Maybe we should have drag queens teach civics to Hollywood?

Instead of taxpayer-funded kindergarten classrooms, maybe we should deploy drag queens to teach Hollywood insiders about civics since they clearly don’t even know the first thing. 

Between Whoopi Goldberg saying that the Supreme Court had the power to say black people (Clarence Thomas) are ¼ of a person again to Howard Stern saying he wanted to run for president to “overturn all this [crap]” meaning the Roe decision, this week has really highlighted the lack of civics education that has been afforded to the poor celebrities of Hollywood. 

It’s interesting how entitled all liberals, but particularly the Hollywood elite, feel to have such extreme opinions about issues that they’re literally crying, yelling and screaming about them without knowing even the very first thing about the issue itself or how the overall system works. 

This week on The View From the Ivory Tower, Whoopi Goldberg, went on a bombastic tirade about the SCOTUS Roe decision throwing all kinds of insults specifically at Justice Clarence Thomas invoking race as much as she possibly could as is her MO. In this tirade she sort of weirdly implied that Thomas was somehow morally inferior for having married a white woman. If that wasn’t weird enough she then said that he should be careful because his decision on Roe could lead to them “coming for” him and making him ¼ a person again. What a doozy. 

Then Howard Stern said he was going to overturn laws by running for President. Oh dear he seems to have missed some basics.

Now, okay Hollywood, pretend this is being told to you by a really great female impersonator so you will actually listen and get the education you deserve: 

What Whoopi is referring to in trying to make her absurd point is Article 1 section 2 of the Constitution which defined not expressly black people but persons who are other than free (so slaves which obviously would be black people in America at that time) as 3/5 of a person for the purposes of deciding federal representation in Congress. Obviously, this policy was ridiculous and heinous because no person can be rightly owned. Our nation fought a full on civil war over this issue. In the wake of the war, Congress passed three Amendments to the constitution: 13, 14 and 15. Those three amendments contain actual explicit language that define who is a citizen and protected person which is to say anyone born or naturalized regardless of race. It also says no one can be owned which totally, literally, in plain language negates Article 1 section 2.

Why does this matter? Because Roe V. Wade derived a right to abortion through two hoops of judicial precedent (essentially) not through Congressional action to change the constitution or federal law. Nowhere does the constitution make reference to abortion in any kind of plain language nor does it make such a reference to privacy. The court at the time of Roe made the jump not just to privacy but from privacy to abortion. Since its initial ruling, the Roe decision had been restricted multiple times leading to its overturn in 2022. 

Whether or not Whoopi thinks the decision to overturn Roe is right or wrong or the legal interpretation is correct, these are the facts of how it occurred and why it doesn’t apply to rights expressly listed in amendments passed by Congress or other federal laws passed by Congress like the Civil Rights Act.

Now Howard. Howard Stern tried to make a point by suggesting he would run for President to “overturn this [crap]” suggesting a President can overturn a Supreme Court decision. There are three branches of government. One makes laws, one enforces laws and one interprets laws. They are all equally powerful. The one that makes laws is Congress and the one that interprets those laws is the Supreme Court. The only power the President has is to enforce the laws created by Congress and interpreted by the Court. So if Howard Stern were to miraculously run and become President: he still would not be able to overturn the decision of the Supreme Court. Giving him the benefit of the doubt that he meant to pass a law to supersede the precedent, he also would not be able to do that. 

The only thing the President can do (which Donald J. Trump did) to influence the interpretation of the law by nominating justices for the court. So President Stern would have to nominate and have Congress confirm his pro-choice candidate and because of the makeup of the court – he’d need at least two to make it. And no I do not think this is what he meant when he said “overturn this [crap].” 

These two idiotic statements made this week are just a fraction of the examples of times Hollywood has fundamentally lacked the critical understanding of how the government works but still felt the need to have deeply held, loudly expressed opinions about it. 

So I say, since drag queens are their preferred educators, we get Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, we teach them drag and we get them out to Hollywood for some lessons.