Crappy Congressional Decisions

As Bob Parks said, the nation must have been distracted.

"That allowed the House to quietly pass H.R. 2679, the "Public Expressions of Religion Protection Act of 2006," with scarcely a mention in the media. The bill would prevent plaintiffs from recovering legal costs in any lawsuit based on the "establishment clause" of the First Amendment, which of course only happens when the court finds the plaintiff's Constitutional rights have been denied. The Senate is expected to pass a companion bill, S. 3696."

I certainly hope it's just because the country was distracted. Otherwise it means we want a theocratic authoritarian regime. (Hey - no wonder "we" like Pakistan so much!) Not only do we want to undercut The Great Writ (see yesterday's bill), but now we apparently want to punish people who have actually had their Constitutional rights taken away for daring to fight to get them back.

This last bill can't work. It's unconstitutional on the face of it - it's abridging the Bill of Rights, for crying out loud. All I can imagine is that it's pre-election posturing for the Republican base. Who does, after all, believe that non-Christians shouldn't be citizens no matter what those rebels who founded the country might have thought.

Someone tell me that those moronic Democrats who believed Alito and Roberts would be fair and unbiased weren't as stupid as I fear they were.

Please.