Thank you Jesus for letting us change things. Wait, no, we don't want to change any more! STOP!For Teabaggers, it seems, the older the law, the better. Everything we need is in the Constitution, because it was written at the beginning. Even though back then, people had no idea what America was going to look like or, really, what it should be. And even though the beloved founders failed miserably at their first attempt at a constitution, the Articles of Confederation. Why aren’t the Teabaggers reading that document instead? Don’t they know the Constitution was actually an illegal intrusion by a bunch of elites that violated the beautiful Articles, the ORIGINAL Constitution of our land? Also, Teabaggers, you will remember, actually don’t like a lot of the Constitution they are supposed to adore so much. Which Teabagger is going to be forced to read the Fourteenth Amendment today? What about the Seventeenth? Whoever does should be shot immediately, because those parts are BAD.

From Wikipedia:

Although the states’ representatives to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia were only authorized to amend the Articles, the representatives held secret, closed-door sessions and wrote a new constitution. The new Constitution gave much more power to the central government

In other words, a bunch of government elites who thought they knew what was best for the changing country came in and TRAMPLED ON our dear constitution, the Articles of Confederation. Why won’t the Teabaggers stand up for this poor constitution? A group of people we call the founders was actually illegally violating the TRUE FOUNDERS with this new, SOCIALIST “central government” intrusion. They should have been shot.

Why does Scalia always say originalism is about the Constitution? It should be about the Articles of Confederation. By holding the Constitution in the highest esteem, he’s actually supporting an evolution of the law and an admission that old legal constructs did not suit a changed nation. He should be shot.

But never mind all this, because these guys don’t even like the current Constitution they jerk off to. Once Teabaggers climax, they start to talk about how it has flaws. Like how the Fourteenth Amendment lets ANCHOR BABIES do terrorism to citrus crops. And the Seventeenth Amendment lets citizens elect U.S. senators the Teabaggers don’t like very much.

Today, the people reading the Constitution are skipping over the parts that progress has seen fit to change. Because a lot of the Constitution is embarrassing, even to them. Because, as much as some people hate the idea of reality not being the same as it once was, things change.

Donate with CCDonate with CC
  • Troubledog

    Give me that old-time religion,
    Give me that old-time religion,
    Give me that old-time religion,
    It's good enough for me.

    • SorosBot

      You mean deism?

    • SorosBot


      • Worthly Wokette Skum


      • Sophist FCD

        Fire worship.

    • Negropolis


  • What do you mean once they climax?

    If they did climax then they wouldn't be so fucking angry and maybe even less stupid.

    • Negropolis

      You mean they've been edging for 200-something years? Gawd that must be painful.

  • OneDollarJuana

    Fucking Magna Carta, how does it work?

    • horsedreamer_1

      How's that Diviny, Righty thing workin' out for ye?

    • V572625694

      Fuck that revisionist bullshit Magna Carta (not really all that "magna," when you see it.) Let's go back to the Code of Hammurabi. It's not nearly as muslin as it sounds.

      • OneDollarJuana

        The Repubs should like it. One tear-filled eye for another, and lots of sections about slaves.

    • bagofmice
      • SorosBot

        The fucking Moon, how does it work?

  • SorosBot

    And here I was planning on doing a shot when they go to the Eighteenth Amendment, ah well.

    • horsedreamer_1

      I'm still doing shots. Every time they stammer for having to read something they don't like.

    • JadedDissonance

      I'd be equally happy to hear the recitation of all supreme court decisions that influenced how the constitution is interpreted.

      Having grown up in conservative, right-wing christianity, I can accurately label this as more Hermeneutics without the Exegesis.

  • MittsHairHelmet

    What if I'm happy with the Articles of Confederation? Americans should be allowed to keep the founding document they have instead of having this so called "Constitution" reform shoved down our throats by Democrats.

    • horsedreamer_1

      There were no political parties in 1787. There were partisans, there were interests, but none had coalesced into organized groups, with by-laws.

      That came later.

      & I guess this means the Democrats, Republicans &/or Tea Party, & the rest need to disburse. For originalism.

  • prommie

    An ape can read philosophy, Otto, he just won't understand it.

