Convention of Statesmen


Should We Abandon the U.S. Constitution?

by Candace Salima, News Corner USA
Originally published on 8 January 2013

I will admit when I heard Georgetown University Professor Louis Michael Seidman’s advocation for the U.S. to abandon the Constitution I was in a state of shock. As a student of the Constitution, as well as having studied the life and times of the Founding Fathers, I am always shocked when I hear something so ridiculous.

FoxNews' Megyn Kelly spoke with Professor Seidman on his article, and book, advocating the abandonment of the Constitution to a more mob rule type of law...that is, until she pressed him for details.

You'll notice Professor Seidman continually contradicted himself. He initially said that the U.S. Constitution was the document that has made our nation broken with its “archaic, idiosyncratic and downright evil provisions.” For a man who has spent his career teaching people about the U.S. Constitution he is grossly inadequate for the job. His dismissal of the founding generation was offensive.
“This is our country. We live in it. We have the right to have the kind of country that we want. I’m not very happy with having a bunch of folks who have been dead for over 200 years...telling us what kind of country we have.” Professor Louis Michael Seidman
Seidman's lack of understanding of the founding principles and what made this nation great, not to mention the advice the Founding Fathers gave us over the next few years is stunning. A Georgetown professor who can't tell his head from a hole in the ground. Big surprise.

Seidman complains,
"Of all the constitutions in the world, the American Constitution is the most difficult to amend,” he proclaimed. “It’s only been amended 27 times — only 17 times if you don’t count the Bill of Rights."
That, my idiotic friend, would be the point. The Founding Fathers didn't just jot down the Constitution and walk away. Jefferson and Franklin traveled abroad studying the different forms of government. They studied history, and they focused on the Anglo Saxon original version of government. They haggled, argued, negotiated and this beautiful document of governance was the result.

"Oh, but Candace," you say. "What about the 3/5ths clause, it's evil." And yes, it was evil. But have you stopped to see why that clause was included? The North was notoriously anti-slavery, the South's entire industry depended on it. King George was knocking on the door, the Articles of Confederation were a dismal failure, the colonies were knee deep in debt, and the Constitutional Convention was called to fix things, and fix it they did. They threw out the Articles of Confederation and crafted, with much debate, the U.S. Constitution, 4,543 words that changed the course of history. Nobody got everything they wanted, but what we received is a solid form of government. The 3/5ths clause was the key compromise to get the South on board, which was critical to the salvation of the fledgling nation, however, it was supposed to be sunsetted out early in the 19th Century, but it wasn't. It took the Civil War to finally keep the agreement made in Philadelphia in 1776, all men who had been created equal were finally free.

Judge Andrew Napolitano responded to Seidman's comments with: “Think of it this way – the purpose of the Constitution is to govern the government, to restrain it, to make sure Congress writes the laws, the president enforces the laws, the courts interpret the laws.” Without the Constitution, Napolitano argues personal liberties would die because the government would have too much control. He says that it’s a “brilliant” document that “assures that too much power won’t end up in one place.”

He concluded, “The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. If you want to amend it, amend it, but you can’t overlook it.”

Over 80+, according to George W. Bush, constitutions in the world are based on our Constitution, and for good reason. It's a solid form of government that has held America in good stead until we passed the 16th and 17th Amendments, which is when we started to have trouble. Well, to be frank, the Dred Scott Case as well as Wicker v. Filmore also altered the course of America forever. The main point is this, we didn't start having the trouble we've had in the last century, and this one, until we altered the fundamental foundation of the U.S. Constitution.

Conservatives, as a whole, understand the fundamental rights found in the Constitution are ones that provide the opportunity for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Are those guaranteed? No? Nor should they be, because they are the end result of each individual human's choices in life. When government tries to dictate these things, it always ends in the complete eradication of freedom and sheer misery for the citizens of that nation. The U.S. Constitution was written by wise and good men raised up for the sole purpose of protecting the citizens of America from rogue governments, liberals, and idiotic professors.

Maybe Professor Seidman needs to go back to the beginning, back to where I first learned of the founding of America, School House Rock:

And maybe Professor Seidman needs to see "I'm Just a Bill," also from School House Rock:

The basics of what I'm attempting to teach Professor Seidman is to go back to the beginning. When we have something as precious as the U.S. Constitution is, then we must fight to keep it as the rule of law. It isn't supposed to be easy, because when it's as precious as the freedoms we have and enjoy, it should never be easy to take them away. Ever.

Copyright 2013. All rights reserved by Candace E. Salima.

Should We Abandon the U.S. Constitution? Should We Abandon the U.S. Constitution? Reviewed by Candace Salima on Monday, February 25, 2013 Rating: 5