Bush* said people don't have equal rights under the Constitution.

[LoZoccolo]

From last night:

The Constitution of the United States says we're all -- you know, it doesn't say that. It doesn't speak to the equality of America.

;)

[dogtag]

1. I heard that too and was thinking I was the only one! (n/t)

I haven't heard anyone mentioning it.

[LoZoccolo]

3. I mean, that's totally out of context...

...and a product of his non-linear presentation of his answer, but remember when they did this to Dean over the Confederate flag?

[Kadie]

2. Thanks for posting that.

I was going to look for a transcript this morning find out exactly what he said. :eyes:

[elfin]

4. Same here -

I think that was when he was all tangled up in trying to make Dred Scott points to show African Americans he "gets it" when it comes to civil rights. Probably heard about Dred that morning and got himself in a hole desperately trying to make it relevant somehow, some way.

[jefferson_dem]

5. Guess the Chimp-in-Chief has forgotten about the Equal Protection Clause

...which, ironically enough, was his ticket to the freaking white house, as it was so MISinterpreted.

From Bush v. Gore (2000)
The petition presents the following questions: whether the Florida Supreme Court established new standards for resolving Presidential election contests, thereby violating Art. II, §1, cl. 2, of the United States Constitution and failing to comply with 3 U.S.C. § 5 and whether the use of standardless manual recounts violates the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses. With respect to the equal protection question, we find a violation of the Equal Protection Clause.

http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-949.ZPC.html

[beaconess]

6. In context, this wasn't that bad

Of course, he was babbling and utterly incoherent, but in full context, I think he was trying to say that the Dred Scott decision "doesn't speak to the equality of America," not the Constitution.

Another example would be the Dred Scott case, which is where judges, years ago, said that the Constitution allowed slavery because of personal property rights.

That's a personal opinion. That's not what the Constitution says. The Constitution of the United States says we're all—you know, it doesn't say that. It doesn't speak to the equality of America.

[Demit]

7. Godd Lord! He looks so much stupider in print.

[central scrutinizer]

8. I heard it too and said WTF?

As soon as I heard the words Dred Scott, I pricked up my ears. I expected that Bushco would soon be like the unprepared student taking an essay exam. He would randomly throw some of the vocabulary words from the chapter review into a hideous run-on sentence completely devoid of meaning. Sure enough. But, will the transcript of the debate be verbatim or will it be scrubbed to buff the Teflon of the boy king?