Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Originalist sin

By Tom Toles

c_07212010.gif

***

Obama and Palin have already won

Critics can chew and chafe at Obama's presidency, and pundits can try to puzzle out the portents of his plummeting approval numbers. Prognosticators can predict how much alliteration I will pack into this pithy post. But the fact remains that even if Obama loses in 2012, which I predict he won't, he's already won. He's had a solid record of real accomplishment, and if his term ended tomorrow, it would still be true. He came to office to get some things done. The U.S. health-care system was on a crazy, irrational trajectory, and Obama has moved it closer to sanity. You can argue all you want about it, but it's done, he won.

Sarah Palin is something else altogether. Will she run for president? Golly, prolly! Will she win? Prolly not! Does she care? Not so much! Palin is all about becoming a recognized, talked-about public figure. She's there. She's already won, too. --Tom Toles

***

sketchicon_ver1.jpg

s_07212010.gif

By Tom Toles  | July 21, 2010; 12:00 AM ET
Categories:  Tea party  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: America’s new spy trick
Next: Meltproof

Other Syndicated Editorial Cartoons:

Comments

Some ideas for you, picture this,

Immigration reform like bank robbery is a withdrawl.

A picture of President Obama signing a health care reform bill with an elephant captioned Lawyers lobby filling the room.

A picture of President Obama viewing the destruction of the Gulf fishery noted as 1/3 of the economy dead, while behind him his administration detonates a bomb driving the oil business away from the coast captioned that will take care of the rest of it. The under caption shows enviormentalists keeping exploration off shore using enviormental impact statements and misusing the endangered species act.

How about a picture of an artist at his easle viewing the map of the country stuffed with problems, 9 percent unemployment, destruction of a fishery, Audubon rolling in his grave, illegal immigration, lawyers who write thier version of health care reform, Impotent in rage our President has to fire his own General, Pelosi/Reid holding one of thier hands out to stop the Republicans while shoveling money to the same Republican cronnies in Wall Street and in the Banks, (subtitled we have met the enemy and she is us), a catapult throwing mud shows us ticking ticking off our allies on a map of Europe, which also depicts an Obama door mat encouraging our enemies, a map in Mexico indicates territories to be Annexed like Arizona, Nevada, California New Mexico ect.., warships in retreat depict the US not defending our sphere of influence with the Iranian, Chinese and Russian warships arrive to a festival in Venesuala while Cuba gives a passing thumbs up, the bubble caption, "At least it isn't politics as usual."


Posted by: almorganiv | July 26, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

While much progress was made by the Founders to end the institution of slavery, unfortunately what they began was not fully achieved until generations later. Yet, despite the strenuous effort of many Founders to recognize in practice that "all men are created equal," charges persist to the opposite. In fact, revisionists even claim that the Constitution demonstrates that the Founders considered one who was black to be only three-fifths of a person. This charge is yet another falsehood. The three-fifths clause was not a measurement of human worth; rather, it was an anti-slavery provision to limit the political power of slavery’s proponents. By including only three-fifths of the total number of slaves in the congressional calculations, Southern States were actually being denied additional pro-slavery representatives in Congress. Based on the clear records of the Constitutional Convention, two prominent professors explain the meaning of the three-fifths clause:

[T]he Constitution allowed Southern States to count three-fifths of their slaves toward the population that would determine numbers of representatives in the federal legislature. This clause is often singled out today as a sign of black dehumanization: they are only three-fifths human. But the provision applied to slaves, not blacks. That meant that free blacks–and there were many, North as well as South–counted the same as whites. More important, the fact that slaves were counted at all was a concession to slave owners. Southerners would have been glad to count their slaves as whole persons. It was the Northerners who did not want them counted, for why should the South be rewarded with more representatives, the more slaves they held? THOMAS WEST

It was slavery’s opponents who succeeded in restricting the political power of the South by allowing them to count only three-fifths of their slave population in determining the number of congressional representatives. The three-fifths of a vote provision applied only to slaves, not to free blacks in either the North or South. WALTER WILLIAMS

Why do revisionists so often abuse and misportray the three-fifths clause? Professor Walter Williams (himself an African-American) suggested:
Politicians, news media, college professors and leftists of other stripes are selling us lies and propaganda. To lay the groundwork for their increasingly successful attack on our Constitution, they must demean and criticize its authors. As Senator Joe Biden demonstrated during the Clarence Thomas hearings, the framers’ ideas about natural law must be trivialized or they must be seen as racists.

