Dump the Constitution? Here's Your Answer Right Here

A Liberal Constitutional Law Professor suggests we stop listening to "now long-dead" people and instead listen to important and inspiring modern ideas. A Conservative reacts to 'lawlessness.'

Dr. Louis Michael Seidman, a liberal Constitutional Law Professor known for making controversial statements, made headlines this week appearing on CBS, calling for an end to the Constitution.    

I recently wrote a blog where I swore off listening to the elite smart people promising instead to seek out those with common sense. Here is further proof since Dr. Seidman qualifies as one of those smart people. Here is what Dr. Seidman said:

The Constitution has many important and inspiring provisions, but we should obey these because they are important and inspiring, not because a bunch of people who are now long-dead favored them two centuries ago.

In this argument the good Doctor is saying he is smarter than our founding fathers, an argument Liberals use to downplay the Constitution with a thought to replacing it with liberal decrees. Liberals, with an arrogance defying belief, purport to know better than the people who risked their lives and fortune to found this miracle of a country.

President Wilson’s ideas, restated recently by President Obama, believed the Constitution is a collection of negative rights. These rights keep the Elites from making over the Country the way they want, because it restricts action by the Federal Government. The really smart people would prefer positive rights which require Federal Action on any subject they choose. The Founders recognized this desire and took action to protect future Americans from a Government with all the answers.

Suppose that Barack Obama really wasn't a natural-born citizen. So what? 

Great question. So what? This leads us to the idea of Judicial Activism, a touchstone in some legal circles for years. If one actually believed in the Constitution, believed in the oath our forefathers took to defend the Constitution, saw themselves as a presentative of the people, it would be impossible to say “So what.”  This is ... lawlessness, according to Dr. Thomas Sowell. By this reasoning, we should only be required to follow those laws which you personally approve. This is how we get to Illegal Immigrant Rights, Abortion Rights and attempts to restrict the Second Amendment, all in the name of "So what?"

Worse yet, talking about gun control in terms of constitutional obligation needlessly raises the temperature of political discussion. Instead of a question on policy, about which reasonable people can disagree, it becomes a test of one's commitment to our foundational document and, so, to America itself. 

Yes, Doctor, exactly. The question will always remain whether we are a society based on law and a Constitution or whether we are a society dominated by Liberal Thinkers with great ideas and limited practical experience? Liberals are certain they have a better plan and the higher intelligence to act. The fact people have not accepted their role is an endless frustration to them.

If we are to take back our own country, we have to start making decisions for ourselves, and stop deferring to an ancient and outdated document.

There you have it.  Never before in our history have Americans been willing to come out and challenge our Constitution. The naked truth is Liberals are insulted the common man will not accept their leadership, ideas or direction. This is the reason they insulate their ideas behind the fog of claiming they are for the poor, downtrodden and needy, the very people Liberals hurt the most with their programs.

Who would the good Doctor suggest we use to create this new “living” document? My guess is it would be academia, politicians and lawyers.  What could possibly go wrong with that idea? I mean, beside restricted liberties, high taxes and a constantly changing series of guidelines that “responsible people” would be
required to follow.

When actually reading the Constitution and the Federalists papers, hearing the Founders' own words, the thought process which moved the Founders toward a Constitution, their fear of big government and the very outcomes envisioned by Liberals it is easy to see why they gave limited, defined powers to the Federal Government. 

We have evidence of how governments work under the guidance of Liberals by looking at local governments under the long-term rule of Democrats. States like Illinois currently racing toward bankruptcy while constantly raising taxes and imposing stricter rules on its citizens while children die in the streets from gang violence. Look at Detroit, which has been dying for years despite being the home of the American Automobile Industry.

