Note: when a reporter writes something stupid, it’s not just him. It’s those layers of editors and fact checkers, too.

Alternate title: does Ben Evans think the Eighteenth Amendment shouldn’t have been allowed? Or does he think it shouldn’t have been repealed?

This is really…something. Ben Evans, AP reporter, says Republicans are hypocrites for wanting to…change the Constitution. The headline:

SPIN METER: Republicans hot, cold on Constitution

The story:

WASHINGTON — Republican Rep. Paul Broun of Georgia won his seat in Congress campaigning as a strict defender of the Constitution. He carries a copy in his pocket and is particularly fond of invoking the Second Amendment right to bear arms.

But it turns out there are parts of the document he doesn’t care for — lots of them. He wants to get rid of the language about birthright citizenship, federal income taxes and direct election of senators, among others. He would add plenty of stuff, including explicitly authorizing castration as punishment for child rapists.

And he wants to do this by…amending the Constitution. The methods for which are included…in the Constitution.

Ah, feh, what am I, serious? Am I serious? Do I really think amending the Constitution by following the rules set out by the Constitution is any different from simply ignoring the Constitution when it doesn’t let me do what I want?

Yes, actually, I do think there’s a difference. AP reporter Ben Evans, and all those mythical layers of editors and fact checkers they have in the mainstream media, don’t.

Via Memeorandum. And Sweetness and Light made the same point I did, only better.