WHERE WE HAVE GONE ASTRAY

When you want to know how something is supposed to operate, or you want to fix something that is broken, the best person or persons to ask is the person or persons who invented or originated the something. To learn how to fix our country, it would make sense to learn from those who founded us. We should do this, but we do not do. The reason we do not is because the Democrats and the RINO’s do not have the same goals for our nation as did those who formed us. The Democrats and RINO’s believe big government is always the answer while the founders believed individual liberties and rights were the answer. The Democrats and RINO’s believe that government control or tyranny is the answer. The founders believed that the government must serve, and the people must control or that freedom is the answer.
The focus on politics has crowded out almost all discussion of our founders’ intent for America and the implications for following and not interpreting the Constitution that Justices pledge to defend. Fortunately, we have an extensive record of our founders’ views. But the purposes and limits they believed in, and the litmus tests they applied, are far different than those today.
Patrick Henry: "Liberty ought to be the direct end of your government." Liberty is the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views. Please reread.
James Wilson: "Government … should be formed to secure and enlarge the exercise of the natural rights of its members; and every government which has not this in view as its principal object is not a government of the legitimate kind." The natural rights are defined as including but not limited to life, liberty, and property. Property is not limited to physical property but includes our income, our thoughts, our talents, our being.
Thomas Jefferson: "A sound spirit of legislation … banishing all arbitrary and unnecessary restraint on individual action, shall leave us free to do whatever does not violate the equal rights of another." It is not the purpose of government to limit the rights of one so as to enhance the rights of another but to enhance the rights of all.
Benjamin Franklin: "An equal dispensation of protection, rights, privileges, and advantages, is what every part is entitled to …" Franklin echoed Jefferson, or maybe Jefferson echoed Franklin.
Samuel Adams: "Without liberty and equality [under the law], there cannot exist that tranquility of mind, which results from the assurance of this to every citizen, that his own personal safety and rights are secure … it is the end and design of all free and lawful Governments." The turmoil of our society today is a direct result of those in government not assuring but threatening the personal safety and rights of those they deem to be enemies of the state, primarily because they disagree with those in government.
John Adams: "The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If ‘Thou shalt not covet’ and ‘Thou shalt not steal’ were not commandments of heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society before it can be civilized or made free." This is the exact opposite viewpoint of the Marxists or Democrats who believe that all property is the governments, and it is the right of government to distribute as they deem to be appropriate. The graduated income tax and welfare programs, the tax at death, the recent ruling to prevent evictions, the threat to tax wealth are all examples.
John Dickinson: [W]e cannot be free, without being secure in our property … we cannot be secure in our property, if, without our consent, others may, as by right, take it away …" Dickinson is echoing Adams or Adams was echoing Dickinson.
George Washington: "[Government] has no more right to put their hands into my pockets, without my consent, than I have to put my hands into yours …" Washington joined the other two or the other two joined Washington.
Richard Henry Lee: "It must never be forgotten…that the liberties of the people are not so safe under the gracious manner of government as by the limitation of power." Lee understood that those in government have a propensity to gain power by limiting freedom.
James Madison: The powers of the federal government are enumerated … it has legislative powers on defined and limited objects, beyond which it cannot extend its jurisdiction." Madison was the primary architect of the Constitution. The purpose of the Constitution was to limit the power of government and protect the freedom of the people. This is why the Democrats and RINO’s despise the Constitution.
Joseph Story: "The Constitution of the United States is to receive a reasonable interpretation of its language and its powers, keeping in view the objects and purposes for which those powers were conferred." Never forget, that the only constraints in the Constitution are the constraints on government.
Thomas Paine: "All power exercised over a nation…must be either delegated, or assumed…All delegated power is trust, and all assumed power is usurpation." We have witnessed the usurpation of power increase and trust diminish over the last 100 plus years as the Marxist movement has taken control of the Democrat party.
Alexander Hamilton: “A limited Constitution … can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void. Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing … To deny this would be to affirm … that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid …" Our courts, the Supreme Court, Appellate Courts, and District Courts, have taken the opposite view. They believe they have the power to rule according to their conscience and their belief system, regardless of what the Constitution states. The ultimate law of the land is no longer the Constitution, but it is based on the political sway of the Supreme Court.
Our founders clearly revealed their central purpose was defending Americans’ rights and liberties against encroachment, particularly by an overbearing national government. The Supreme Court’s major purpose is preventing such overstepping. That requires following the Constitution as the highest law of the land in fact as well as on paper, because as George Mason put it, “no free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by… frequent recurrence to fundamental principles.” If we are to be true to our heritage, all who have any authority including the American voter, must focus on those principles.