No thanks, Dr. Seidman, you and yours have a track record. You are all talk about how much you care overshadowed by a history of bad results. If you really cared you would be for the individual and not big government. We’ll stick with the Constitution.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

John Webb February 06, 2013 at 10:56 PM
jb, I read the entire article prior to writing this blog. I also took the time to review the work of the good doctor to make sure he was serious and not attempting to generate discussion. Anytime you use the New York Times as a proof source, I get nervous. Quite honestly, their Liberal credentials are without peer.. mfriedrich's comment, "The founding fathers could never have anticipated a world like that of 2001, with nuclear weapons, and international terrorism. We've had to amend and adjust, not without great cost." is excellent. The Founders were not worried about situations, they were worried about human nature. Despite the passage of time, human nature remains pretty constant. The Founders also allowed for changes with the amendment process. "don't think anyone is seriously considering scrapping the US Constitution, a shell of what it once was." If this were true, many of us would breathe easier. Benjamin Franklin said early on, "you have a Republican form of government, so long as you....." The Constitution must be safe guarded against people who believe they have a better way. The problem with the better way, we the people always lose.
JustUs February 06, 2013 at 11:07 PM
"The problem with the better way, we the people always lose." So very true. Look at ObamaCare and all the 'hidden' problems therein that are only being disclosed today - not when it was passed. The whole idea was to contain costs since we are spending 18% of our GDP on health care. Now we learn it will not slow down costs at all. Some people have a reflex action to 'change' and think it can only be an improvement to the status quo. Those grounded in realism understand that is far from the truth.
jb February 07, 2013 at 02:13 AM
Justus - zzzzzzz
Chez February 07, 2013 at 03:42 AM
I love the casino analogy. That'spretty much what this administration has been doing.
Yeparoo February 07, 2013 at 08:32 PM
Dr. Benjamin Carson for President!! I'd vote for this guy in a second. Hopefully the guy 2 seats to the left learned something today. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/clip/4353213
tiny February 07, 2013 at 09:10 PM
The Constitution was also set up to promote economic development. In Hamilton's Report on Manufactures he layed out how manufacturing can be developed in an organized fashion which the system they defeated didn't allow. So the First National Bank was instituted with Hamilton as Treasury Sect., and Congress was charged with regulating commerce. So Congress, which were the peoples representatives, and the Executive directed credit towards manufactures, westward expansion and large infrastructure projects. They also implemented tariffs to protect those economic activities deemed to be in the national interests. This is very different than the invisible hand of the free market outsourcing the jobs and industries to the lowest cost labor globally under the direction from the worlds private central banks and one-world institutions, and the few rich and powerful families behind it.
John Webb February 07, 2013 at 09:44 PM
Tiny, excellent point. There is a school of thought that says the Constitution was written because of commerce. The idea being a free people without interference from the government would prosper much better than people working for a restrictive form of rule. Those who propose this thought process point out The Fed, high taxes, restrictive trade regulations, and government regulation move us away from freedom by restricting commerce. Nice pickup, many are not aware of this.
tiny February 07, 2013 at 10:05 PM
The end of Bretton Woods fixed exchange rate mechanism set up during FDR's day, which made global money speculation king over production and the real economy, and all the other deregulation leading up to the ending of Glass-Steagall, which put money speclulation into hyper activity over all else, this is your free trade paradiso.
JustUs February 07, 2013 at 10:30 PM
There is no real 'free hand' in today's economy unless you happen to own a corner market - and even then you are subject to massive regulation and government manipulation of economic metrics that impact your bottom line. Next time your heating and air conditioning man visits your home ask him about the hoops and barrels that the government forces him to jump through. As him about unlicensed contractors in his business who are able to competitively undercut him in service pricing and take dollars out of his pocket with no protections from the State. So the little guy takes on all the RISKS of entrepreneurship and gets virtually none of the benefits bestowed upon the big corporate long-ball hitters with political connections. We all know this. It's not a secret. Some are willing to acknowledge it and others aren't. That's the only difference. The adversarial relationship between big business and government was vital to protect the interests of the common citizen. Well, that adversarial relationship on the top-end has gone bye-bye. Now both sides work together to screw the little guy. We have no protector anymore. The big boys are allowed to commit blatant criminal violations with full immunity from the laws. And all you need to do is look at the long list of political campaign fund raisers to understand how that system works. Even casual observers should be able to figure this out. Those with a dog in the race certainly understand it. This permeates all levels of gov.
