Below is my column on Fox.com from a recent trip to Grand Lake, Colorado, a small town where families gather to celebrate our shared faith in the United States Constitution. For this aging academic, the visit was rejuvenating. It was a sharp contrast to the divisions and anger I had left behind on the East Coast.
Here is the column:
“I am very angry.” Those words from Harvard Law Professor Michael Klarman were something of an understatement in our debate at Colgate University last week over whether our country is in a “constitutional crisis.” Taking the affirmative position, Klarman lashed out at the current “authoritarianism rooted in old-fashioned white supremacy.” Analogizing the current situation to that of Nazi Germany, he denounced Trump and his supporters as “fascists” while calling ICE agents “thugs” operating “concentration camps” where immigrants are “essentially tortured.”
When I noted that Klarman was demonstrating the license of what I have called our “age of rage,” he readily agreed that “I am enraged.” He said he wanted to “show rage” because the constitutional system “is not working” and I do say this to alarm you . . . to shake people out of their insomnia.”
Like many law professors today, Klarman questioned the viability of our constitutional system. However, what he was describing was not a constitutional crisis but a crisis of faith.
A New York Times column last year denounced “Constitution worship” and added that “Americans have long assumed that the Constitution could save us; a growing chorus now wonders whether we need to be saved from it.”
There is a growing chorus of faculty calling for us to scrap our constitutional system.
Brown University’s Corey Brettschneider called the Constitution a “dangerous document” that is driving this “threat to democracy.”
George Washington law professor Mary Anne Franks condemned the “cult of the Constitution” that has been defended to advance “white male supremacy.”
In a column titled “The Constitution Is Broken and Should Not Be Reclaimed,” law professors Ryan D. Doerfler of Harvard and Samuel Moyn of Yale insisted that we need to “reclaim America from Constitutionalism.”
Berkeley Dean Erwin Chemerinsky, author of the book “No Democracy Lasts Forever: How the Constitution Threatens the United States,” argued that the Constitution is now a threat to American democracy.
It is a drumbeat heard on cable news where the Constitution is called “trash” and a vehicle for oppression.
In academia, we are seeing the expansion of this counter-constitutional movement. The recent elections and court cases have gone against the demands of many in the establishment. The conclusion is that the system itself is broken and must be tossed aside.
For many law students, this is the academic echo chamber in which they learn the law. To support the Constitution or deny a “crisis” is to invite ridicule and retribution. It is viewed as simply naïve to suggest that the most successful constitutional system in history is anything but a failed experiment.
In my forthcoming book, Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution, I discuss this crisis of faith and dangers presented to the American democracy in the 21st Century.
Despite engaging in such debates for years, it can take its toll. It can often seem like fewer and fewer people understand the great gift that the Framers gave us in this unique document. While Klarman reminded the students in the audience that the Constitution is merely “words on paper” if it is not working correctly, it is more than that. It is a covenant of a people with each other; a leap of faith in a system that survived wars, economic crises, and social unrest for over two centuries.
I did not come straight home to Washington after the Colgate debate. I had one more stop. I was asked to give the Constitution Day Address for the small town of Grand Lake, Colorado. Nestled in the Rocky Mountains, this town holds an annual celebration and I was intrigued by the invitation. It said that they may be a small town, but they believed in something truly big. They believed in the United States Constitution.
I arrived near midnight and, frankly, I was questioning my decision to make the long trip after two weeks on the road. The next morning, I was pretty worn out when I was taken to the parade before the speech. What I found was what I needed the most. The entire town, along with others from communities as far away as Wyoming, had come out to share their love for our nation and our Constitution.
Before we began, I met three young boys dressed in revolutionary garb and carrying American flags. They were part of the local fife and drum team. We proceeded down main street as families lined up to cheer the Constitution. Flags passed on horseback and a line of go carts as neighbors cheered neighbors. They were not angry. There was not a scintilla of rage. They were grateful.
I am sure that this account will be scoffed at back East as some trite remake of how I came upon an American Whoville. However, living in Washington, you can easily succumb to the cynicism and tribalism of our politics. Patriotism is at best a soundbite to be used by politicians to satisfy the chumps in the hinterlands.
