By John Q. Hosedrinker 
In a recent interview with NPR, Senator Mark Kelly criticized the Pentagon’s investigation into his involvement in a video reminding active-duty troops about the illegality of following unlawful orders. The former Navy fighter pilot is facing potential court-martial for appearing in the video, which was released amid legal concerns regarding the deployment of National Guard troops. Kelly also responded to the White House’s initial condemnation of the video, where the President stated this action was “seditious behavior, punishable by death.”
Read the original article here
Sen. Mark Kelly’s statement that Trump and Hegseth don’t “understand the Constitution” seems to be hitting a nerve, and it’s understandable why. The core of the issue, as people on the internet are pointing out, isn’t necessarily a matter of comprehension, but rather of prioritization. It appears the general consensus is that these individuals, and perhaps others aligned with them, aren’t actively trying to understand the Constitution. It’s more that they actively choose to ignore it.
The sentiment that Trump might not even have read the Constitution isn’t just an idle observation; it’s a stark commentary on his actions and rhetoric. The perception is that he views the document as an obstacle, a hurdle to be overcome, rather than a guiding principle. This attitude, if true, undermines the very foundation of the American legal and political system. It suggests a lack of respect, or perhaps even a contempt, for the principles of governance that the Constitution embodies.
This brings us to the core issue: the perceived disregard for the Constitution. Many people on the internet seem to agree that it’s less about a lack of understanding and more about a lack of caring. It’s the difference between knowing the rules and choosing to break them. When the Constitution is viewed as a roadmap to be disregarded rather than a guide, that’s a problem. This is especially alarming when individuals in positions of power, like Trump and those who support him, appear to be actively working to dismantle or circumvent the constitutional framework.
The online conversation expands to other related figures as well. The lack of respect for the Constitution is particularly dangerous when those in power are perceived to be using their positions for personal gain or to advance a specific agenda, regardless of constitutional constraints. There is a sense that the Constitution itself is being weaponized, used selectively to advance certain goals while ignored when inconvenient.
It seems that the perceived threat extends beyond a simple lack of understanding. The comments suggest that the core issue is the intention behind actions. If the Constitution is actively being rejected, it poses a profound threat to the very fabric of American democracy. This is particularly concerning when combined with the potential for abuse of power, such as using military courts to target political opponents, as suggested in some of the comments.
The criticisms seem to highlight a deeper concern about the direction of the country. This sentiment suggests that the actions of certain political figures represent a departure from established norms and a threat to the rule of law. Some comments even express concerns that the people running the government are there to destabilize the government.
A common refrain is that the Constitution is just “a piece of paper” without the will to enforce it. No matter how well-written or meticulously crafted a document is, its effectiveness hinges on its consistent application and adherence. A disregard for the Constitution, regardless of the reasons, can lead to the erosion of democratic principles and the potential for authoritarianism. The discussion highlights the importance of holding leaders accountable to the principles of the Constitution and ensuring that it is respected, upheld, and enforced. It’s not about memorizing the document; it’s about adhering to the values it represents.