular provision might go, but they generally do not have much disagreement over the core interpretation of the Constitution.
To update that old canard about lies and statistics, there are lies, there are damned lies, there are statistics, and then there are liberals.