There is a dangerous conceit in every generation by those who believe that their problems are unique and require radical new measures. They are the same voices that we have heard for centuries; they are the voices of an age of rage.
In our debate, Professor Klarman stressed that he was not calling all Trump voters fascists because he believed many are simply ill-informed and “many do not read newspapers.” He added that any students in the room who had “not gone to a protest in the last eight months” were effective accessories in the rise of authoritarianism and autocracy.
I suggested another possibility: most citizens do not agree with the political, academic, and media elite. They are not unread idiots but people who see something that many in academia can no longer see or are unwilling to see in this country.
I respect that Professor Klarman is responding to things that he honestly views as threatening and harmful to the most vulnerable in our society. Yet, at Harvard, where there are only a handful of conservative faculty members, it is easy for students to conclude such views are the unassailable truth.
Outside of Cambridge and Washington, there is an entire nation that still believes in our Constitution. That is why this trip was so rejuvenating for this refugee from higher education. Many law professors today are like priests who have lost their faith but kept their robes. They lash out against a system for failing to meet their demands and an electorate that failed to yield to their collective wisdom.
When I was walking in the town, I came across two boys near the pavilion. They eagerly described their haul of candy and could not wait for the fireworks that night. I was about to walk away when one of them added “and I got this.” He then proudly produced a pocket Constitution. His younger brother immediately objected, saying, “We are sharing it.”
As a nation, we are all still sharing it after two centuries. It defines us as a people. Unlike other nations bound by common language and culture, we are a nation joined by a common legacy of ideas, a revolutionary faith in a free people bound to each other by a simple constitution.
It was hard to leave Grand Lake, but it felt better just knowing that places like this still exist.
Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
This may seem simplistic but if they hate the constitution, don’t like the way the country is run, why don’t they leave and settle in a nation that has no constitution and suits their political views? Would it be because you wouldn’t be able to criticize the government, the benefits of tenure and the salary they enjoy? Planes leave this nation every day to locations all over the world, surely one of these locations would best suit your rage and hatred for the United States. The constitution is the reason you won’t leave, where else would you be able to speak, act the way you do and above all break the minds of the young your entrusted to educate. Do you hate the constitution or really, do you hate yourself?
After Charlie was assassinated one of the clips that made the rounds was where a student stepped up to the mic and said he hated the US, and Charlie asked if he planned to leave. When he said, “No,” Charlie remarked that you know this is a great country because even the people who hate it refuse to leave it.
The colonists didn’t leave the British colonies – they stayed and changed the way they were ruled.
What is it with morons saying “If you don’t like it then leave”?
To say they don’t like the US is saying they don’t like the way it is governed, which is what the 2nd Amendment is all about – to kill the tyrants in power. Do you support the 2nd Amendment or not?
You didn’t see the clip I referred to. The student said, “I hate America.” He said wanted America to stop existing, not to be improved. But he wanted to stay anyway. Charlie had a solid point.
@Anny –
Don’t mix patriots who built this nation with College Communists. You talk like the settlers could have just gone on down to the NY docks and booked a trip to any place they wanted to go and leave. Many were indentured slaves, lucky to have the cloth on their back and a piece of bread in their mouths. Yes. If they don’t like it leave, plain and simple.
As far as the second amendment go’s and what it’s there for maybe you need a visit from the FBI to explain your remark?
The anti-constitutionalism of law faculties on the Left, and the culture of political violence on the Left, are connected. They are different facets of an effort to bring down America in the name of Socialist revolution. The law professors involved are Antifa in suit-and-tie. Antifa’s goal is to violently overthrow the American government and way of life.
Professor Turley, please follow your emphasis on freedom of speech in the Constitution with the essential imperative of the right to private property.
The right to private property precludes communism, which is why Karl Marx said, “The theory of Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.”
The right to private property is absolute.
The right to private property denies government any power to “claim and exercise” any aspect or degree of dominion over private property, with the sole exception of the “Takings Clause.”
The right to private property is qualified by the 5th Amendment, and no further qualification is possible.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“[Private property is] that dominion which one man claims and exercises over the external things of the world, in exclusion of every other individual.”
– James Madison
The Supreme Court and Zorro Mamdani in New York have no power to “claim or exercise” dominion over any aspect or facet, or to any degree, of private property.