  • Allmighty_Manos

    Look if the Founding Fathers really wanted people to mess with the Constitution, they would have spelled out in explicit detail procedures for changing it.

    I don't see that anywhere in my copy of the Constitution, provided to me from SarahPAC.

  • Blendergoathead

    "Articles of Confederation" is too many syllables for even the most advanced teabagger brain.

  • James Michael Curley

    "There are no comments posted yet. Be the first one!"

    NO! I will not be intimidated by this Centralized, Socially Networked, Tyrannical …

  • Amaravilha

    Oh, that's an easy fix….

    "We the People, under God, in order to form a more perfect union, under God, establish justice, under God, ensure domestic tranquility, under God, provide for the common defense, against your brown dirt false Allah God, promote the general welfare, under God, secure the BLESSINGS of LIBERTY to ourselves and our posterity, under God. do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

    and so forth.

    It's worth the extra reading time, because it's what our Judeo-Christian Founders originally wanted when they founded this country on Judeo-Christian Values. (No homo.)

    • nounverb911

      "under God"

      I thought the US was under Canada.

    • "We're being inclusive! We said Judeo!"

  • iburl

    Wait…. Republicans can read? NO way. These are people who claim their favorite book was "My Kitchen…. oh I thought you said favorite bar….what did he say? Reagan Diaries? Yeah, That."

    • NewtsChicknNeck

      my favorite part of that enlightened discussion was steele's response: "umm, war & peace." oh yeah, war & peace, great job, mike!! either he's a comedic genius who won't be fully appreciated until he's dead or he just admitted he's never read a book but can recite a few words of the longest book he can think of. what's truly shocking is that none of these idiots said the bible.

  • Rosie_Scenario

    Step One: Find teabaggers who can read all those big words.
    Step Two: Revive teabaggers who are stunned that the "right to drive Hover rounds and Rascals — if Medicare doesn't pay, we'll give it to you free" is not in the Constitution.
    Step Three: Wake me when this charade is over.

  • HempDogbane

    "Because as much as some people hate the idea of reality not being the same as it once was, things change."

    On my screen this last sentence of the post was right next to the ad for American Girl Aloha Kanani, which I believe is the mother of the Constitution hating Kenyan usurper.

    • You must have a rich and vivid browser search history.

  • EatsBabyDingos

    "Olds" like Scalia remind me of Oscar winner Ernie Borgnine's comments last year when he was asked the secret to his success ("He was something other than Mermaidman?")

    Thinking he was "off mic," he leaned into the interviewer and said "I masturbate a lot."

    Makes me want to shake Scalia's uhh "hand."

  • neiltheblaze

    They're going to think they are the Articles of the Confederacy, and as a consequence, embrace them enthusiastically shouting "The south shall rise again!!" Even the ones from Iowa.

    • horsedreamer_1

      Quantrill Lives!

    • EatsBabyDingos



      NORTH: 1
      SOUTH: 0

  • The parts I like best are about how only the white dudes have a vote, can own property (including other people), etc. That's some delicious Jedeo-Christian goodness right there.

    • widestanceroman

      With hypocrisy baked right in, like yummy cheese.

    • LionelHutzEsq

      Those are the parts Justice Scalia likes best also. Also.

  • HolyMaracas

    Glad to hear that Teabaggers will finally get to actually go over the Constitution for the first time today.

  • MinAgain

    Just tell them that Jefferson Davis signed the Articles of Confederation, and they'll be all over it.

  • The next tactic that Boner and friends use to delay having to actually start working will be a mass game of smell my finger presided over by Sun Yung Moon followed by the ritual depantsing of male pages.

  • SharkSandwich

    Other unpopular provisions:

    – Art. I Sec. 8 (taxing power, spending power, commerce clause, etc.)
    – Art. III Sec. 3 (you can be charged with treason only for warfare against US)
    – First Amend. (no law respecting establishment of religion)
    – Fourth Amend. (no search/seizure w/o warrant + probable cause – even for things other than meth and guns)
    – Eight Amend. (no cruel and unusual punishment)
    – Fifteenth Amend. (assuring the right of blacks, mexicans, and muslins to vote)
    – Sixteenth Amend. (authorizing income tax, IRS)

    Good God, this "constitution" is just a bunch of liberal clap-trap!