CDC February 07, 2013 at 11:38 PM
No drones back in 1776 looking in your windows and murdering you. The new future hobby will not be trap shooting, but drone shooting. SkyNet is here! The government will be watching you from above in the months ahead. Your constitutional rights are now gone! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZU94kBmXs4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jplh7uatr-E http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=3sULmaNeexQ
tiny February 08, 2013 at 03:29 AM
Well ya. Gov't is supposed to protect and enhance business. But with the emasculation of gov't oversight of the wildhorse private concerns of the "elite", this has led to lawlessness and destruction which naturally leads to all the things like in the NDAA etc, now being implemented.
JustUs February 08, 2013 at 03:47 AM
Tiny, did you pay any attention to the origins of the Wall Street meltdown and it's aftermath? If you failed to see the collusion between government and big business I really can't help you. I would suggest that you get ahold of the DVD "Inside Job", which may or may not open up your eyes. But at least it's a start and a primer, although there is much more to the story than that which would probably take about 20 DVD's to explain. You saw firsthand what happens when government (SEC, FDIC, etc..) goes to sleep at the wheel and turns the key of the chicken coop over to the foxes. You saw what happened to Main Street, right? One of government prime responsibilities is to protect Main Street from Wall Street. Of course, what should have happened is that all the casinos should have been forced out of business when they lost their loot. But the government protected the crooked casinos and kept them in business with taxpayer dollars. Not only kept them in business, but made them much bigger with even more power. This is as much as I can condense it in one post. But I recommend "Inside Job" so that you get a grasp of what happened.
tiny February 08, 2013 at 04:08 AM
Sad but dominant: www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqDJrmlsiKE
Ralph Hutchinson February 08, 2013 at 04:20 AM
Nice blog John. Thanks for your Patriotism.
JustUs February 08, 2013 at 05:01 AM
What does that song have to do with what I said? Why don't you just respond to my statement and we can discuss it instead of you-tubing a rock song? Let's start there.
tiny February 08, 2013 at 04:25 PM
Ok, just watched half ofa trailer on Inside Job. Haven't you read any of the comments I posted. Just look up.
JustUs February 08, 2013 at 05:25 PM
Tiny, if all you could do is watch half the trailer you're not really interested in the truthful account based upon the facts. That's fine. Go your own way. This is America after all. All of us are allowed to devise our own storylines. Enjoy yourself while that freedom still exists.
tiny February 08, 2013 at 05:47 PM
JustUs, I have a 9 to 5 job 5.5 days/week, and if I was any more informed on this stuff it would be hard to contain it. Besides a solution has been offered here. What is your solution?
JustUs February 08, 2013 at 06:00 PM
Tiny, my solution is really pretty simple. I try to keep stuff as simple as possible. (1) Bring back 'equality under the law' to America. Make the laws apply to everyone and prohibit people from using their social status, power or money to evade the consequences of the laws that they have violated. Rid society of selective anarchy. (2) Allow the 'free hand' of the market to prevail. Do not bail out or reward businesses (not matter how big) that have failed, regardless of the short term consequences it may have on our economy. Allow other better managed businesses to swoop in and capture the market share. That was always the basis of the American entreprenureal system. But that design has been destroyed. (3) Enact laws that hold politicians criminally liable for willful lies to the electorate and citizens. Similar to laws of perjury in a court of law. Leaders with special powers of the masses must be held to higher standards. Telling lies to get elected by stealing votes and money is a very serious form of fraud and should not be tolerated. I'll just keep it at 3, Tiny. That would be a good start and really help to clean up the mess that we find outselves in today.
tiny February 08, 2013 at 06:14 PM
1) feel good measure 2) how do you determine a good from bad business that takes over another. Remember the financial deregulation that allowed the Junk Bond Boys to raise funds to leverage out companies, strip their assets, rake of huge gains and leave the husk of a company. 3) How you gonna do that with the current power structure and electorate?
JustUs February 08, 2013 at 06:30 PM
(1) So the founding premise that underlies the American justice system, namely 'equality under the law' is a 'feel good measure'??? heh. You just flunked American Jurisprudence 101. Get out of my classroom. It's really not even worth my time discussing these matters with someone with such an opinion. (2) Easy. If the income sheet and balance sheet shows that there are no funds left in the corporate coffers and operations must cease - let it die. Just like Joe's Market down on the corner. It is the corporation's obligation to remain solvent. It should NEVER be the taxpayer's obligation to keep a corporation in operation. NEVER. And anyone who proposes such a scheme is really no better than a communist. (3) You asked me for a solution and I have it to you: Enact laws that hold politicians criminally liable for willful lies to the electorate and citizens. If we are what we allegedly stand for: 'With Liberty and Justice for All', then (3) is a great place to start. So now you aren't interested in solutions. You are bickering over how we can possibly change a dirty system into a clean system. That's a totally different question. But you wanted a SOLUTION. I gave you a SOLUTION. So let's stay focused and not divert. Fair 'nuf?