Guess we’ll see how mayor mamdani does with his great ideas? The unions will be hilarious.
Unions are criminal organizations: Breach of contract, trespass, harassment, threats, intimidation, vandalism, property damage, bodily injury, etc., without which they have no bargaining position or power.
“I am very angry.” Those words from Harvard Law Professor Michael Klarman were something of an understatement in our debate at Colgate University last week over whether our country is in a “constitutional crisis.” Taking the affirmative position, Klarman lashed out at the current “authoritarianism rooted in old-fashioned white supremacy.”
Cue “Dick the Butcher” in William Shakespeare’s play Henry VI, Part 2.
Big Law is lurching Left in a stark way. Hopefully Patel and Bondi are prepared.
Big Law Leans Left—and Is Moving Further Left, Research Shows
David Lat, Bloomberg Law
University of Notre Dame law professor Derek Muller has been tracking the political contributions of lawyers and staff at large law firms for more than a decade. He first wrote about the topic in 2013, based on data from the 2012 presidential election, then revisited it in 2021, looking at the period from 2017 to 2020.
This year, Muller updated his research yet again. He began with 150 law firms: the Am Law 100—the nation’s 100 largest law firms based on revenue, which do primarily defense-side work—and 50 comparable plaintiffs’ firms, taken from the NLJ 500 or Legal 500 rankings. He reviewed contributions by lawyers and staff at these firms to the Biden/Harris presidential campaigns, the Trump campaign, major Democratic and Republican party organizations, and two leading aggregators of campaign contributions, ActBlue (Democratic) and WinRed (Republican). He looked at a two-year period, covering 2023 and 2024.
Muller’s research captured around $52 million in contributions to Democratic-affiliated groups, compared with approximately $4 million to Republican-affiliated groups. So 92.45% of the funds went to Democrats—roughly a 12-to-1 ratio, significantly up from the 6-to-1 ratio he observed back in 2020.
The overwhelming majority of firms had fewer than 10% of their employees’ contribution money going to Republicans, and most of these firms saw less than 5% falling on the Republican side. Only six firms had at least 25% of their employees’ funds going to Republicans, and no Am Law 100 firms had a majority of contribution dollars going to Republicans. Compare this with Muller’s 2021 research—when more than 20 firms had at least 25% of employees’ contribution money going to Republicans, and three Am Law 100 firms had a majority of contribution dollars going to Republicans.
https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business-and-practice/big-law-leans-left-and-is-moving-further-left-research-shows
“Big Law Leans Left—and Is Moving Further Left, Research Shows”
You’ve provided some eye-opening data that should wake and warn everyone…. I don’t understand how “their” words and actions are taken as merely opposition, when they are clearly instilling anti-Constitution aggressions on the order of SEDITION.
Have we all become so left of RIGHT, so liberal, as to call this kind of confutation [of the Constitution] and organized rebellion, simply a “free-speech” issue?
Have we all become so left of RIGHT, so liberal, as to call this kind of confutation [of the Constitution] and organized rebellion, simply a “free-speech” issue?
the US Constitution is not a rubric for moral nor virtuous life. Far from it. The Founding Fathers believed quite the opposite .
“Of all dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and morality are indispensable supports.”
– George Washington
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
– John Adams
“No government can continue good but under the people’s control; and … their minds are to be informed by education what is right and wrong; to be encouraged in virtuous habits and deterred from vice.”
– Thomas Jefferson
“To suppose any form of government will secure liberty or happiness without virtue in the people is a chimerical idea.”
– James Madison
“Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom.”
– Benjamin Franklin
“A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience, is incompatible with freedom.”
– Patrick Henry
“Neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt.”
– Samuel Adams
https://www.usconstitution.net/founders-vision-of-virtuous-citizenry/
True, and Amen.
May we think of freedom, not as the right to do as we please, but as the opportunity to do what is right. ~ Peter Marshall (Preacher, 1946, appointed as Chaplain of the US Senate).
Hear hear
It’s nice to see a community that still has cohesion on display.
