XPost: alt.politics.usa.constitution, dc.urban-planning, talk.politics.guns
XPost: wa.politics
From: anonymous@anonymitaet-im-inter.net
On Tue, 07 May 2013, "Obama Tells Military To Fire On American Citizens"
wrote:
>Charles Osgood, the host of CBS Sunday Morning, shocked many
>viewers when he introduced a segment that called for the
>abolishment of the U.S. Constitution.
>
>“Is the U.S. Constitution truly worthy of the reverence in which
>most Americans hold it,” Osgood asked his viewers.
>
>He then introduced Georgetown University Professor Louis Michael
>Seidman — who launched into a lengthy essay bashing the Founding
>Fathers and the Constitution.
>
>“I’ve got a simple idea: Let’s give up on the Constitution,” he
>said.
>
>Seidman is a professor of Constitutional Law at Georgetown. He
>said Constitutional disobedience is “as American as apple pie.”
>
>“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outdated document,” he said.
>
>The segment ended without any objections from Osgood.
>
>(CBS News) Is the U.S. Constitution truly worthy of the
>reverence in which most Americans hold it? A view on that from
>Louis Michael Seidman, Professor of Constitutional Law at
>Georgetown University:
>
>I’ve got a simple idea: Let’s give up on the Constitution.
>
>I know, it sounds radical, but it’s really not. Constitutional
>disobedience is as American as apple pie.
>
>For example, most of our greatest Presidents — Jefferson,
>Lincoln, Wilson, and both Roosevelts — had doubts about the
>Constitution, and many of them disobeyed it when it got in their
>way.
>
>To be clear, I don’t think we should give up on everything in
>the Constitution. 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.
>
>Unfortunately, the Constitution also contains some provisions
>that are not so inspiring. For example, one allows a
>presidential candidate who is rejected by a majority of the
>American people to assume office. Suppose that Barack Obama
>really wasn’t a natural-born citizen. So what?
>
>Constitutional obedience has a pernicious impact on our
>political culture. Take the recent debate about gun control.
>None of my friends can believe it, but I happen to be skeptical
>of most forms of gun control.
>
>I understand, though, that’s not everyone’s view, and I’m eager
>to talk with people who disagree.
>
>But what happens when the issue gets Constitutional-ized? Then
>we turn the question over to lawyers, and lawyers do with it
>what lawyers do. So instead of talking about whether gun control
>makes sense in our country, we talk about what people thought of
>it two centuries ago.
>
>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.
>
>This is our country. We live in it, and we have a right to the
>kind of country we want. We would not allow the French or the
>United Nations to rule us, and neither should we allow people
>who died over two centuries ago and knew nothing of our country
>as it exists today.
>
>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.
>
>http://nation.foxnews.com/cbs-news/2013/01/28/political-corruption-cbs-news
The "constitution" was never worth the paper it was printed on. All
of it is lies. All of it.
So in this sense, the teleprompter script-writers were being honest,
for once. They are like a serial killer wanting to be caught.
--
Bub
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
