Louis Michael Seidman
I’d like to personally explain to this Constitutional Law professor that I’d gladly ‘give up the Constitution’ if it mean we could unshackle ourselves from a bloated, tyrannical government that seeks to destroy itself. I’d gladly do it. When separated, we could then remake our own Constitution, largely like the original, but giving virtually no power to a Federated Government.
I just saw his commentary on the TV. He must realize that the Constitution is what gives him the freedom to float such tripe.
Add Hussein to the list.
Unfortunately I watched this POC this morning (the wife likes the human interest stories lied by osgood).
He was openly calling to do away with the constitution.
Here it comes, new rule by man, not by law. The criminals have taken over.
Re: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-3445_162-57566014/professor-take-our-country-back-from-the-constitution/
Can’t warp it any more without breaking it, apparently.
Fair enough.
Get to work on convening a Con-Con and revise or scrap the whole thing.
I personally would love to see these people survivie in a world without our Constitution.
The Constitution did not set up a perfect government. It did, however, establish a republic that worked right up until politicians began interfering with the laws of economics and bribing voters with money from the public treasury. No council of fools such as this so-called professor could come up with anything better themselves, and in fact, would come up with something far worse than absolute monarchy. Communism, for example, created far more death and misery than the pretensions of Louis XIV or Napoleon; Fascism, the same results under different management. Both the projects of pseudophilosophers and a lame secular intellectualism that denies natural law.
I just saw his commentary on the TV. He must realize that the Constitution is what gives him the freedom to float such tripe.
Yeah, yeah, rule of law and limited government are so overrated. We need leaders who can get things done. Like Benito and Adolf and Uncle Joe.
Yeah, yeah, rule of law and limited government are so overrated. We need leaders who can get things done. Like Benito and Adolf and Uncle Joe.
Hey I got a good idea Professor: How about we get rid of part of the constitution? Like the 16th amendment? Which come Feb. 3rd will be its 100th anniversary. So what better time to get rid of it?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16th_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
I remember when a diploma from Georgetown Law was worth more than the equivalent square footage of Charmin.
Now, I'm not so sure.
Nitwit professor ping.
“Article V: The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution...”
Seidman, if you don’t like it, amend it. Let the people decide if your proposed changes are worthy.
Every single one of the hundreds of contracts I’ve worked on in my career have had a similar clause stating precisely the rules for amending the contract and that both parties must agree in writing to all amendments.
We all know the real reason behind his proposal. The leftists and statists simply want a government of made-up ad hoc “rules” that can be bent and twisted at their every whim to create a dictatorship and resulting in totalitarian control over us.
And another moronic, mentally-diseased, communist heard from...
Add him to The List.
I wonder what this twit would say if someone decided to ignore the laws and rob/rape/kill those he considers loved ones because the laws got in their way...
and another drank the kollaid.
“Constitutional obedience has a pernicious impact on our political culture.”
Constitutional obedience is rule of law not rule of man.
A significant part of the “political culture” wants “rule of man”, as long as it’s their man.
So, if “Constitutional obedience has a pernicious impact on our political culture” I say “good”.
“...neither should we allow people who died over two centuries ago and knew nothing of our country as it exists today.”
Does that go for court decisions and other legal things too? How about land grants, can we go back and revise them because we don’t like the way it turned out now?
It’s almost 2014, 200 years after the Treaty of Ghent which ended the War of 1812, so can we say to Britain: “Hey, we want to kick your butt some more and this Treaty is 200 years old so it doesn’t count, so ‘game on’”?
Louis Michael Seidman