Skip to comments.CBS's Charles Osgood: 'Is Constitution Truly Worthy of Reverence in Which Most Americans Hold It?'
Posted on 01/28/2013 5:25:12 AM PST by servo1969
Imagine you're getting ready to head to church one fine Sunday morning and on your television you hear a man say, "Let's give up on the Constitution."
Such actually happened when CBS News Sunday Morning aired a rather inflammatory commentary by a Georgetown University law professor teased by host Charles Osgood asking, "Is the U.S. Constitution truly worthy of the reverence in which most Americans hold it?" (video follows with transcript and commentary):
CHARLES OSGOOD, HOST: Is the U.S. Constitution truly worthy of the reverence in which most Americans hold it? A view on that from Lewis Michael Seidman, Professor of Constitutional Law at Georgetown University.
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 of 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.
OSGOOD: Opinion from Professor Lewis Michael Seidman.
The folks at CBS News were so enamored with Seidman's opinion they posted a video of this nonsense at their website along with the transcript.
Worse than that, in the last two weeks, Bob Schieffer likened President Obama's gun control initiatives to America defeating the Nazis in World War II, CBS News's political director John Dickerson called on President Obama to destroy the Republican Party, and now this.
I recently asked if CBS News is making a conscious move to the far-left to become broadcast television's MSNBC.
What do you think?
Have you noticed that they are all too lazy to amend it or replace it? They don’t want to be restrained by ANY constitution. (I put drug warriors in the same category.)
Osgood should stick to poetry.
Seems to me there should be some penalty on them for undermining the country that has done so much for them.
Charles, if you ask a question like that, it signifies that you are too stupid to understand the answer. Those who do not know or understand the history of the United States are the ones who want to re-write the Constitution.
This is more likely the opening salvo in formalizing zero's desire to shred the Constitution he has so willfully ignored. The left does not like having limits placed on their naked power grabs and the Constitution is an obstacle they want to destroy.
If the left is as full of intellectuals as they claim, it begs the question why they do not appreciate the brilliance and the thought that went into creating the Constitution?
Better tighten your seatbelts, it gets bumpier from here. America is being attacked on several fronts by the left in order to find an opening amidst the chaos!
He revealed how leftists feel. Most don’t say anything, but tear the Constitution to shreds.
The media is the number 1 enemy. Until we make a concerted effort to do some real financial damage to the networks. If a half million young people could turn out for life in the frigid temperatures of DC, surely we can get something going. We need to make our voices heard via the pocketbook. Boycott every show on the big three networks AND ALL of their sponsors. We have to do something or nothing will change.
TRANSLATION: “It has stuff in it that prevents us from imposing our totalitarian socialist Utopia, so it is obviously bad.”
And so it begins. This was no accident or spur of the moment thing. This is the begining of a movement to get obama a third term and finish reshaping America. Expect more on this line in the future.
They only like the constitution when it comes to the “Freedom of Speech” and expression.
Common sense rule #1: Never take a grown man who wears a bow tie seriously.
Things are quickly coming to a head...
You know why they despise the Constitution?
Its bibilical, and therefore Godly, foundation.
These people are working more and more openly building Satan’s kingdom on earth, no matter how short lived that’s going to be (7 yrs).
Isn’t he so folksy. Can’t be evil intent right? (Sarcasm). Just as the other Sunday commentator, Charles Kuralt, was found out to be amoral with his second “shadow” family, all these media people who want no rules have one purpose: to follow their amoral objectives.
Yeah, these jacks$$es would be the first ones invoking the brilliance of the Constitution and long-dead Framers if the majority was trying to take away the parts THEY like (such as the First Amendment ... )
Disregarding the Constiution, even partially, opens up all sorts of doors to disregarding it in a much wider manner. Someone, quick1 conduct a poll on income taxes so we can disregard the 16th Amendment.
It’s not about “reverence” for the constitution... it’s that it’s the law of the land. It can be changed, but it ought not be ignored.
Absolutely correct. Bears repeating.
Never trust a man who wears a bow tie.
Right on!!!We need to start pushing back. I no longer watch anything on the major networks. Old movies and Fox news is what we mainly do. With FX,TLC,Discovery etc., also!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.