While this has been only a cursory examination of the Founders and slavery, it is nonetheless sufficient to demonstrate the absurdity of the insinuation that the Founders were a collective group of racists.

Source Link:
http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=122

Posted by: charko825 | July 25, 2010 11:30 AM | Report abuse


Whoever drew the cartoon above which states that the Constitution authorizes slavery is a MORON.

The Constitution DOES NOT validate slavery at all.

As more information comes out about the truth of America's origin's there is coming a day when the lies of the left will be laughed at....


...If you care about the TRUTH please read this article....and "NOTICE" all the footnotes that point to "original source" documents.

Source Link:
http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=122


It's time to get back to the "original" writings of the Founders/Authors of the Constitution and not the Revisionism that is is prevalent in our country today.

THANK GOD FOR FOXNEWS!!

Posted by: charko825 | July 25, 2010 11:14 AM | Report abuse

Typical lie from a typical liberal liar. The Constitution had to include slavery in order to abolish it. What if the Constitution had ignored the topic? ***WE***'d still be owners today.

Posted by: righttwingconspirator | July 21, 2010 10:47 AM |
---------------------------------------
(Emphasis mine). No, rwc, WE would not be owners. Just you. Thanks for telling us what you'd do to African Americans if not constitutionally barred, though.

Posted by: hayesap8 | July 22, 2010 11:28 AM | Report abuse

Well spoken, Mr. Toles.

Posted by: jonroesler | July 21, 2010 5:36 PM | Report abuse

thomas_pearson46~~~
you contradict yourself when you speak of RACE....when did "they" change the 'term' to Ethnic Profiling?
I still use the term Racial Profiling.
Just like I say potato and you say....
and since I am a common tater I think I know what I am talking about....
Same difference.
However, you do, indeed, have a right to your opinion and I, too, respect that even though I do not agree.

Posted by: bertzel | July 21, 2010 4:20 PM | Report abuse

"The originalist view is that if you want to pass a law that is not permitted under the Consitution you need to first pass and ratify the Constitution."

Huh?

"Everybody knows that the constitution includes the 13th amendment, which abolished the practice of slavery."

Which is why it's nonsensical to argue that we need to do only what the Founding Fathers said to do. If the Constitution as written was materially altered 80 years later, then the Founders' original intent isn't the final word anymore, is it?

This is a great cartoon. Going back to the Constitution "as written" means going back to a regime where, among other things, slavery was legal. Period.

Posted by: simpleton1 | July 21, 2010 3:21 PM | Report abuse

What a stupid political cartoon. Everybody knows that the constitution includes the 13th amendment, which abolished the practice of slavery. Calling an originalist a racist because they want the country to follow the law is the height of obfuscation and demagoguery. If this cartoon is fair, then it is also fair to call Obama a Hitler. When can we see that cartoon in the post? Or is Toles a Nazi, too?

Posted by: _BSH | July 21, 2010 2:22 PM | Report abuse

This cartoon is a bit intellectually dishonest. Seeing as the Constitution as originally written has a means to be amended this argument doesn't fit at all with the originalist view on the Constitution.

The originalist view is that if you want to pass a law that is not permitted under the Consitution you need to first pass and ratify the Constitution.

The non-originalist view is to largely ignore the Constitution or the idea of limited government and hold that anything Congress passes is fine. It ignores the fact that the Constitution is the final and ultimate law of the land and that violating it is a violation of law.

Posted by: BradG | July 21, 2010 1:16 PM | Report abuse

Race hatred....that's bigoted ole me.

NASCAR and the NHRA, both races ya see, have been legislated to death by dumazz rules and regulations that have ruined the sport and I hate it.

But as for human race hatred?

Hell...their ain't but one race of humans with lots and lots of ETHNIC divisions and I don't hate any of them...I disagree with many ethnic group policies, especially policy demands of ethnic groups that reside in this freest of all nations, that think they deserve, demand, and mus have special provisional legal rights bound in special laws that favor only themselves;

My disagreements are not bound in or by exclusion or inclusion of, nor specific to ethnic or national origin, creed, color, language spoken, or religion which is not just my legal right as a citizen to express disagreement, but a nationally declared God given right to express as disagreement non specifically as does the meaning and definition of "Equal justice and punishment for all under the law" is without boundry.

Posted by: thomas_pearson46 | July 21, 2010 1:10 PM | Report abuse

@SharpshootingPugilist: Obama's our "Nigerian Messiah" now? But I thought he was Kenyan! How am I supposed to know what's going on if the facts you're using keep whipsawing so violently?

