I seriously can't imagine the thought process of NYT's editors running that "let's ignore parts of the Constitution liberals dislike" op-ed.—
Dan McLaughlin (@baseballcrank) December 31, 2012
That must be something from The Onion, right? Nope.
In another case of self-parody, an op-ed published in The New York Times calls for the abandoning of The Constitution of the United States.
From the appalling op-ed, penned by Louis Michael Seidman, a professor of constitutional law at Georgetown University, and titled “Let’s give up on the Constitution“:
But almost no one blames the culprit: our insistence on obedience to the Constitution, with all its archaic, idiosyncratic and downright evil provisions.
It goes on to mock our “obsession” with The Constitution.
Silly rubes, “obsessed” with our founding document and the rights delineated therein! The evil and archaic provisions?
When you’ve lost Glenn Greenwald …
There is no clearer barometer than that, is there?
Indeed. The shake fisty is strong with this one, even though it shouldn’t be surprising.
Alas, liberals really are embracing the article. Seriously.
That’s right, including the always inane Slate’s Matt Yglesias, who starts mumbling about “some bad stuff” in the Constitution. Stuff and things! And it’s super old or something.
And Glenn Greenwald is giving him, and others, the business.
Here he goes.
Yes, some of the Constitutuion should remain, if the law professor deems them suitable. Anything that will aid sweet, sweet liberal policy? Still totally awesome and not “archaic.”
The sane (hint: Not Yglesias) weigh in.
Again, not all is evil and archaic. Just the stuff with which he doesn’t agree.
Heh. Will the Fishwrap of Record listen? Doubtful.