It would be insane to scrap the Constitution — our shared roadmap for how to resolve conflict peacefully — especially when the art of institution-building and improvement is at low ebb. What would replace it? Who would decide? Do you imagine our global adversaries just sitting back and watching passively while we take a time-out from world affairs to redesign national government? How naive.
There is no choice but to repair and improve government. Yes, the system has been shifting power away from majority, common-sense rule toward the wealthy, the political parties, corporate lobbyists, and judicial-activist plaintiffs and Judges. They exercise power way in excess of their numbers of votes.
And, Congress, the body our Founders designed to most-directly represent the public will cannot seem to do the things which consistently poll above 75%:
• end birth tourism
• end partisan gerrymandering
• reestablish meaningful campaign contribution limits
• put an end to cybercrime waged daily on Americans and our organizations by foreign criminals
• end the irresponsibility given to internet publishers by Section 230
• rewrite Immigration Law to end the abuse of asylum provisions; reform the legal immigration system priorities
• a serious work schedule for Congress; less vacation; less time spent on fundraising for the next election.
It’s not a matter of Congress taking a couple of election cycles to catch up with the public — it’s abdicating responsibility for DECADES to do the collective majority will. Special interests and minority public opinion seem to always game the process to thwart public consensus long after it has been demonstrated in polls.
The 2 parties fight to prevent process changes that would give more power to We The People. The interests of the Party always come first. If it’s not a Constitutional crisis, and it’s instead a loss of faith, these are the reasons why that faith is dwindling.
Also: end daylight savings time. That can happen any time. It has bipartisan support. Why isn’t Congress doing it yesterday?
because that would be inviting future to the back.
Nice.
The day before yesterday!
It’s Daylight Saving Time because it is saving daylight. It’s a common mistake that is commonly accepted by the mistaken.
“end birth tourism”
The countries that to not have birth right citizenship have far worse problems than the US.
This is a tiny issue, and not worth damaging our constitution over.
“end partisan gerrymandering”
Litterally not possible. There is no means to select election districts that you can get a majority of people to agree on,
and even if you could establish criteria people could agree on – it would still be easy to game them.
Worse you are going to war over a problem that is again tiny.
The more a party strives to increase its control of a state through gerrymandering – the more likely a small shift in the polls will massively wipe them out of power.
Again do not waste effort trying to fix a problem that is not worth the trouble and can not be fixed regardless.
“reestablish meaningful campaign contribution limits”
We have never had them – they are unconstitutional – as they should be.
Further your claimed problem runs at odds with reality.
Trump and Republicans have been massively outspent – often 2:1 in every election they have won.
It is increasingly obvious that spending on a presidential election beyond about 1/2B is a complete and total waste of money. The figures are much lower for other elections.
A poorly funded campaign will lose.
But after a relatively low amount of funding – money has no impact on the results.
“put an end to cybercrime waged daily on Americans and our organizations by foreign criminals”
Easy – just get the govenrment out of the internet and money and crypto – the problem will solve itself
We do not nee legislation.
“end the irresponsibility given to internet publishers by Section 230”
Atleast something I agree with.
Lets just repeal the DMCA – and the Patriot Act and most of the past 60 years of legislation.
“rewrite Immigration Law to end the abuse of asylum provisions; reform the legal immigration system priorities”
Bzzt wrong. To the extent there is anything wrong with our immigration laws it is that they restrict immigration too much.
Our problem is NOT with legal immigration – do NOT do something stupid and make that harder.
The immigration problems we have are due to the federal govenrment not enforcing the laws we already have.
“a serious work schedule for Congress; less vacation; less time spent on fundraising for the next election.”
Again – the wrong direction.
I am with Mark Twain
No mans life liberty or property are safe when the legislature is in session.
Cut their pay to ZERO, and only have congress in session for 3 months a year.
Prof. Turley writes: “Many law professors today are like priests who have lost their faith but kept their robes.” No better words can describe our predicament. Atheists are controlling the Church. We’d be better off with abolishing legal education altogether and let people study or learn the law on their own, as they did in the past, when we produced the great thinkers and patriots of the early Republic. A classical education has proven more important than a legal education.