  • twaingirl

    Wait until the Teabaggers find out that the Constitution was written by people who immigrated to this country–ILLEGALLY.

    • Eve8Apples

      And they pooped out a bunch of anchor babies.

      • Banelm

        Several were actually responsible for decapitating Real Americans!! Then burning down their homes!

  • V572625694

    Ha ha, it's funny to go look at the constitution of the Confederacy, which among other virtues (obvs) says slavery is good, puts Jeebus in charge, and gets the government out of the Medicare general welfare business:

    The elastic clauses in the preamble "to promote the general welfare" and the powers of congress, Article I section viii, "to provide . . . for the general welfare" are both absent, reflecting the confederate founders' wariness of a growing and ever more powerful federal government. The words "invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God" are added to the confederate constitution.

    They had so much of it right!

    • spinozasgod

      yes, very very far right……

    • Ducksworthy

      Thanks for that. You're right. What we're seeing is the Confederates trying to rewrite Our constitution. These traitros should have all been executed last time, starting with Robert E., But maybe its not too late.

    • BarackMyWorld

      I want to find a video clip from today of when they read Article 6 and see if anyone was paying attention.

  • If the House is start every day with reading the constitution they won't have time to get much work done.

    Maybe this isn't so bad after all.

    • MARCdMan

      And watching some of these stupid bumpkin newbies stammer and stumble through the longer passages will provide hours of entertainment.

    • LionelHutzEsq

      Don't worry, as of next week they are switching over to reading selections from Decisions Points at the start of every session.

  • suddenly being ruled by King George doesn't look so bad.

    • LionelHutzEsq

      One insane leader for another.

      And I'm probably missing an House of Orange joke in there somewhere, even if George was Hanoverian.

  • mavenmaven

    You give them too much credit. They don't know Constitution from Confederation. They just don't like a black guy as president.

  • horsedreamer_1

    "I asked Goodlatte and he said it will be first come, first serve,” King explained. “I said, ‘I want to start and I don’t want to yield.’"

    What kind of un-American elitism is this? Steve King, you'll have your Cafe Americano, & you'll like it.

    Get your soy venti double-shot gingerbread mochas out of my face — & back on the Straight Talk Express, where they belong.

  • Troubledog

    Seriously, all this faux-Constitutionalist bullshit is handcrafted dog whistling to people steeped in restorationist dogma.

    Every problem is blamed on "losing our way"; the solution being to "return to the original script" under the guidance of some new charlatan.

  • undeterredbyreality

    Jeebus, they are arguing over what the language of the constitution is. Some fucknut from Virginia wants them to read the original constitution or somethin'. At the rate they are going, they'll never actually get to the reading. Progress indeed. Commentator on MSNBC just called it the "nation's birth cerificate." Okay–looks like the 3/5s rule is what they really really really want to get read, and none of that newer shite.

    • deleted6911319

      The "nation's birth certificate"? Is it the long form? Is it????

  • Hera Sent Me

    If a teabagger reads the Constitution in the forest and doesn't understand it, does he still get Medicare?

    • LionelHutzEsq

      Do you think he would dare let the government get its hands on Medicare?

  • Serolf_Divad

    My question is this: Will they actually read the 16th amendment (income tax) aloud or will they ignore it altogether, claiming that it was never properly ratified.

    • horsedreamer_1

      That Ohio story is amazing.

      Arizona, you just got bumped up one position.

    • Perhaps they can get Wesley Snipes as a guest reader for that section.

    • JustPixelz

      So basically they say Ohio didn't have a birf cert? These guys need some new material.

  • Is the alt text graphic the cover for the new Classic Comix edition?

  • obfuscator2

    i agree.

    scalia should be shot.

  • elviouslyqueer

    Once Teabaggers climax

    Objection. Facts not in evidence, since it's been widely proven that Teabaggers don't have working balls and/or clitori.

  • Eve8Apples

    When they read the line about the federal government promoting "the general welfare," the t-baggers stood-up and shouted, "communist, socialist Kenyan Muslim" and "YOU LIE!"

