"I don't worry about the Constitution on this, to be honest ..." (see from the :45 mark)
In my post concerning the video, I asked, "Is there really *any* Democrat, anywhere, who worries about the Constitution? On any matter?"
Comes this NYT editorial-disguised-as-objective-news-analysis concerning the recently enacted Arizona State law to require enforcement of the national laws concerning illegal "immigrants" (can an invader *really* be honestly call an immigrant?)
... When he hung up, Mr. Woods knew he had lost the case. “She really felt that the majority of Arizonans fall on the side of, Let’s solve the problem and not worry about the Constitution,” he said.Now, Mr Woods (a Republican politician in Arizona who was against the law) may or may not have said that -- with newspapers in general, and certainly not with the NYT, one can never trust that a claimed direct quote was even uttered in the first place, much less that it was quoted accurately if it was even made.
Still, whether or not the quoted statement was ever actually uttered, grasp the sheer audacity of asserting that enforcement of actual Constitutionally-sound law is anti-Constitutional (and grasp the NYT's endorsement of the sentiment), and grasp this especially in light of the long-standing "liberal" disdain for the actual Constitution ... you know, the one that is written down; you know, the dead one!