Posted by: dfbdfb | July 21, 2010 12:22 PM | Report abuse

I wish you were not so one sided - I do not even bother to read your cartoons usually. I already know in advance what you will say on any issue. It is not just that you are a liberal, but that you are a bigoted liberal, which Obama is not.

Take a page from Biden's book:

"The president doesn't believe that the tea party is a racist organization,"
Biden said. "I don't believe that. Very conservative, very different views on
government and a whole lot of things. But it is not a racist organization."

And you, Tom Toles, learn a little respect for people whose political views are different from yours. You do not REALLY want to live in a democracy because all you understand is how to throw dirt at people who disagree with you. Such antics are the death of any political discussion.

Posted by: rohit57 | July 21, 2010 12:19 PM | Report abuse

Tom said:

The U.S. health-care system was on a crazy, irrational trajectory, and Obama has moved it closer to sanity.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tom

This could be your Bush mission accomplished moment. I would not call it a victory before any results come in and the full cost comes about. We might be looking back 10 years from now calling it the biggest blunder of the democrats in history.

Health care needs fixing, whether this bill fixes it remains to be seen.

Posted by: flonzy1 | July 21, 2010 10:56 AM | Report abuse

Typical lie from a typical liberal liar. The Constitution had to include slavery in order to abolish it. What if the Constitution had ignored the topic? We'd still be owners today.

Posted by: righttwingconspirator | July 21, 2010 10:47 AM | Report abuse

Still laughing at Sharpshooter's "Nigerian Messiah" comment. Sort of proves the legitimacy and relevancy of your cartoon Tom.

Posted by: PrairieDog60 | July 21, 2010 10:44 AM | Report abuse

My wish for 2012 is that Sarah Palin is the head of the republican ticket. To complete the Heckle/Jeckle pair I would love to see Michelle Bachman be her running mate.

Posted by: maryd1 | July 21, 2010 9:51 AM | Report abuse

How can you say Obama won - he did get his way passing bills but AGAINST the will of the people. And you think those people will re-elect him? He may be elected illegally but not legally.

Posted by: rockey918 | July 21, 2010 9:46 AM | Report abuse

Good one, TT. And doesn't that same Constitution have something in it about wearing wool and linen together? Or was it bathing during menstruation? All of that aside, I think you are right on the money about Obama's potential for gaining a second term, and Palin not seeking additional responsibility -- only promoting additional notoriety for the sake of "fame and fortune." We all know someone personally who shows an addiction to his/her own image, hammering away with boasts and bashings: she's one of them, only extremely "ratcheted up." Using one of those old-fashioned testing analogies: Palin is to the Presidency as BP is to Precaution.

Posted by: dudeupnorth | July 21, 2010 9:41 AM | Report abuse

Mr. Toles, I am beginning to hope he is reelected for your benefit in particular. Just think, in the second term he could lay out rules for how your sandals are designed as well as how you wear your loincloth while mowing your yard with your push mower. Don't start me on how your nanny-state stormtroopers will need to be reorganized for his benefit as well...

Posted by: gowen1 | July 21, 2010 9:36 AM | Report abuse

Good one, TT. And doesn't that same Constitution have something in it about wearing wool and linen together? Or was it bathing during menstruation? All of that aside, I think you are right on the money about Obama's potential for gaining a second term, and Palin not seeking additional responsibility -- only promoting additional notoriety for the sake of "fame and fortune." We all know someone personally who shows an addiction to his/her own image, hammering away with boasts and bashings: she's one of them, only extremely "ratcheted up." Using one of those old-fashioned testing analogies: Palin is to the Presidency as BP is to Precaution.

Posted by: dudeupnorth | July 21, 2010 9:35 AM | Report abuse

I agree with EGC...But what I am confused about are the poll numbers from Independents. What exactly are they demanding from President Obama? Jobs? Job losses are the bi-product of a failed financial system; slow job growth, yes, but growth none the less. How many jobs saved from the stimulus? Or don't they count?? I think their are two groups that should responsibility for lack of jobs: corporations who have no sense of patriotic duty to give back to the country that made them wealthy and the republican party for creating a negative climate in this country, stiffling growth, promoting fear and division, anything to regain control of our government, even at the expense of the middle class. I suppose the financial reform, in their opinion, wasn't needed. So the question is if McCain had won and financial reform, health insurance reform, equal pay for women, education reform, college loan reform, stimulus to save public servant jobs and infrastructure jobs, were not in place what would we be dealing with at this point? One can only imagine. Progress represents real leadership. Show me one, just one, republican that has shown any real leadership in this country and I'll give that person my vote. That's how confident I am you won't find one.
And to the point about Mitt Romney and his mormon religion losing the nomination: is it possible to take down Glenn Beck for the same reason. I do not know how the man prays with a straight face and is able to sleep at night. He's a real wackjob!

