Leftists are absolutely shocked that conservatives actually revere the Constitution

In a recent article, the Washington Post’s E.J. Dionne whined that “For too long, progressives have allowed conservatives to monopolize claims of fealty to our unifying national document.” He goes on to talk about how conservatives and TEA Party-types walk around with their pocket Constitutions and cite its passages in defense of their political positions, and declares it is high time that liberals use the Constitution to rebut conservative political arguments.

Reading the article, I was reminded of a recent debate with a liberal friend who was blasting the Supreme Court ruling in the Hobby Lobby case, saying that it was setting a dangerous precedent to allow people to exempt themselves from laws based on religious objections, in this case “denying” women of their birth control. In response, I asked him to cite the passage of the Constitution which guarantees women the “right” to taxpayer-funded birth control. He responded by saying that the Constitution is not the only source we rely on to determine what government can and should do.

Actually, that is the ONLY thing that we can rely on to determine the proper role of government.

And therein lies the massive gulf between the conservative and liberal understandings of the Constitution. Liberals see the Constitution as a “living” document which can be amended by judicial interpretation to bring it more in line with societal and cultural preferences, a document infinitely malleable with endless interpretations.

Libertarianism: America’s Manifesto

Libertarians’ aim is to maximize personal and inter-personal liberty. Nationally. Globally.

Freedom is the great coagulant- the way water molecules hold together drops of rain. Ironically, libertarianist philosophy is arguably the oldest of all American currents of thought: originating during the colonial Enlightenment Generation, when the old was still new enough to be considered current, but the United States was forming itself; becoming one in thought and deed.

Libertarianism existed in the minds of our colonial forefathers even before the ideas of a nation were enumerated, before they were disclaimed. Despite regional differences, colonists belonged to a place, a town maybe or an intersection. No matter what, each first and foremost belonged to himself.

The Jeffersonian Democratic-Republican ‘party’ was afflicted by and proposed along the lines of British, French, German and colonial thinking. What resulted was libertarianism. A sense of freedom given to the individual, by each own’s God. Without mediation, without government, without boundaries. Unique unto each.

Three centuries into the newly formed United States, citizens vote on the basis of who will win elections. Examples of voting extend to such extremes, that we are left with no alternative than to chose between an awful and a terrible party. While many in media and political networks might well believe that third parties are superfluous, and dangerous philosophically, it is the true patriot; who must see through the distortions and blatant lies- three centuries in the making.

New Book Reveals the Original Meaning of the Constitution

Fresh from the Tenth Amendment Center:

Looking from the inside out. Recognized national expert on the framing and adoption of the United States Constitution reveals, in simple language, just what the Constitution was originally supposed to mean.

Professor Robert G. Natelson is a recognized national expert on the framing and adoption of the United States Constitution, and on several occasions he has been the first to uncover key background facts about the Constitution’s meaning.

“Some people - including the former law instructor who now serves as President of the United States - believe that it is impossible to reconstruct the Constitution’s original meaning. As this book demonstrates, that view is substantially incorrect.” - Robert G. Natelson on The Original Constitution.

If, like any legal document, the words of the Constitution mean today just what they meant the moment it was signed and ratified, it’s essential to understand just what those words meant at the time of the founding.  The Original Constitution surveys in fairly easy language the legal meaning of the entire Constitution as of late 1791, just after adoption of the Bill of Rights.

The Constitution of the United States created a representative republic marked by federalism and the separation of powers. Yet numerous federal politicians and judges - led by the Supreme Court - have used the Constitution as a blank check to substitute their own views on hot-button issues across the political spectrum for perfectly constitutional laws enacted by We the People through our elected representatives.

State AGs Miss Target with Health Care Lawsuit says the Tenth Amendment Center

I received this press release yesterday from the Tenth Amendment Center, and I think that it gives calls attention to the long-forgotten ideas of nullification and interposition with regard to ObamaCare:

“Prominent founders such as Thomas Jefferson and James Madison warned us that if the federal government ever became the sole and exclusive arbiter of its own powers, those powers would continue to grow, regardless of elections, courts, separation of powers or other much-vaunted checks and balances in our system,” said Michael Boldin, founder of the Tenth Amendment Center.

Nullification, according to the Center, is the rightful remedy to an unconstitutional act, as it considers the recently-signed Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to be. When a state nullifies a federal law, it is proclaiming that the law in question is void and inoperative, or non-effective, within the boundaries of that state; or, in other words, not a law as far as the state is concerned.

Today, the Tenth Amendment Center announced a different strategy for activists and state government. “We are pleased to announce model nullification legislation that is crafted to specifically address the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act on a state level,” Boldin said. “We encourage grassroots activists and state legislators alike to work to get this bill passed in their home states.”

A History Lesson From A 4 Yr. Old

See Video

A four year old takes time out of his busy schedule to give grown-ups an American history lesson. Watch him explain the Declaration of Independence, the Boston Tea Party and the rights of American citizens.

Even he understands citizens should be in charge! Take some time out of your schedule to find out how ballot initiatives can work for you at

The views and opinions expressed by individual authors are not necessarily those of other authors, advertisers, developers or editors at United Liberty.