... and just to make sure we remember that there are still plenty of wingnuts in Congress...

[jducoeur]

... I give you this pointer to the words of Senator Rand Paul. Just when Justice Roberts illustrates that there are some reasonable and sensible conservatives out there, Paul reminds us that there are plenty who don't have even a sixth-grade understanding of how this country works...

Comments

[gyzki.livejournal.com]

To quote from princeofcairo's The Complete Idiot's Guide to U.S. History Graphic Illustrated on Marbury v. Madison:
"This court finds portions of the Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional."
"Your honor, I don't recall 'judicial review' appearing in the Constitution."
"Oh, it's in there. Just look for it."
"Seriously, your honor, *I* wrote the thing. It's not in there."

But to deny it now, more than two centuries later, is just being disingenuous.

[metageek.livejournal.com]

And, if there were no judicial review, our Constitutional rights would be a fiction, because there'd be nothing to hold back Congress from violating them.

[marphod.livejournal.com]

Never ascribe to malice which can be ascribed to ignorance.
(I forget who that's quoting)

I consider it more revisionist history than disingenuousness, much like 'The Civil War had nothing to do with Race/Slavery'[1], 'The UK is the US's longest ally' [2], or 'The New Deal is considered a failure by historians.'[3]




---

[1] - hint: it did. There may have bee OTHER contributing factors, as well, but Slavery was definitely a major factor
[2] - Hint: The oldest ally that is a sovereign nation are the so-called "cheese-eating surrender monkeys", but they're not even the oldest US ally; try the Iroquois Nations, although that alliance may not be continuous
[3] - I'm not even going to try to respond to this brand of idiocy.

[corwyn-ap.livejournal.com]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/03/magazine/mag-03CivilWar-t.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all