Posted by: bevmariec | July 21, 2010 9:33 AM | Report abuse

-


Obama will win in 2012 as long as the GOP is unable to offer anything of substance in contrast. Sure, the GOP will try to make 2012 the anti-Obama election, but that isn't enough to win the Presidential.

Even 2008, which any purported to be the anti-Bush election, wasn't. Obama offered what appeared to be a refreshingly different agenda. As he himself said, the image of this multi-racial, multi-national man becoming President would send a unique message around the world (including America).

But what do we see from the GOP for 2012? Mitt Romney, again, who probably can't win the nomination because of his religion? Sarah Palin, the GOP's cheerleader-in-chief?

I just don't see the GOP as standing for anything that 50%+1 American voters want.


-

Posted by: egc52556 | July 21, 2010 8:41 AM | Report abuse

As for racism... As strange as this is...it, racism, will ALWAYS exist in this country...ah yes, the melting pot calling the other pot "black"....go figure.

Posted by: bertzel | July 20, 2010 9:24 PM | Report abuse

It just makes sense to fix those things that are broke first and then create something new-----JONAHandtheFISH

I don't know....I think that is what he HAS been DOING...

Posted by: bertzel | July 20, 2010 9:06 PM | Report abuse

I apologize to Ms. Sherrod. I spelled her name incorrectly.

Posted by: bobbo2 | July 20, 2010 9:03 PM | Report abuse

I think I have the timeline correct. It started last week with the Right complaining about the failure of the Justice Department to prosecute the New Black Panther member for voter intimidation. Also the same guy was spouting junk about white people. Then the NAACP said that the Tea Party had to purge itself of racists. Then the Post Ombudsman said there was no Post coverage of the Black Panther guy because of staff shortages, um huh. Yesterday Ms. Sherron showed up. Today Mr. Robinson of the Post gave us the rules in his Q and A concerning when racism is relevant or really racism. I think it has to do with how many people are in an organization. Then there was Mr. Dionne with his noise. And finally Mr. Toles and the cartoon about people and the Constitution and racism. ENOUGH. From the Right and Left, ENOUGH. Those that claim racism are never satisfied. Those that are called racist are never cleared of the charge. I don't care who started it kiddies but ENOUGH. I challenge the Opinion section of the Washington Post to refrain from the topic of racism for one week. If you guys can do it I will be very proud of all of you.

Posted by: bobbo2 | July 20, 2010 8:55 PM | Report abuse

Tommy ol boy, what you fail to realize is that in two more years America would elect a ham sandwich rather than give your Nigerian Messiah another shot.

Posted by: SharpshootingPugilist | July 20, 2010 8:48 PM | Report abuse

Toles looks like we eventually rerighted that ship thanks to the Republicans just as the Democrats "slaved to the government's" healthcare program will end. In either case the Democrat party has always fought to preserve the enslaved no matter when or how. Just read your history.

Posted by: taxcutsin12 | July 20, 2010 8:11 PM | Report abuse

How can you look to 2012 already. This President is only halfway through his term. His accomplishments have not been that great. Our long term debt is massive and as taxes go up his approval rating will go down. He inherited a mess no doubt but he can not keep spending and fix it either. He started out right from the beginning making government bigger and more expensive by creating more responsibilities like Health
Care when previous social programs have been so mismanaged like Social Security. It just makes sense to fix those things that are broke first and then create something new. There are a lot of critics around the world, including China that will extend no more credit, that believe America is going bankrupt. The dollar will no longer be the world standard. He continues to foolishly spend money on military operations in Afghanistan and huge domestic intelligence gathering that we are not getting our money's worth from.

Who is going to be foolish enough to back Palin when she terribly damaged McCain's chances of winning in 08. It takes corporate money to win an election and I do not see that coming for Sarah. It is going to take an awful lot of mind control for Palin to ever be a Presidential candidate.

I predict there will be some type of huge disaster that will occur before 2012 that will make Obama lose his bid for re-election.

Posted by: JONAHandtheFISH | July 20, 2010 8:05 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company