  • *From the Hill article on the reading of the constitution.*

    "Goodlatte said there will be no ad-libs permitted.
    “[Members] will not be allowed to” editorialize, Goodlatte said."

    That is too bad. I'm sure the Teabagger version is much more entertaining.

    • DangerHelvetica

      I don't think there's anything preventing them from going "cough SOCIALIST cough cough", though.

    • chicken_thief

      Is Goodlatte his/her real name or their screen name? Jes wondering…

  • ttommyunger

    I never amounted to much in my life, but I'm not reviled and hated by millions. George W. Bush, on the other hand, is. John Boehner will soon join Dubya's Club. The moral: be careful what you want, you might get it.

    • x111e7thst

      Is a Dubya Club like a Stupid Stick?
      As in: "Young George will never amount to much. He was hit at birth with a Dubya Club".

      • ttommyunger

        Probably just a light touch with a Dubya toothpick would be enough to seriously retard a Rhodes Scholar.

    • GOPCrusher

      Not sure where you are getting your information. According to the Dubya "DO YOU MISS ME YET?" billboards, George Bush is even more beloved than Abraham Lincoln.

      • ttommyunger

        Right, neck and neck with Saint Reagan.

  • DemonicRage

    For all the difference it would make, the people in the House of Representatives ought to do a group reading of the script of "Auntie Mame." They seem to want to go back to the 1950's. Let them at least present something on C-Span that is vaguely entertaining.

    • MiniMencken

      Have you read "Auntie Mame?" She was a big, fat Liberal, employing a Chinese houseboy, calling off a marriage to a rich plantation owner because he was a racist fucktard, buying up real estate next to the home of an antisemitic wacko and putting a home for unwed mothers on it, sending her nephew to a progressive day school in Greenwich Village where children studied in the nude. I mean, Dude, "Auntie Mame" would be a real eye-opener for these corporate shills and Confederate race baiters. They don't want to return to the 1950s. They want to return to the 1850s.

      • DemonicRage

        You're right, of course.

  • EatsBabyDingos

    Peabody: "Sherman, set the wayback machine for 2213 BC. We are going to see Moses get the 6 Commandments. Be sure to cover your eyes; you are only allowed to see God's butt."

    Sherman: "Why are we allowed to only see God's butt?"

    Peabody: "God looks like she's wearing size Small stirrup pants when she's a XXXXL. God figures that the sight of so much wedgie cottage cheese would put the fear of God into them. "

    Sherman: "So that's where WalMart babies come from."

  • I say we only read 3/5 of the words in the 14th amendment.

    • DustBowlBlues

      What surprised me the most was when I learned that the southerners wanted slaves represented as a whole person, in order to get more votes in the House. The north didn't want them represented at all.

      Indulge me: Though Delaware's John Dickinson didn't say much about this in the debate, he wrote in his journal about it on July 9, when the debate was the most heated. (Slaves were consistently referred to as "other persons" and "particular property" so they woudn't have to say slave or slavery).

      "What will be said of this new principle of founding a Right to govern Freemen on a power derived from Slaves, . . .[who are] themselves incapable of governing yet giving to others what they have not. The omitting [of] the WORD" (caps his, not mine) " will be regarded as an Endeavour to conceal a principle of which we are ashamed."

      The fine, fine history of the glorious south. If they'd won the debates, we'd still be a colony. If they'd won the debates, we would still have the Articles.

      You can write the recent history yourselves, if the south had won anything. Whatever southerners want, you can bet that history will condemn it.

      (Gah. I'm gagging. Langford, the new okie, is on. He beat the establishment Republithug with a stealth campaign inside Southern Baptist churches. Even has hie "victory party" in one. Bet that was a good time. Total theocracy douche.)

  • Jerri

    They're sure in for some surprises today then, aren't they?

    (Assuming they can comprehend some of the polysyllabic words, that is.)

  • WhatTheHeck

    The Bill of Rights is a ‘Job-killing’ Bill.

    • DustBowlBlues

      Not for the jobs that matter: making guns.

  • RawhideRawlins

    What the hell IS that picture?

  • I imagine today's grandstanding will go something like this:

  • LionelHutzEsq

    I'm just surprised that these followers of Regan and Beck can mutter the first Socialistic words of the Constitution: "We, the people…"

  • Weenus299


    • ShaveTheWhales

      Thank you, Anne.

