Mitch McConnell,

the most recent face of resident evil since Dick Cheney left office, wants to have hearings on the meaning of “born” in the 14th amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America. 

(See article http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gqnOBf_QRibbHZe0ieJDDRnvWxRgD9HC9ESG2).

Ok, my head is spinning.  Here’s a guy who says he thinks that the Constitution is sacrosanct.  Now he thinks we ought to INTERPRET this document? Ahhh, it is sacrosanct . . . . until it’s not.

WAIT, I get it.  The Constitution is crystal clear about an individual’s right to bear arms (see the muddy Second Amendment)

“Amendment II —  A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Um, wait, doesn’t the Second Amendment mean that you can bear arms as part of a well regulated militia (i.e., sanctioned by a governmental entity)?

BUT Resident Evil finds it very confusing when it comes to the meaning of “born“:

“Amendment 14 Section 1: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.  No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

Hmmm.  What is the plain meaning of this?  If you are born here, you are a citizen whose rights of citizenship may not be infringed upon.

Ok, this Amendment was not written by our Founding Fathers.  It was written in the aftermath of Civil War as a nation needed to heal and learn to be citizens of one nation for the common good and to protect the children of newly emancipated slaves.

So, we have to have hearings on what “born in the United States” means.  If McConnell and his ilk weren’t talking  about people’s lives and the very meaning of a free and open society, it would almost be a humorous riff on Bill Clinton’s “depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is”. 

But it is not funny at all.