Sarah Palin is at it again:
“[O]ur Constitution, of course, essentially acknowledging that our unalienable rights don’t come from man; they come from God. So this document is set up to protect us from a government that would ever infringe upon our rights to have freedom of religion and to be able to express our faith freely.”
As Steve Benen notes, the concept of “unalienable rights” comes from the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution, and nowhere in the Constitution is God or the bible cited as a source for anything. Anyone who was paying attention in Grade 5 history class could both tell the difference between the two documents and tell you what is and what isn’t in them. And you can’t make this stuff up.
Her defenders will say, “Oh, well, she just misspoke; she does know the difference.” No, apparently she does not, because she went on to rhapsodize:
“I think we should kind of keep this clean, keep it simple, go back to what our founders and our founding documents meant. They’re quite clear that we would create law based on the God of the Bible and the 10 Commandments. It’s pretty simple.”
Aside from the glaring misinterpretation of reality, what boggles the mind is that a lot of people actually take Sarah Palin seriously and consider her to be a viable candidate for President. Of the United States.
The question then becomes not how stupid are the people who would consider such a possibility without falling down, but how the hell can anyone in their right mind even let this sort of discussion take place? Sarah Palin can blather on with her gross and willful misinterpretation of history, and she’s entitled to whatever opinion she wants, but the idea of taking her seriously as anything other than an ignorant laughingstock is deeply disturbing for the future of our country.