Aliens for President!
Senator Durbin’s statement saying that an illegal alien could be our president is more than just a slip of the tongue, particularly given that he appeared to be reading from prepared remarks. One would think that a senator would at least be familiar with the constitutional requirement that the President be “a natural born Citizen,” especially given all the needless controversy that surrounded the President’s place of birth’s until he finally released his birth certificate.
Durbin’s statement is really just another indication that for him, like so many on the left, the Constitution is just not all that important. Oh, they will pay lip-service to it when the occasion requires it, but it is really not all that important. They are akin to the Sunday Christian, the one who normally shows up on Sunday, but never actually reads the Bible, and thus it has very little impact on what they think, say and do.
In fact for many on the left, the Constitution is more of a bother than anything else, something that just gets in the way of the important work they are doing. Case in point: The Obamacare requirement to purchase health insurance. Now under the commerce clause the federal government can regulate interstate commerce. But how can not buying health insurance be considered an act of interstate commerce? This is especially true when you consider that one cannot purchase health insurance from other states to begin with. Thus it really was no surprise when a court ruled this law unconstitutional. It was also not a big surprise when the administration basically ignored their ruling and waited until they could get some judges with a more flexible view of the constitution.
In fact the Constitution has been one of the biggest barriers to the left, going back to FDR, who tried to pack the court to avoid its limitations. He failed in packing the court, but eventually got the court, and thus the ruling, he wanted. The left has followed his blueprint ever since. When faced with a clause that they don’t like, they just reinterpret it to conform to their desires.
Take the Bill of Rights, for example. The left’s effort to change the meanings of these amendments has been so successful that many now think that the first amendment actually says separation of church and state. Free speech, put in place to protect political speech has been so turned on its head that political speech is now the most regulated. The second amendment which specifically mentions “the right of the people” is seen as referring to the right of state governments. The fourth and fifth and sixth amendments has been extended to enemy combatants, while the fifth amendment protection of private property have been weakened such that the government does not really need to take your property, they can just control what you do as if it were theirs. As for the tenth amendment, that, of course, is meaningless. Then of course there are the new “rights” that have been found lurking around in the emanation of various penumbras.
In short, the Bill of Rights does not mean what it says, it only means what the liberals tell us it means, and any attempt to restore it back to its original meaning is loudly decried as “Trying to change the Bill of Rights for the first time in our history.”
Thus Durbin’s statement is really not all that surprising. After all, why should he see the Constitution as a hindrance? This also goes a long way towards explaining why so many on the left fear the Tea-Party movement. These people not only read the constitution, they actually want to follow it! Can you get more unreasonable than that?
