Best
125 Comments
Post
  • #1
    !
    "Translation for Dummies" - Did our founders have professor Louis Michael Seidman in mind when they passed the second amendment?
  • #55
    !
    @Neo_NtheMatrix so if Seidman is a communist, that means that Thomas Jefferson was a communist also.
  • R Load more replies

  • #9
    !
    Louis Seidman has made it plain that he is wholly unqualified to be teaching a class on the U.S. Constitution, or on Constitutional law, or even U.S. history. Georgetown University should be ashamed to have this guy on the payroll.
  • #45
    !
    Agreed....however most of the universities these days are progressive liberal to severely socialist in nature....he's bordering on domestic treason....

    Now people should have a better idea and understanding why the 2nd amendment is there....
  • #8
    !
    This man shows what is wrong with public education now. He has no business teaching anyone, especially anyone who will be trained in the law. Maybe this is why we got the Sandra Flookes of the world from Georgetown Univ. Law School. He will single handedly run down the sagging reputation of a once fine institution. Thankfully he lives in America, many other countries would have him in prison for these kinds of remarks.
  • #24
    !
    As I understand it, this is typical of law schools. Its not about the law, but about how you can get around the law. An outward representation of our "relative truth" society.
  • #26
    !
    @DerivePI Well, some law professors for sure, this one seems a bit more extreme than others, but as hubby is an attorney, one of the ethical ones, I will have to say that not all lawyers are bad, most are very good and it really depends which law school you go to, which state you choose to practice in (DE being one of the harder bars to pass and one with the highest ethical requirements) and the person themselves.
  • #40
    !
    @DerivePI The guy is an idiot. It has nothing to do with his school, it has everything to do with him. Plenty of idiots with law degrees. What law school did you go to? What an ignorant comment. Most law schools teach you to go around the law, that's just nonsense.
  • #47
    !
    @PoliticalSpice My hubby when to the Univ. of PA law school, I have no idea where you get your information, but most law schools and most law school teachers teach the law, not opinions or how to skirt the law. If you take the bar of any given state, they test your knowledge of the law, not how to skirt it. Most lawyers do practice this, obeying the law, applying the law etc. Are there bad ones? Sure, but one apple shouldn't spoil the entire barrel. Also, a trial lawyer, or as my hubby, a Business Litigator, must have a reputation for integrity, at least in DE for Corporate business, with the sitting judges. Out of state lawyers come here and try their tricks, are quickly disabused of that practice and either go on to lose and lose big time and find it hard to get a "Home" law firm to partner with them on trials or they clean up their act. No, the ethical lawyer does exist in great numbers you just hear about the sleeze balls like John Edwards in the news.
  • #51
    !
    @PoliticalSpice Disregard my comment, I though you were replying to me, I guess it really isn't "All about me Monday" after all.:()
  • R Load more replies

  • #32
    !
    Don't like the Consitution??? Feel free to leave to any Socialist/Communist hell-hole you can find which more suits your liking. Countless souls have fought and died for that "outdated" document, and it is just as relevant today (if not MORE so) as it was over 200 years ago.
  • #10
    !
    For sure, the Constitution has its flaws and we'll always argue over parts of it, like the Electoral College, but I think we can always say that its major advantage is that it works 3,287 times better than any other form of government
  • #13
    !
    Thomas Jefferson thought we need a revolution every 50 years or so. We've gone far beyond that. We can't beat them with guns. It's time for a ballot revolution and if you want to keep the constitution then it's time for some new amendments. Like election reform on contributions, term limits and the electoral college.
  • #2
    !
    The Constitution has no business in the world of today. It's time for a Constitutional Convention. Of course, bear in mind that with the extremism of both the left and right today, that if they start a convention on Monday next week they'll still be there 250 years from now whining, threatening, lying, bitching and complaining about each other. But we have to start sometime.
  • #65
    !
    No the constitution is just fine like it is. I can't imagine how it could be improved. All we need to do is have a government that follows the constitution.
  • #84
    !
    The constitution was a document that the states agreed to establish a general goverment, and the bill of rights was against the general goverment and they have trampled on those rights. The general goverment and the constitution should go. Sucession is the only answer that can fix the problem. You will never be able to please 315 mil people but you can find agreement and similar beliefs in smaller numbers.
  • #88
    !
    Why don't you enlighten us on what exactly is wrong with the Constitution... and how it doesn't fit today's society and please be very specific
  • #104
    !
    @bsking To amend the constitution is lengthly and cumbersome by original design, with purpose and will guide effectively forever. The problem is todays law makers, law professors, law activist are just much,much lazier than those of the days of origin.
  • R Load more replies