But our biggest problem is with words. A “constitution” does not need to be a written document, whose minute turns of phrase are pondered by monks in black or purple robes. Until recently, the British have been proud of their “unwritten Constitution”. The word “constitution”describes rules that govern the actions of men/women who hold the highest political power in the land (what leftists call “our democracy”). What academics like Prof Klarman object to is rules of any kind that limit the actions of those people. That is what “progressives” have opposed for over a hundred years. The non-troll followers of this blog celebrate the existence of a constitutional system.
Edward – I would argue that Great Britain’s current situation warns us of the dangers of not having a written constitution.
Well professor, I do hope that place, as lovely and wonderful as it appears, has appropriately considered the current level of internal terrorist activity across the country. The Commbies, or the Walking Red, while not having been gifted much in the way of cranium activity by any means, are none the less a clear and present danger to civilization, anywhere.
Young Marxists thinking to put lipstick on the pig, give it their best go and attempt to hold a civil discourse at a TPUSA Event. There’s the back and forth, then when the leftists see their lies are falling flat, what do they do?!?
Run away, run away…
“WATCH: Crowd Roars as Megyn Kelly DEMOLISHES Woke College Student During TPUSA Event When He Blames Trump for Charlie Kirk’s Assassination”
by Cullen Linebarger Sep. 25, 2025 9:45 am
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/09/watch-crowd-roars-as-megyn-kelly-demolishes-woke/
—————————————
–Oddball
“Take it easy Big Joe, some of these people got sensitive feelings.”
This has to be a joke…… Right?
__________________________
Former Vice President Kamala Harris admitted in her new memoir that she quietly worked behind the scenes on a “secret project” to elevate far-left Democrats such as Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX).
Dustoff: Good Lord. I hope so.
(although with Harris’ tendency for word salads, maybe she was looking for a stand-in/backup who knew how to more effectively “put it to the people,” ha ha
Former Vice President Harris, as we all know, being an expert linguist was simply tutoring Crockett to help her improve her speaking skills.
https://www.tiktok.com/@cheemcreem/video/7193069349744201003
———————————–
–Oddball
“Take it easy Big Joe, some of these people got sensitive feelings.”
Totalitarians go after individual rights and checks on government first, which is what the Constitution provides for us. The Left seeks to use disinformation to manipulate Americans into throwing away their rights.
Klarman joins the coordinated strategy of Democrats to frame the Republican Party and most especially Donald Trump as Fascist Hitler on the eve of WWII. It is impossible to wrong Nazis, and one’s personal duty to destroy them. It may arguably be interpreted as a call for more assassinations and domestic terrorism. Like Nancy Pelosi said against Trump in 2018, for enforcing federal immigration policy, “I just don’t even know why there aren’t uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be.”
I predict that the next time there is a Democrat president, there will be assassination attempts on conservative Supreme Court justices, to open spots for that president to nominate.
Like Professor Turley, I had agreed there was no “Constitutional crisis,” believing in its primacy and efficacy, until I was apprised of the claims made by extreme-leftist thought leaders (like Klarman) at most universities. Here are a number of the very earnest and ALARMING statements by these anti-Constitutionalists, and this is but a small sample:
* Klarman [and many others] claim and “show rage” because the constitutional system “is not working”
* NYT column denounced “Constitution worship” … a growing chorus now wonders whether we need to be saved from it.
* Brown U faculty calling the Constitution a “dangerous document” that is driving the “threat to democracy.
* George Washington law professor condemning the “cult of the Constitution” that has been defended to advance “white male supremacy.”
* Harvard and Yale law professors insisting that “we need to reclaim America from Constitutionalism.”
* Berkeley professor says “No Democracy Lasts Forever” and argues that the Constitution is now a threat to American democracy.
* Drumbeat on cable news: the Constitution is called a vehicle for oppression.
* Academia in general: we are seeing the expansion of counter-constitutional movement
* Law students’ echo chamber: To support the Constitution or deny a “crisis” is to invite ridicule and retribution. It is simply naïve to suggest that the most successful constitutional system in history is anything but a failed experiment.
W A R N I N G !
Why is no one calling this SEDITION?
These thought-leaders and their followers are seditionists—the illegal actions of incitement and resistance to lawful authority [i.e., the Constitution, SCOTUS, ICE, Law Enforcement] causing the disruption or overthrow of the government.
