Nullification redux

Teabaggers could not pass a freshman class on the Constitution. That's why they do things like propose amendments to let states nullify acts of Congress and give quotes like this to alleged journalists over at Tucker's Folly:

“The founding fathers who put together our Constitution … were very, very concerned about the power a large federal government, which … was the driving reason behind the first 10 amendments; a lot of what they feared has come to pass,” Virginia House Speaker Bill Howell told The Daily Caller. “I think it is vitally important that we restore some of that balance, which has been taken away.”

1. As long as we accept that "large" has a single universally understood meaning, this statement is correct. Since it doesn't, Bill Howell is retarded. A balanced system of dual federalism (with a Supremacy Clause that made clear which powers would prevail in a conflict) and checks among the three branches of the Federal government were the response to fears about a "large" government. The Bill of Rights was thought unnecessary by the majority of the Founders (see the Federalist Papers for ample evidence) and it was promised mostly to appease skeptics and ensure ratification. The driving reason behind the first 10 amendments was public relations. In any event, nothing in the Bill of Rights speaks to the "largeness" of the Federal government excepting the 9th and 10th Amendments reserving powers to states and individuals. These amendments were appended to a Constitution that clearly reserves powers that are limited in number but vast in scope to Congress.

2. In Teabaggerland, "restoring balance" means giving states a power they never had. A power, incidentally, that the Hallowed, Genius Founders explicitly contradicted with Art. VI Sec.1 Clause 2:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

Funny how the Founders' intent, not to mention their brilliance, is only relevant when it supports the version of reality in wingnut brains.

So, to summarize, "ObamaCare" is bad so we should change the Constitution to allow states to nullify it. Insert bullshit pseudo-rationalization based on inaccurate knowledge of the Constitution here. Good work, guys.