tiny February 08, 2013 at 07:10 PM
1) how has it changed under the law?
JustUs February 08, 2013 at 07:39 PM
"1) how has it changed under the law?" Maybe you're too young to remember this. Back in the 1990's we had widescale corruption in the Savings and Loan Industry. Bill Black was appointed as the special prosecutor. He is now a law professor at, I believe, the University of Kansas. He indicted and jailed about 1,000 dirty bankers in that scandal. The recent Wall Street meltdown was 700x's larger than the S&L scandal. No special prosecutor. No jailings of major players who knowingly processed defective loans and sold security instruments knowing that they contained poisoned investments to unwary investors, and shorted them as they left the back door. PLUS, several of the large American banks laundered hundreds of billions of mexican drug cartel proceeds and knowingly assisted in the purchase of aircraft for the cartels that were used to fly narcotics into the country. This is all public information. The banks were found criminally liable in court yet not one banker was individually indicted, prosecuted or did time in prison behind said violations. And then there is good old Richard Nixon who had his feet held to the fire back in the 1970's. That would never ever ever happen again to a high ranking government official since the Bernsteins and Woodwards of investigative reporting are no longer with us. The ones today are in the bag and know much better than to hold high ranking businessmen or gov officials accountable. Matt Tabbei is the only truthful one left.
tiny February 08, 2013 at 08:05 PM
So your a Glass-Steagall guy then?
tiny February 09, 2013 at 05:27 PM
A Christian friend, (attended Calvary?), a while back said regarding problems in the world, that if everybody was Christian that things would solve themselves because all people would love one another as themselves and God. Well nice thought but it's a fantasy. What would the reinstatement of Glass-Steagall do now? And by the way it has over 100 co-signers in a bill in the House. It would restore national sovereinty to our financial system by seperating our commercial banking system, (deposits and loans), from the investment area, (600 trillion to 1.5 quadrillion in outstanding dervivatives speculation). The gov't would protect the valid and most non-bankrupt commercial sector banks and leave the investment banksters to their own devices, (Fed would stop QE infinity of currently 45 billion/month). This would be the simplest way to block the global corporatist bankster stranglehold over us. The problem is that when a 1 quadrillion bubble is blown, not much real money, backed by the real economy, will be left, and many people with retirement funds, investments, etc, where these things are intermixed with the speculative stuff, well the word haircut comes to mind. So this part that makes one hesitate. But if then Glass-Steagall is followed up with a new credit system and a large FDR style rebuilding program which gets people real jobs not pushing paper, this will create a future for the next generations and is what could be done.
tiny February 11, 2013 at 01:46 PM
tick tock: www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-10/putin-turns-black-gold-into-bullion-as-russia-out-buys-world.html earlier: www.forbes.com/sites/afontevecchia/2013/01/16/germany-repatriating-gold-from-ny-paris-in-case-of-a-currency-crisis
tiny February 12, 2013 at 01:19 AM
Ongoing 'Western' Economic/Financial outlook: 1) Divert and deflect 2) Delay and pray 3) Extend and pretend
tiny February 12, 2013 at 02:46 AM
Confessional - went to the Lakewood Mall yesterday and saw there was hardly a white face there. And this makes me feel bad. So for me the issue is letting things go on autopilot as they are in the big picture, which is destruction, or caring about the future with Glass-Steagall, which would take things as they are, cut out the cancer and build from there.
tiny February 12, 2013 at 05:26 AM
The most primitive but effective divide and rule strategy of the Oligharchy is: they are working for a one world order where a few families run most of the planet. To do it they have to destruct all the nation states. In my view their most basic way is to divide people is based on income and reproductive growth inequalities. So Europe and America had the income and much better standard of living while other areas are less developed but have much higher reporductive rates. So with globalism you intermix these disparities, divide peoples from each other and are one your way to a reality where the elites control everything, you have their gov't enforcers and everybody else is in a cattle like, manual labor type global village situation with a much reduced world population. But maybe I just have an active imagination?
tiny February 12, 2013 at 04:28 PM
"cut out the cancer" should read: stop the 5-yr now ongoing bailouts.......


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something