Interesting question. When POTUS takes the oath of office, he swears to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
Interesting question, indeed.
Is it self-suppression, self-deception, or the over-simplification and oversight of naivete?—I can hardly believe that most Conservatives, the ones with conscience and loyalty to the Constitution, don’t call out Klarman and his progeny, as SEDITIONISTS. It’s SEDITION, the prosecutable kind, not just oppositional rhetoric and hyperbole.
What is going on in theses colleges is purely SEDITION in every true-and-real sense of the defined term and its ramifications.
Nailed it. We see the seditionists here in the comments. Monikers like “just” or “X” or the various “anonymous” post blatant lies and attacks on both Professor TURLEY and President Trump. What they don’t realize, or do but are deathly afraid, is that their day is over. We’re taking out the trash. The liberal traitors, democrats, Russian and Chinese provocateurs are being swept into the garbage heap where they belong.
The Left lost when they lost monopolistic control of the media, including news and entertainment. The internet and new media was a big part of that, including podcasts, all of which could bypass the old left-wing-controlled channels of communication. November 5, 2024, was the day in American history that proved their loss of monopoly more than any other. Andrew Klavan has some interesting analysis tying that loss of media/culture to today’s political violence:
I’ll trust that “we have won” when there is a shift in our most prestigious law schools, and they are no longer teaching that the Constitution is a “threat to democracy,” a dangerous document, a cult, a tool of oppression….
While it is good to remain positive, and the extreme-left has lost a huge share of media, they have not yet lost a huge share of academia, where the inputs are just as important, if not more so. * See Estovir @ 2:51 *
Truly. What a magic trick to convince people that Kirk deserved the death penalty for political speech. That puts Kirk right up there with JFK and RFK …
Each person who spoke joyously of the murder are?
@Dianna – How about Sanctuary states and cities?
I agree that sanctuary states and cities are joining in the sedition, facilitating opposition to law, modeling the success of resistance—but on a different level.
Anti-Constitutionalism is antithetical to the entire moral base and structure of our legal system, and as such is even more dangerous than the sanctuary machination.
I suppose the sanctuary strategy is to force the batting-down of multiple fires, removing attention from the internal sedition, while destroying our foundational principles of government.
In such a time if they take your coat give them your cloak, too.
It’s that dangerous.
Margot: If I may respectfully step in here, I don’t think sanctuary cities, in a sua sponte sort of way, rise to the level of sedition. That being said, take a look at what I just posted above (“A Call to Anarchists in America”), from which I excerpt below (near bottom of the site’s page, which I re-link here:
Now here’s something a little more metaphysically closer to sedition:
Excerpted from “A Call to Anarchists in America, dated 23 Sep 25:
“What is anarchy if not a refusal to comply? An attack on institutions of power? Or an exploration into becoming ungovernable – even if only for the simple adventure of breaking out of mind-numbing routines? To channel hopelessness into a frenzy of outbursts – illegal street raves, nocturnal smash and grabs, or spontaneous attacks on institutions across america could be more fun than simply spending what’s left of our lives complaining about how bad things are. Every fist that hurls a piece of concrete through a bank or an ICE agents car window has the potential to ignite a wildfire. At this point what’s left to lose? The only life we’ve been permitted to have is a portfolio of experiences celebrating our dedicated submission.”
https://anarchistnews.org/content/call-anarchist-action-america
There is one indisputable fact about the intent of the Founding Fathers:
The American system of government was designed to prevent absolute unchecked power by any branch of government. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Governing power was divided by 3 co-equal branches of government. No American president is superior to Congress nor superior to any judge.
If an official(s) violate their sacred oath of office to protect the Constitution from all enemies (including domestic enemies to the U.S. Constitution – the loyal officials from other branches were dutibound (by loyalty oath) to check & balance any officials (disloyal to their oath of office) trying to grab absolute power by subverting the constitutional rule of law.
Republicans should keep in mind that by supporting foreign style government, in the very near future Democrats will be able to do exactly what Republicans are doing. Democrats can literally cite Trump to go after any constitutional right Democrats dislike.
