“Mount Vernon Statement” brings conservative self-delusion to a new level of fail

Like a bunch of abusive spouses, some self-labeled conservatives are having a moment of love for the constitution they mercilessly battered for most of the 2000s so far, with the grandstanding release of something called the “Mount Vernon Statement.” (On a website using possibly the most poorly executed WordPress theme of all time, no less.)

With no irony, Fox News crafts a revolutionary war flavored piece quoting members of the movement to protect things like our property and freedoms:

“For those of us striving hard every day to defend our nation’s freedoms from liberalism’s belief that an ever-increasing government is the cure for every care, the Mount Vernon Statement is a breath of fresh air that reminds us that constitutional conservatism need not be reinvented or poll-tested in each new election cycle,” said Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., chairman of the House Republican Conference.

What. A. Load. Of. Bollocks. Where the hell were all these Constitution-humpers during the last eight years when the Bush administration systematically peed all over the fourth, fifth and sixth amendments? Oh, so breaking up the murderous monopoly of insurance companies is somehow cause for Valley Forge 2, but it was okay when we lost our rights to:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The “Patriot Act” anyone? While the government got busy tapping our phones and reading our e-mails to root out the turrists, I didn’t hear any vocal complaining from this bunch. And naming it the “Patriot Act” was like an extra “screw you” to the American people, as the patriots we learned about as American children would have bayonetted anyone who suggested such a thing.

Of course, you may say the constitution didn’t address these technologies, just like the constitution doesn’t address a modern concept like universal health coverage. (Bear in mind, back then, doctors anesthetized with moonshine and accepted grain sacks as payment.) Even still, if the founding fathers were presented with the idea of the government intercepting the correspondence of private citizens, I do believe they’d go what is now colloquially known as “apesh*t.”

No person shall be held to answer for any capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation:

Guantanamo Bay? Again, I don’t think the founding fathers thought these rights only existed outside of Cuba. George W. Bush and his band of merry constitution rapers threw this one out the window and rapidly, and again, where was the outrage then? Erosion of one’s rights within the criminal justice system over the past decade when the word “terrorism” was invoked should have scared people a hell of a lot more than an insurance premium under $867 a month for a small family.

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense:

Again, Guantanamo Bay, for starters. We’ve had people rotting down there for the better part of a decade with no plans to move or deal with them in a timely fashion. Merely by merit of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, men have ended up in this judicial purgatory for years, and it’s shameful. But we should all speak up because poor people might get to go to the doctor, and that is not the American way.

Don’t forget the Eighth Amendment, either.

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted:

In the country where we’re known worldwide as allowing and encouraging torture, and we actually debate whether waterboarding is a useful interrogation technique. Fox News fellates these hypocrites in describing the goals of the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC):

It will speak directly to the three pillars of the modern movement: economic conservatives, social conservatives, and national security conservatives.

Economic conservatives my libertarian derriere. A bunch of people who supported two poorly planned and ill executed wars that had nothing to do with the September 11th attacks and saddled the American people with a massive debt burden should not be allowed to call themselves economically conservative. While we were off sending our troops to fight, ill-equipped I might add, in two countries that did not attack us, did not have weapons of mass destruction and causing a distraction from genuine national security, the American economy imploded and we lacked desperately needed soldiers to respond on American soil when the levees crumbled in New Orleans. So, massive fail on the whole national security/economic conservatism thing.

The biggest insult going in the whole conservative blogging lovefest over this idiocy is using the term “big brother” when discussing the possibility of healthcare reform. Wiretapping was perfectly acceptable, but when trying to break the stranglehold the government has on healthcare insurance comes into play, suddenly we’re all afraid of “big brother.” It would be funny if it wasn’t so tragically sad, and people weren’t dying in this country every single day because of it.