Constitutional scholar Rick Santorum explains why Iowa's Supreme Court overstepped its bounds — because article three of the US constitution is smaller than articles one and two!

Since Bob Vander Plaats thinks it's ok to take Justice Wiggins' words completely out of context and plaster them on a flaming red forty-foot bus, AKSARBENT thought we'd do something similar (in yellow) to Rick Santorum's participation in the Iowa Family Leader's smear-Wiggins junket in Des Moines on Monday. Except that we're misrepresenting Santorum far less than he and his are distorting Wiggins' words:

It's very simple to understand what the role of the courts is, as far as the power that was given them; the authority that were [sic] granted by our founders in the constitution... the founders were very clear that the court's role was limited. How do we know this? Well, read the constitution... Article one was put first... Second is article two... Read that article! Much shorter than article one... Third was the judicial branch — a very small, I might add, article [interrupted by applause!]... Our founders understood that the role of the court was not to be the one that was to be pre-eminent.

Now a cynical person might conclude that since the founders enumerated fewer constraints on the Supreme Court, resulting in a shorter article, that they were actually giving it more power — the last word, if you will. But such people are probably judicial anarchists who favor the color red. Oh wait...