And another thing . . .

When I blogged Sunday about Dennis Henigan's blatant re-writing of the Second Amendment (at least he didn't say "the right of the National Guard . . . "), I missed part of his hypocrisy. Luckily, David Codrea spotted it:

My favorite hypocritical quote:

It is not appropriate for the courts to edit the Constitution

...he says, after editing the Constitution.

Today, though, the hypocrisy and irony of something else from the website of Mr. Henigan's employers caught my attention.



Not a very flattering picture of Dennis, is it?

By the way, I just noticed that the Brady Bunch has helpfully provided a transcript of Henigan's edit of the Constitution (and his pompous admonishment of the illegitimacy of . . . editing the Constitution) [Update 11-29-2007: The Bradys have done a bit more editing, and removed that page from their website. For now, the cached version (courtesy of Days of Our Trailers) is available here. When that goes (I don't think cached web pages stick around forever), I have a screen capture of it here.]:

The Second Amendment is the only provision in our Bill of Rights that actually states its own purpose. It says a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. And the Court has held, the Supreme Court has held, that that statement of purpose must be taken seriously and the right must be evaluated and interpreted in light of that purpose. And by ignoring that purpose the D.C. Circuit not only contradicted the Supreme Court but also years of precedent which establishes that it is not legitimate for courts to edit the Constitution. The courts must interpret the Constitution as it was written by the framers. That is what the D.C. Circuit did not do.

Hope you fix your combustible trousers problem soon, Dennis.