If Klarman and his fellow academic, erudite geniuses believe that the U.S. Constitution is “broken”, “trash”, “a threat to democracy”, why don’t they write a candidate replacement document? I say they haven’t done so, because they can’t.
Jonathan: Speaking of “Beyond Rage” artists know how to express their rage. Did you see the large bronze (?) statutes of DJT and Jeffrey Epstein erected on the National Mall? The two are depicted holding hands and each standing on one leg. Hardly a realistic depiction of DJT. Hard to imagine “Cankles” standing on one leg.
Anyway, the artist or artists who made the statutes had a National Park Service permit for the display “to demonstrate freedom of speech and artistic expression using political imagery”. The statutes were to remain up until Sunday but they have suddenly been removed. The NPS issued a statement saying the display was not “in compliance with the permit” but did not explain how it violated the permit.
I suspect we all know why the statue was summarily removed. Just as with the Epstein files–leave no trace!
Professor Turley: A very nice and touching tribute to small town America’s charm and spirit, thank you!
P.S. the photograph near the top (of the two on horses) makes them look like a modern-day rendition of the Lone Ranger and Tonto, out to make the world a better place. Please let them never leave or be swept into suburbia.
Jonathan: Psychiatrists say that “malignant narcissism” is a severe and potentially dangerous form of Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD), characterized by a lack of empathy, aggrandizement and an eagerness to harm others to achieve some personal goal. It includes elements of anti-social personality disorders, including aggression, manipulation, and a disregard for general rules and ethics. Those with NPD often, if not always, blame others for their problems.
Two days ago at the UN, DJT displayed all the characteristics of NPD–blaming the UN when the teleprompter failed and the escalator that suddenly stopped just as he and Melania stepped onto it. DJT whined before the UN assembly “These are two things that I got from the United Nations: a bad escalator and a bad teleprompter”. Karoline Levitt later claimed all that was a sabotage plot to embarrass DJT and there would be a full investigation. DJT said the person who stopped the escalator should be arrested. FACT CHECK: The UN issued a statement saying (1) DJT’s teleprompter is controlled by the WH, not UN personnel; and (2) DJT’s videographer likely inadvertently triggered a safety function while walking backward up the escalator to capture DJT’s arrival.
DJT needs to be institutionalized before he destroys the country–and maybe even the world!
Dennis:
Actually, I thought Trump handled both incidents with contemporaneous humor.
“’All I got from the United Nations was an escalator that on the way up stopped right in the middle,’ he mused, chopping the air with his hand.”
“As he began his speech, Trump also noted that the teleprompter wasn’t working. He joked that whoever was running the teleprompter ‘is in big trouble.’”
https://apnews.com/article/trump-un-escalator-teleprompter-ddfc0875301f29d71625b353f2c2f832
I’m sure that many were hoping that he would explode and do something very unsavory or regrettably unprofessional. May I include you in that group?
Lin: You have to be kidding…”Trump handled both incidents with contemporaneous humor”. DJT doesn’t have a humorous bone in his body! Standing before the UN General Assembly and falsely blaming the UN for a malfunctioning teleprompter and escalator is hardly “professional”. Making a big deal and conducting an investigation of two small incidents is not what seasoned and serious diplomats do when they appear before the UN! Get real!
Gee, I thought I was being quite real.
(1) Trump immediately and contemporaneously pointed out the possibility of his own team/staff for the teleprompter: “gonna be in big trouble,” and
(2) I can objectively understand why MANY persons might reasonably be curious about the strange coincidence of two events happening upon his arrival into a somewhat hostile ambient environment. Would the videographer or someone nearby not have known immediately what happened and apologized? –It took an official UN “investigation” with “results” rendered more than a day later? How many “investigators” does it take to unscrew a light bulb?
(3) I do not favor Trump’s personality. But I resent silly comments from others rushing to judgment and with intent on destroying him.
I am capable of objectively looking at this quite ambivalently. Trump handled it quite fine. That’s all, no more, no less.
thanks anyway.
“Would the videographer or someone nearby not have known immediately what happened and apologized?”
Only if they recognized that it was their action that tripped the safety system. The videographer was concentrating solely on getting flattering footage of the President and not paying attention to what was around them.
“DJT needs to be institutionalized before he destroys the country–and maybe even the world!”
