Remember when "shredding the constitution" was a bad thing?

That was then.  Now, with the incoming Republican majority in the House deciding to read the constitution aloud, things are different.  The editors of the New York Times condemned this reading as "unusual pomposity," "presumptuous," and a "self-righteous act."  The San Francisco Chronicle dismisses the reading a merely "a sop to Tea Party-supported members" done by Republicans who are "shrill, obstructionist and slightly deluded."  Writers at Slate and MSNBC and Salon all now deride concern for the constitution as a mere "fetish."   They seem to know, even if they won't admit it out loud, that the progressive agenda really is at odds with the constitution.