‘Constitutional Law’ Professor in New York Times: ‘Toss the Constitution’

Never let it be said that leftwing effetes aren’t open about their totalitarian wet dreams.

Louis Michael Seidman, a “professor of constitutional law at Georgetown University” wrote an OpEd (where else?) in the leftwing rag New York Times entitled: “Let’s Give Up on the Constitution”.

Seidman isn’t pleased with the checks, balances, and rights that extend to everyone, including people he despises.

Some of his arguments for the disposal of the Constitution include:

……our insistence on obedience to the Constitution, with all its archaic, idiosyncratic and downright evil provisions.

‘Archaic and evil provisions’, like the First Amendment to which Seidman owes the right to spout his bullshit in a printed public forum.

Our obsession with the Constitution has saddled us with a dysfunctional political system, kept us from debating the merits of divisive issues and inflamed our public discourse. Instead of arguing about what is to be done, we argue about what James Madison might have wanted done 225 years ago.

The dysfunctional system exists because of corrupt, greedy, incompetent, arrogant, power-hungry malfeasants who occupy the White House and chambers of Congress. They haven’t honored the laws or the spirit of the Constitution in years. The Constitution was written by people who risked their lives and fortunes against a tyrannical British regime. Madison, Washington, Franklin, Jefferson, Hamilton, and Adams, were dedicated patriots who led an armed rebellion to win independence and establish a Democratic Republic that protects even idiots like Seidman. The freedoms guaranteed in the Constitution are usually appreciated by the average American citizen. The statist asslown scribbling in the NYT, not so much.

If even this change is impossible, perhaps the dream of a country ruled by “We the people” is impossibly utopian. If so, we have to give up on the claim that we are a self-governing people who can settle our disagreements through mature and tolerant debate. But before abandoning our heritage of self-government, we ought to try extricating ourselves from constitutional bondage so that we can give real freedom a chance.

“Constitutional bondage”…? Like being bound by the Bill of Rights? That Constitution was ratified and adopted by ‘We the People’. Instead of a founding document that establishes equitable laws, articles, and statutes that apply to every citizen, perhaps mob rule and anarchy are preferable.

But not to worry, Seidman. The Dems have been doing everything they can to sidestep, circumvent, trample, ignore, and violate the very principles you hate. They don’t mind extending those rights to terrorists, however.

Obama wishes to hell he could bypass Congress and make his own laws. Those damned pesky checks and balances. We have entirely too much democracy in this country. That philosophy has a lot in common with the likes of Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Castro, Chavez, Mussolini, Putin, and the Muslim Brotherhood. The Constitution doesn’t matter because it’s like so 225 years ago. Some lawmakers use their wild-assed imaginations to claim that illegal aliens can be a U.S. President. The SCOTUS even perverted the 16th Amendment to inflict Obama’s unconstitutional socialist healthcare takeover as a “tax”.

Says Seidman:

This is not to say that we should disobey all constitutional commands. Freedom of speech and religion, equal protection of the laws and protections against governmental deprivation of life, liberty or property are important, whether or not they are in the Constitution. We should continue to follow those requirements out of respect, not obligation.

This intellectually bankrupt asshole wants to pick and choose which Constitutional articles he likes enough for his own benefit. Last I checked, the founders stated quite clearly:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

The Constitution affirms those rights as law. Were it not for that, what makes Seidman so sure that his own government would be bound to respect those requirements?

It also places limits on the federal government, and for good reasons. The 1oth Amendment is one of the most powerful measures against centralized government:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

States rights. That’s what makes liberals so angry.

He instructs a college course about a document he believes should be abolished.

Just think, this idiot is teaching your kids.

http://sfcmac.wordpress.com/2011/05/14/indiana-supreme-court-shit-cans-fourth-amendment/

http://sfcmac.wordpress.com/2009/09/11/obamas-regulatory-czar-is-a-real-wackjob/