  • #36
    !
    If he doesn't like what it stands for no matter how old it is then he has the right to migrate to another country and start over as an immigrant there.
  • #31
    !
    I just watched the video of this and all I can say is he should have laid off the drugs back in the 60's. What a dumbass!!!
  • #30
    !
    Let's be honest, the constitution contains parts that are no longer "politically correct" (like that pesky second amendment). For those thinking about changing it or scrapping it, just ask yourself how long before someone suggests eliminating a part that's important to you. Like the old saying, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"....
  • #19
    !
    The hubris of these "scholars" is unfathomable, to think that they could in anyway judge the brilliance of our forefathers. Men born of revolution and hardship; as opposed to a life of enviable easy, that risked their wealth, families and their very lives, to create a document that gave rights and freedom to all citizens of this nation. I am glad they were so nearsighted as to invest the power between three branches that didn't include the overly educated big mouths.
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • #34
    !
    @Russell797
    Talk about stupid! What in the world are you talking about? I never said I want people not to be educated. I said I was glad the Constitution wasn't in danger from overly educated people that think they are sooo smart we should dismantle the Constitution on his say so. Something that IS as relevant today as when it was when written, because we could ammend it when necessary.
  • #68
    !
    @kathyparsell First, I have no idea why my post was removed by the moderators???

    If I said something offensive I apologize.

    What exactly are "overly educated people"? I think it ridiculous that you can say that. So there should be limits to how smart or knowledgeable a person can be to qualify for public office? No one is discussing the dismantling of the Constitution, that's a right wing strawman pushed by people full of hate.
  • #94
    !
    @Russell797 Au contrarie, the above referenced professor said just that..ignore what you don't like as it is obsolete... As to the moderators they are sometimes contrary ..have had several bizarrely removed myself. BTW little offends me.
  • #124
    !
    It will be if we let demagogues continue to chip away at it in the name of safety and security.

    A lot of my fellow gun-owners like to use the example of the Spartans as what a small number of well-armed folks can do against a vastly greater force. There are BETTER examples of MORE LIKEABLE folks who have actually won against such odds. Consider the ancient Spaniards (Celtiberians) in their 200-year war against Rome. Examples of armies of 4,000 Celtiberian warriors defeating Roman legions of 20,000-complete with ballistas, catapults and ELEPHANTS abound. Numancia is one such example. Defeated one Roman General after another for 20 years, until a siege and dead cattle infested with anthrax were catapulted over their walls forced a tiny remnant to set their city on fire and commit suicide rather than surrender and be disarmed. This small city of 8,000 is behind the word "disaster" (dies ater: Dark Day, August 23, when a Roman army of 20,000 was defeated,captured by 4,000 Numantine warriors and forced to sign a peace treaty) the RED FLAG as a signal for emergency or impending attack; and January 1st as the first of the year, rather than March 15th (The Romans changed their fiscal year due to the extended 200-year "War of Fire" in Spain- 218 B.C. to 19 B.C).

    I have some Greek in my family. I have mixed feelings about the Lacedaemonians (the people that Americans and much of the rest of the world know as "Spartans"). Yes, Lacedaemonia was what the "Spartans" called their homeland. That's what the Lambda on the shield is all about "L" for Lacedaemonia. Anyway, the Spartans were an EXTREMELY MILITARISTIC AND OPPRESSIVE PEOPLE. They severely oppressed fellow residents of their own peninsula, Peloponessos. A people called the HELOTS. At night, "Spartan" Spike Teams (Army Veterans will know what I'm talking about) would go into Helot areas and MURDER any Helot who showed leadership abilities or superior intelligence. The HELOTS were not allowed to own, transport, manufacture, or buy weapons. So when you see the actor portraying King Leonidas in the movies talking about FREEDOM, he was not including the poor HELOTS. The HELOTS make the best case for an armed People, NOT the Lacedaemonians (i.e., Spartans). OK, now, you churchies, HAVE FUN WITH THEIR REAL NAME, lol.
  • #119
    !
    Yeah, let's replace the US Constitution with a "make-it-up-as-we-go " social contract... that seems to be what many people are supporting anyway... and how's that working for us???
  • #116
    !
    Yeah, time to replace the one country with two separate countries-I hope one will adopt the old constitution; and the other can give away free stuff
  • #112
    !
    Lets not do away with it but lets update it and make it relevant for our time.

    "I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and constitutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as a civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors....."
    ~ Thomas Jefferson ~
  • R Load more comments...
Post