Fox Insults the Founders by Calling Palin and Bachmann Constitutional Experts

Did you ever ask yourself why people who watch Fox News are so grossly misinformed about our Constitution? The answer can be found by looking at who FNC considers constitutional experts. Fox doesn’t consider our constitutional law professor president an expert, but they look to such intellectual luminaries as Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin for guidance.

On Freedom Watch today, The Judge referred to Bachmann as a constitutional expert. Here is the video from Media Matters:

The Judge prefaced a question about whether Congress takes the Constitution seriously by referring to Bachmann as, “You are also a well known expert on the Constitution.” Bachmann then babbled on about something called a constitutional conservative, “There are people who do look to the Constitution for guidance, and those who don’t. I would say there is no moral equivalency however. I think the conservatives, the constitutional conservatives, tend to reside overwhelmingly in the Republican Party, and I think going forward this November any candidate who wants to win, needs to run as a constitutional conservative, because that’s what the American people are looking for.”

Notice that the question to Bachmann actually had nothing to do with an interpretation of a constitutional question, but that it was just a chance for her to shill for November disguised as a constitutional question. That’s some Constitutional expert you’ve got there, Fox News. She is so good that you are too afraid to ask her any real questions about the Constitution. Oh, but fear not, Bachmann is not alone as FNC’s constitutional expert, there is help, and the cavalry is arriving in the form of Sarah Palin.

Before Sarah could not figure out what the First Amendment is, she appeared on FNC’s Hannity as the constitutional expert on the healthcare reform bill. Who could ever forget that fateful night when Sarah Palin sounded like she was giving an oral report on the Constitution, but had no idea what is in it?

Palin said, “We’ve learned through America’s history that the government that governs least governs best, and that all political power is inherent in the people. Government originates just from the will of the people. It’s implemented according to the will of the people…The process that Pelosi is pushing right now is unconstitutional. This bill will not have been passed by both houses in Congress, and that’s unconstitutional. It’s cut and dry. It’s white and black. It’s quite clear to most Americans that this isn’t right, and not only again does it go against the will of the people, but it goes against our own constitution. What? Is the Constitution not worth the paper the paper it is written on then?”

Once again, notice that a Fox News constitutional expert, never actually specifically mentioned the Constitution. The Constitution isn’t worth the paper it is printed on if people like Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin don’t bother to read and understand it. Unlike Palin, Bachmann actually has a law degree, but she got it from one of the evangelical techs (Oral Roberts), and it is in tax law, not constitutional law. Bachmann’s legal experience is as a federal tax attorney in U.S. federal tax court. This is not exactly the same as being a constitutional law professor.

One last point, when I heard Bachmann use the term constitutional conservative, as a person with a couple of poli sci degrees, my BS detector went on overload. That sounds like a made up term, I said to myself, and sure enough it would seem that the angry far Right has rebranded itself. This comes from the Constitutional Conservative Blog, “Constitutional Conservatism flows from Judeo-Christian Biblical principles, but is religion-neutral — atheists can be (and are welcomed as) Constitutional Conservatives — Constitutional Conservatism does not seek to set up a religious government (as some conservatives desire). But in agreement with the original framers, freedom of religion is paramount to the Constitutional Conservative.”

The four principles of constitutional conservatism are a textual interpretation of the Constitution, fiscal responsibility, charity, and personal responsibility. In other words, they are the Republican Party. By the way, the charity principle is a nice euphemism for their desire to end the entire social safety net. Instead of the government, they believe that each citizen has a moral responsibility to help the less fortunate. What their principle doesn’t address is how this works when there is more need than private help available, but constitutional conservatives don’t seem too concerned about the future, or reality.

What happens whenever you have people like Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin going on national television and ideologically distorting the Constitution? The result is a couple of million people dangerously wandering the streets of Anytown, USA screaming about anchor babies, mosques, and the First Amendment without the slightest clue of what they are talking about. I would argue that America doesn’t want a constitutional conservative government. They want jobs, and so I urge all Republicans to follow Bachmann’s advice and run on constitutional conservatism, while the Democrats talk about the economy and jobs, because it seems that Bachmann and Palin know as much about the electorate, as they do the Constitution.

36 Replies to “Fox Insults the Founders by Calling Palin and Bachmann Constitutional Experts”

  1. Fortunately I think most republicans are smarter than Bachmann and Palin. But Bachmann must know the constitution as she is all over those 2nd amendment solutions

    These are a bunch of really sick people that know what they are doing. But guess what, if anyone is smart, they will debate them on the constitution. Fox News wills link away and so will the two birdbrains

    American has reached close to bottom of how our country is run. What we see is the worst of the republican party and as usual a weak kneed dem party that cant overcome itself and lead. if only this congress would stand up and lead against the hate.

