Megyn is good at this sort of discussion and she realizes it´s better to engage him publicly than to just ignore him. She also is respectful, but very firm, even if she´d like to behave differently.

This man manifests an ignorance about the background, origin, and debates over the crafting of the United States Constitution that is appalling, and that would simply be unbelievable if we did not have the proof he himself provides right before our eyes. It is as though he is utterly unfamiliar with the actual thinking of the Founders and the basis for the document he disparages as the outdated beliefs of some dead people. That an individual of such limited knowledge and comprehension should be in a position of trust and authority is alarming beyond measure. One almost feels it to be an emergency requiring immediate action and notification of someone. Something is terribly, terribly wrong here. If I were in charge of Georgetown University, the first thing I would do is order a careful re-examination and re-verification of his academic credentials to be certain he is who he claims to be and has completed the training he says he has. What on earth is going on when a professor who specializes in the Constitution knows less about it than a graduate of a good high school?

The professor could maybe be well educated while not being a critical thinker. Such a person usually doesn´t understand that without the arcane Constitution he spurns is the only enduring moral compass that allows him to voice his attitude and ideas freely.
Without that laws to protect that standard of conduct he could be tossed in jail for life with out a trial if the ruling powers decreed.

"a lot of viewers don´t agree with what I have to say."

Way too modest there, Seidman. To be fair, a lot of viewers are deeply insulted and offended by what you have to say. In many other countries, investigators would look for you in the wake of such comments, but would only be able to locate a few parts. Try reading the Federalist Papers sometime, if you want to call yourself a Constitutional scholar.

Likewise, the next person who characterizes the Electoral College as oppressive (within arm´s reach of me) will get a quick smack upside the head for being totally ignorant about the Great Compromise.

Megyn gave him a platform so America could see just what a Georgetown professor is spewing about his country. It´s hard to listen to but I am glad she invited him. Good job, Megyn.

Foxie Knews is bearable if one turns the volume to zero.
The girls are great, but they have wacko pop ups with no warning like pro gun control billous o´really.
I quit watching it when nasty bobbette bechel and smarmy jaun willym&ms became it´s mainstay newsters.
If I wanted to watch that trash I would view the Jihad Nightly or the Dimfecal Marxist Review.

I suggest Mr. Seidman go talk to Mark Levin on his program. I look forward to that discussion.

#2, this guy is not ignorant. His attitude towards the nations founding is based on his world view. He is a prototype liberal/progressive. Like many in Washington, He hates freedom and the basic ideals of Americas foundation. What is really scary is, this clown is polluting how many minds with this krap!

Seidman should re-evaluate his views on our Constitution. I don´t think he´d fare very well under sharia law. Think Daniel Pearl.

and while we´re at it, let´s scrap the tenure system at colleges & universtities in this country. . .

I swore a "blood oath" to "preserve, protect, and defend" OUR Constitution against ALL enemies...both Foreign and Domestic. This dolt is a "domestic enemy."

This man is not ignorant; he is introducing the next evolution of the one world order progressives, of whom Obama is a hood ornament.

While Obama is having great success in moving America toward the EU socialist welfare state, he and his handlers will eventually come up against immovable and immutable elements of the Constitution. The professor is preparing the ground for that eventuality, and the inevitable debate on whether the time has come to discard the constitution.

That´s what I was going to say, #8. I´m sure Seidman has a reasonably good mind that he has chosen to channel down a narrow avenue of leftist thinking. Anything outside that is warped or ignored by him. Contrary reaction to his view will not force him to weigh the alternatives, he´s locked in. He´s an avatar of elite leftism or, in other words, a very bad man.

I firmly believe our wonderful president and most in his administration have the exact same belief. My concern is we are about to see these ideals released on this nation. We will be feeling November for a very long time.

The class of people who live for ideas do not pay a penalty if their ideas do not work in the real world. Aren´t I clever? Original? Provocative? Bravely against the grain? Nimbly verbal? Widely quoted? Admired by other idea people? Vain tinsel. The founders were steel and will be revered long after the tinselmen are forgotten.

Get out. Stay out.

Mediate is not a legitimate news source.

Ayn Rand felt the greatest danger to this country was for those protecting the Constitution to fail to understand the progressives did indeed ´believe´ what they espoused. Never, ever say - I can´t believe you mean that. They do.

When people complain about the Constitution I am always reminded of the movie "Scent of a Woman." Pacino´s character says he always knew the right path, but he never took it. Why? Because it was too damn hard.

These simpering whiners remind me of that. It´s too hard to convince a majority of the people to give up their liberty. So he wants that dysfunctional parliamentary system that has given Europe such a economic benefit (Italy,Spain, Greece,France), all on the backs of the taxpayers of a Constitutional Republic who has provided military cover for over 60 years.

I would suggest this parliamentary consensus builder move to Europe where he can indulge himself in his fantasy of government that "respects" rights, rather than a people who demand their rights. The former is wishful thinking; the latter is just too damned hard.

I took umbrage when Megyn said Republicans don´t believe in privacy issues but Libtards do. Since when? The libtards are the ones destroying every right that deals with privacy.