Yes...we do.

Nancy Pelosi is confused.

No wonder she passes laws she doesn't understand.

Former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) confused two of our founding documents — the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.  (You know...those pieces of paper every school kid in America is supposed to learn about...) She gave her version at a Center for American Progress event.



Her gaffe wasn't the only eyebrow-raising thing Ms. Pelosi said. (Read more here.)

Incompetence...or worse?

"Operation Fast and Furious" -- the debacle that gives us a view of the administration's efforts to undermine the Second Amendment.

In a video clip (at bottom) from this morning's testimony by the USAG before Congress, Attorney Gen. Eric Holder admits the effort was "reckless," "tragic," "flawed" and that "...more people are going to die."

No big deal, Mr Holder?

U.S. Border agent Brian Terry: Another Fast and Furious casualty...

At the very least, Holder and his team (on this) were criminally negligent. More likely, though, they have been caught in a web of lies they offered in an attempt to cover-up a scheme to subvert the U.S. Constitution – a scheme that resulted in the murders of at least one U.S. Border agent and likely hundreds of other innocent civilians.

It’s not just a crime, it's a national shame.

Someone needs a high school civics class refresher...

Oxymoron?

God love her.

In a brave, albeit utter failure of an attempt to defend the alleged Constitutionality of ObamaCare™, Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) does not have a Hall of Fame moment.

Her first stab at justifying it is that it must be OK based upon the idea that similar legislation was used to “build national highways.” (For the record, she is informed that the Constitution does grant authority to build interstate “post roads.”)

Then Ms. Schakowsky tries to explain that civil rights legislation sets the precedent for something like ObamaCare™. (The trouble with that explanation is that those laws "enforced" several existing amendments... namely the 13th, 14th and 15th.)

The good Congresswoman tries one last time by using Social Security and Medicare as examples. (Once again: FAIL. You see, Social Security is a government program and Medicare is voluntary.)

Because Rep. Schakowsky can't seem to point to any specific part of the Constitution that mandates citizens purchase a "product," the whole exercise leaves her flummoxed. So what does she do? Why, she does what any good elected official does when they can't own-up to their activities in office: she scurries back into the dark corner she came from.

(Huge h/t: Hot Air, for the link and content. Founding Bloggers gets a h/t for original reporting.)

'A republic…if you can keep it'

Sometime later this week, it’s likely Congress will vote on one of the most far-reaching pieces of legislation in the history of the United States: the health insurance reform bill (aka: “ObamaCare”).

The GOP is doing everything it can to stop the 2,400-plus page law from being approved, but the Dems are trying anything and everything to get the bill over the hump…including a host of parliamentary tricks and unconstitutional measures.

When asked why it’s OK to circumvent our nation’s legal foundation and tradition, the answers are myriad. From the noted blog, Red State: “Lefties (Daily Kos, TPMDC, and Huffington Post) are defending against allegations that the ‘Slaughter Rule’ proposed strategy to pass ObamaCare without a vote is unprecedented and unconstitutional. The Slaughter Rule has the support of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and is the Democrats preferred strategy to pass ObamaCare. Liberals are peddling a talking point that self-executing rules like the Slaughter Rule have been done before and it was the Republicans that used this tool in the past. The fact of the matter is that there is no precedent for the House to pass a bill without a direct vote by using a budget reconciliation measure as a trigger and a means to pass ObamaCare. Nancy Pelosi’s potentially unconstitutional strategy to pass unconstitutional ObamaCare is without precedent or justification.”


The leaders of the pack...

So the question arises: why does the Constitution only seem to matter with the pro-ObamaCare forces when it applies to granting rights to terrorists, unlawful combatants, terror detainees and their abettors? Why doesn’t the Constitution matter now?

Two reasons:

• First, this is about an agenda. The Rule of Law be damned.
• Second, this is about cowardice. Even Speaker Pelosi admits as much.

From a Washington Post story by staffers Lori Montgomery and Paul Kane – “After laying the groundwork for a decisive vote this week on the Senate's health-care bill, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi suggested Monday that she might attempt to pass the measure without having members vote on it.

Instead, Pelosi (D-Calif.) would rely on a procedural sleight of hand: The House would vote on a more popular package of fixes to the Senate bill; under the House rule for that vote, passage would signify that lawmakers "deem" the health-care bill to be passed.

The tactic -- known as a "self-executing rule" or a "deem and pass" -- has been commonly used, although never to pass legislation as momentous as the $875 billion health-care bill. It is one of three options that Pelosi said she is considering for a late-week House vote, but she added that she prefers it because it would politically protect lawmakers who are reluctant to publicly support the measure.

"It's more insider and process-oriented than most people want to know," the speaker said in a roundtable discussion with bloggers Monday. "But I like it," she said, "because people don't have to vote on the Senate bill."

Republicans quickly condemned the strategy, framing it as an effort to avoid responsibility for passing the legislation, and some suggested that Pelosi's plan would be unconstitutional.

"It's very painful and troubling to see the gymnastics through which they are going to avoid accountability," Rep. David Dreier (Calif.), the senior Republican on the House Rules Committee, told reporters. "And I hope very much that, at the end of the day, that if we are going to have a vote, we will have a clean up-or-down vote that will allow the American people to see who is supporting this Senate bill and who is not supporting this Senate bill."

In closing, a bit of history: At the Constitutional Convention of 1787, Benjamin Franklin was buttonholed as he left Independence Hall on the final day of deliberation, “Well, doctor, what have we got – a republic or a monarchy?’ Franklin replied, “A republic…if you can keep it.”

After all is said and done, what will we have?


The Constitutional Convention...