Pelosi Confuses Constitution With Declaration Of Independence

I’ve got to hand it to Pelosi. She’s very reliable when it comes to providing bloggers with material. And for that, I’m very thankful. It makes my job a lot easier. If I’ve hit a temporary writer’s block, I know I can always depend on Pelosi and report on something she said.

Recently, she was giving a speech at the Center for American Progress. She was reminiscing about the women’s rights movement, and particularly its 19th century culmination, which was at a convention held in Seneca Falls, New York in 1848:

“And so, it was 165 years ago, 165 years ago. Imagine the courage it took for those women to go to Seneca Falls and do what they did there, to even leave home without their husband’s permission, or father’s, or whoever it was. To go to Seneca Falls, and to paraphrase what our founders said in the Constitution of the United States: they said the truths that are self-evident, that every man and woman, that men and women were created equal and that we must go forward in recognition of that.”

As we know, the document she was thinking of was not the U.S. Constitution; it was the Declaration of Independence. In case we’ve forgotten, this is what it says:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

If you go to Pelosi’s website and read the transcript of her speech, you’ll see that they’ve kindly corrected her Constitution reference and replaced it with the Declaration of Independence.

Ordinarily, this wouldn’t be that big of a deal. We all make mistakes. Perhaps it was an oversight on her part. But she’s an elected representative. She’s tasked with creating laws that affect all Americans. She took an oath to support and defend the Constitution. How can she do that and make laws when she’s not all that familiar with the document with which all her legislative ideas have to be consistent?

She pays lip service to the founding fathers, but we all know that if you were to share a bottle of wine with her (why anyone would want to do that, I have no idea), she’d tell you how much she despises the founding “founders” (can’t say “fathers,” because that’s far too male-charged). She’d tell you that they were a bunch of DWEMs (Dead White European Males) who owned slaves and treated women like property.

She only likes the Constitution insofar as she can use it to her advantage. Like when she said recently that she has to uphold her oath to the Constitution by passing more gun control:

“We must uphold our oath to ‘protect and defend’ the constitution and all Americans by expanding background checks and keeping dangerous firearms out of the wrong hands.”

Never mind the fact that her oath wasn’t to “protect and defend”; it was to “support and defend.” And it’s not to support and defend all Americans; but the Constitution. But she’s not all that familiar with the Constitution. It’s simply a relic. And an anachronism.