  2. I want to comment, but I don’t know that I can – I’m laughing too hard! Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann as experts on the Constitution? THE Constitution??

    I’m sorry, but I believe that people on the right such as Palin and Bachmann have one “truth” when it comes to our nation’s Constitution, and it’s the same “truth” that they have about the Bible, and every other document they consider important: It says whatever they want it to say.

  3. I haven’t laughed so hard…This is hilarious. Of all the people FOX can trot out with a snap of the fingers, with all the people they’re giving money to, this is the best they can do. Palin probably can’t even read the Constitution and Bachmann clearly has not. Simple test: Wall of Separation. Epic fail on both their parts.

  4. Good point. I had momentarily forgotten about the push to have the President declared a non-citizen repeal the 14th amendment.

  5. Love that “Constitutional Conservatism FLOWS from Judeo-Christian Biblical Principles”….OOZES might a more appropriate term with this bunch, they understand the Bible even less than they do the Constitution (thank you Oral Roberts)
    Great article. LMAO

  6. And, just as in real life, Michele Bachmann inserts herself where she is not wanted. Please make the google ad go away OR let’s investigate her for her anti-American activities:-)

  7. hahaha:-) Hraf, are you quaking in your boots? Don’t worry, Jason threatens to fire me every day, but then I just remind him that if I leave, he is stuck covering Palin and usually he lays off for a few.

  8. For a second I read that as “inverts” herself, which had all sorts of interesting possibilities…

  9. Isn’t that the truth? Maybe someone should set it up, as pay-per-view, with the proceeds going to charity. I’d watch!

  10. Perhaps the bozos on FOX PAC meant to say that Bachmann and Palin are experts at performing their daily constitutional since they habitually take a walk on the wild side of reason.

  11. There is a well known phrase “a momentary lapse of reason”. These two embody “a lifetime lapse of reason”. From “saying no to the bridge to nowhere” to “the US census data will send people to secret internment camps”, any talking point from them fails even the weakest of tests. Occam’s razor is not necessary here, there is no subtle nuance of truth to be found. What we can’t fall prey to is that they are so ridiculous that they’re not worth our time to dismiss- any right wing semi-information like theirs needs relentless public debunking.

  12. Palin-Bachmann 2012!!!!!

    Suck on that, libtards!!

    We’re taking back the White House and the country!

  13. I agree that although it’s easy to laugh off Dumb and Dumber, the fact is that people actually see them as presidential material. I find this both disquieting and disturbing, because it is a direct result of the dumbing down in this country. As I once said before, I agree with Washington Post columnist Courtland Milloy when he said we are in far more danger from homegrown ignorance than from a terrorist attack.

  14. I appreciate your article, and the pointed accuracy of the comments. I too can’t believe that they are referred to as experts. It is hard to imagine.
    I am a little confused though, why you would change course midway through the article and point out, and comment on only one point of the definition of Constitutional Conservative. Maybe you would like to compare and contrast the fiscal responsibility of the Constitutional Conservative and the Democratic party in office right now – the ones who have spent billions of tax-payer monies without showing how they will cut spending in other areas to support these expenses. But that is a real trick, isn’t it? To ask a politician to transparently separate income from expenses?
    Thanks again for your article.

  15. Conservative Heart, I totally agree with you, and these stupid ass liberals are to full of hate and to stupid to realize it. By the way it has been shown that Conservatives give way more to charity than the Liberals. The difference I guess is they want them to use our hard earned money, than their own! Keep up the battle! Terry

  16. As I said in another post, the danger is not in the total nonsense this pair spouts, but in the sheer number of people who believe it. Sarah and Michelle are caught up in the euphoria of their support among those who hate anything “big government” might do that causes any inconvenience. This support becomes it’s own reinforcement since everyone who agrees with it agrees with it (rather conveniently insulated from any outside facts). If I believed the world was flat I would ignore any evidence or believers on the other side of the debate. What’s scary here is the number of people ignoring the facts.

  17. I’m really good at making stuff up. AND I grew up in Philadelphia. How do I get a gig as a Constitutional Scholar?

  18. Sarah Palin isn’t equipped to teach an eighth grade history class much less govern a nation. A woman who can’t even answer simple questions from real reporters certainly doesn’t have the answers to solve national or international questions. The Fox News charade of editing her into soundbytes that exclude her Yoda backwards talk gibberish: ( throw the cow over the fence some hay) is a journalistic joke. The woman is just one dumb duck. That’s all there is. End of story.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.