Dennis: if you didn’t make this claim in earnest when Biden was stumbling, bumbling, sneering, luridly-whispering, and causing death,
You certainly have NO reason or authority to speak now.
The UN building cost billions to renovate. DJT said there bids 500 million including marble floors. He pointed out for billions of dollars the escalator and teleprompter should work. He’s right.
The building needs an exorcism as voodoo has entered the building spiritually along with envy, pride, greed, murder, rage, hate and every other vice like fleas clinging to the oc upants. Move the UN to the EU or elsewhere. IMO
When a safety system operates the way it is supposed to, that is an indication that the escalator is working correctly. When the White House staff is incompetent and doesn’t allow the UN audio-visual team do the job with the equipment they are familiar with, that is a failure of Trump.
Like most buildings of that age, I expect the UN building is insulated with asbestos. Keeping the building open and the occupants safe from asbestos fibers is expensive. Trump’s plan is to just dump the asbestos out the window to keep it cheap.
Also, marble is a soft stone that stains easily. It’s fine for a residence but not good for a public building that sees heavy use.
“old-fashioned white supremacy.” “white male supremacy.”
Whew! Talk about dog-whistling!
It joins other such calls, “transphobic,” “homophobic” “Islamophobic” “misogynistic,”
You can see that such calls are blatantly intended to unite specifically-identifiable groups (LGBTQ, Muslims, Blacks, Hispanics, women) to join to wipe out all those evil, despicable white males!
Once upon a time, prior wars identified our enemies as Reds, Communists, Nazis, Fascists, Viet Cong, “Japs,” Sandinistas/Contras,
jihadists.
Now we are calculatingly picking on each other to start a fight or war.
Let’s not let Krushchev smile from his grave: “we will destroy you from within.”
Ah the ole trans former’s dog whistle. Seems it plays, both ways. Of course.
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8mtql0
———————————–
–Oddball
“Take it easy Big Joe, some of these people got sensitive feelings.”
Just a couple of thoughts on the US Constitution.
It was written to be read by every citizen.
It does a pretty good job of trying to thwart some bad governing urges that are part or human nature.
It is lawyers, politicians an wealthy interest that have twited it around and backwards over the years.
Nice piece. But maybe you shouldn’t be so open-minded about Klarman and what he believes. I have no doubt that he would assign you to a re-education camp if he had the power to do so.
Don’t be so open-minded that your brains fall out (attributed to Chesterton, among others)
Might we conclude that “open-mindedness,” such that our brains fall out [coming from the right, though not as illogical as what comes from the left], is our own version of “virtue signaling.”
Thank you for sharing this Professor Turley. As many of us have said at times – you are no ageing dinosaur – it’s the other way around with those that will hold onto power at any and every cost. I do not believe for a second that this anti-Constitutionalism is organic nor that every drop of rhetoric is not carefully calculated. The DNC is no longer an American party, or even a political party. They have been fully captured. We can do it at the ballot box, but they must never be in majority power again.
Moderates, Independents, and Conservatives still make up the bulk of our society, and we aren’t about to just accept the dismantling of our system or society by globalist powers. Excellent, well timed, and much needed column, and it has been problematic for a good while that coastal bubbles are so sequestered – that much is not new. Eventually in such a closed feedback loop, the feedback becomes tainted, and then self-reinforces that rot.
This is a good reminder that by and large this country is pretty centered. But that doesn’t make the news. It is the angry and embittered people that make the news.
On a related note, I have been reading David Mamet’s (playwright extraordinaire) fascinating, “The Disenlightenment”. In it he makes the argument that “… the sole political entities that didn’t begin as crime families have been the democracies. These emerge not from powerful scheming to create that order which will support them at the cost of their opponents, but from a consensus of the wise or concerned legislating peace through understanding of human weakness, and the attendant need for justice and order.” Mr. Mamet was contrasting the foundations of all major (and most minor) nations (China, Britain, France, Germany, Russia, …) with that of the United States and its constitution that embodies checks and balances based on a thoughtful understanding of human weaknesses. The genesis of the United States and its American constitution are the foundation of America Exceptionalism. That is not to say that the United States is a perfect polity but that its foundation allows it to evolve towards improvement.