Sen. Dianne Feinstein wants us to know that she is "not a sixth-grader."
Anyone who saw the recent exchange before the Senate Judiciary Committee between Feinstein and Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas over guns and the Constitution might speculate that the reason she said this is because she couldn't pass the entrance exam.
As for Cruz, a friend of mine for a decade, it turns out that the most important of the Senate rules is unwritten: Thou shalt not embarrass a fellow senator — even one in the opposing party — by making him or her look unprepared, uneducated or uninformed.
That's not always an easy thing to avoid. The rulebook doesn't say what to do when a Senate colleague who wants to ban certain guns dodges a tough question and then goes on the attack — thus embarrassing herself.
Nevertheless, the 42-year-old Cruz — who, as Sarah Palin told Conservative Political Action Conference delegates, "chews barbed wire" and "spits out rust" — is headed to the principal's office. His infraction was asking the right question. What Cruz wanted to know was this: Why do liberals cherish the First and Fourth Amendments, but trash the one in between — the Second Amendment?
That's a brainteaser. Why does the left play favorites with different parts of the Bill of Rights?
Experience teaches that the better the question, the less likely you are to get a straight answer.
That's what happened here. Feinstein went on offense. Abandoning reason for emotion, she scolded Cruz for daring to "lecture" her. After all, she said, she had seen the bodies of people killed by gunfire.
She was referring to the assassinations of San Francisco supervisor Harvey Milk and San Francisco Mayor George Moscone in 1978. Feinstein was in San Francisco City Hall when the shootings occurred.
Feinstein obviously feels very passionate about limiting people's access to guns. But who says she gets to decide who gets to own a gun or how many stay on the market?