  • Schmannnity

    Equal Protection? WTF? Who put that in there? Oh, the 1860s Republican Party.

  • DustBowlBlues

    C-SPAN's call in question is, "What's your view of the Constitution?" If you're not all-in with the governing document, shouldn't you GTFO?

  • DonnyKerabotsos

    Jeez, Reps, read much? This is more tedious than a phonics lesson.

    Maybe they could liven this up a bit by telling us the title of their favorite book. Or their favorite bar.

    Book or bar, either one would be good.

    • genxr

      It was the best of drinks, it was the worst of drinks.

  • whiterabid

    I have a personal relationship with my Constitution. It speaks to me and leads me through all the days of my life. And anyone who doesn't agree with my personal relationship can fuck off.

    • WIDTAP

      Ahh. As we suspected. You are sleeping with it, aren't you.

  • HELisforHEL

    You know, I had a possibly the worst end of year ever putting down our beloved dog. And to start out the new year this grandstanding, ridiculous tarted-up shit from a bunch of complete morons elected by a load of greedy stupid fools who don't understand that they're being utterly played—ARGH

    Q. Why is it that dogs live only a short time and pieces of excrement like Boehner and McConnell and (of course) Cheney and the rest of them get to continue breathing? Can anyone explain?

    I'm already wishing this year was over. Sigh.

    • SorosBot

      They have unnaturally long lives from drinking the blood of children.

  • Refudiation

    Ferchrissakes, Jack, don't give these dimwits any more ideas. They're already chock full of lousy ones, and I bet they'd love themselves some Articles of Confederation — which probably would be more effective at keeping Kenyans out of the driver's seat — as soon as they can figure out how to work Conservapedia.

  • JustPixelz

    A little political theatre from the Repubicans. Otherwise, the sub-text is "we need a Constitution cram session because there will be a test on this later in the session."

  • Truculent

    President Michele Bachmann will straighten everything out in 2013. Just you wait and see

  • chascates

    If the Founders were such God-inspired geniuses and the Constitution is second only to the Bible in infallibility why the hell are there any amendments to the thing, huh??

  • inedalo

    didn't the Man jeebus christer invent the constitution? or was that constipation?
    why can't you wonketeers just follows its teachings?

  • Man, I am really sorry about your dog. I have 8 myself and just the thought of one of them dying makes my heart hurt.

    As to your question, I wish to God I knew. Each and every dog I have ever seen in my life is worth more then assholes like Boner, Turtleneck and Darth Cheney.

    • Truculent

      "Heaven goes by favor. If it went by merit, you would stay outside and your dog would go in" — Mark Twain

    • HELisforHEL

      Thanks to you all. And I never read the Twain quote before…he got that right.

  • BerkeleyBear

    Nice channeling Clarence Thomas. Seriously, he likes to go back to the Articles as if they are still binding.

    Personally, I think a compare and contrast with the Articles would be a good thing for the GOP, since then maybe would see the difference between a government with only exclusively granted powers (Articles = crapfest of the highest order) and one with implicit powers (Constitution = less crappy, more capable of actually dealing with problems on occassion).

  • Redhead

    "Today, the people reading the Constitution are skipping over the parts that progress has seen fit to change."

    That's exactly what they do with the bible too, and then they try to make the bible apply to everyone as well. In fact, it's pretty much what they do with all books that use big words and that they have trouble understanding (or, all books but "My Pet Goat").

  • rocktonsam

    its all those squiggly fancy hand writing that turns the baggers on. They sign their welfarez check just like all of them

  • Negropolis

    Jack, lots of talk of gun violence in that post. Is there something you're trying to tell us? You know, like the opinion that someone needs to be shot, or some shit?

  • Negropolis

    From Article 3 of The Articles:

    "The said States hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other…"

    The teabaggers would absolutely love this one. Who needs a government when you have a "firm league of friendship"? We need to rename this confederation of states "The Firmly Frienshipped/Aligned States of America."

Previous articleGOP Congress Ratifies Constitution Again Or Something?
Next articleSteve King To Rescue Place Next To Mexico From Mexico