US Constitution Series 13: American Safety from Human Corruption

US Constitution should Provide Safety for Americans from Corruption in their Leaders

keyPower corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. ~Edmund Burke

The Founders’ Basic Principles: 28 Great Ideas that changed the world
5000leapThe practical application of this book review of Skousen’s educated wisdom is to leverage “We, The People’s” knowledge to easily expose ignorance, anarchy and tyranny, and hold the government accountable.
From The 5,000 Year Leap—A Miracle that Changed the World By W. Cleon Skousen

US Constitution Series 13: The Constitution should protect the people from the human frailties of their rulers


Distrust of Power Not Necessarily Disrespect For Leaders

The Founders had more confidence in the people than they did in the leaders of the people, especially trusted leaders, even themselves. They felt the greatest danger arises when a leader is so completely trusted that the people feel no anxiety to watch him.

alexanderhamiltonAlexander Hamilton:

For it is a truth, which the experience of all ages has attested, that the people are commonly most in danger when the means of injuring their rights are in the possession of those [toward] whom they entertain the least suspicion. (Federalist Papers, No. 25, p.164)

Every unconstitutional action has usually been justified because it was for a “good cause.” Every illegal transfer of power from one department to another has been excused as “necessary.”

jeffersontyrannygovThomas Jefferson

In questions of power, then, let no more be said of confidence in man, BUT BIND HIM DOWN FROM MISCHIEF BY THE CHAINS OF THE CONSTITUTION. (emphasis added) Skousen, 164

George Washington

George WashingtonGovernment is not reason, it is not eloquence—it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.

Leaders Are Not Angels, But Fragile Human Beings

James Madison saw the problem of placing power in the hands of fallible human beins who, by nature, contain a complexity of elements reflecting both good and evil. the purpose of a constitution is to define the area in which a public official can serve to his utmost ability, but at the same time provide strict limitations to chain him down from mischief. In every human being there is a natural tendency to practice Parkinson’s law of perpetual expansion and to exercise personal proclivities toward ego-mania and self-aggrandizement. (Skousen, 165)

madisontyrannydefineJames Madison

It may be a reflection on human nature that such devices [as Constitutional chains] should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? … If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.

I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpations …This danger ought to be wisely guarded against.

Why the Original Constitution Will Never Be Obsolete

constitution2And that is what the Constitution is all about—providing freedom from abuse by those in authority. Anyone who says the American Constitution is obsolete just because social and economic conditions have changed does not understand the real genius of the Constitution. It was designed to control something which HAS NOT CHANGED AND WILL NOT CHANGE—NAMELY, HUMAN NATURE. (Skousen, 166)


Principle 14: Life and Liberty are Secure Only so Long as the Right to Property Is Secure

US Constitution Series 12: Democracy Attacks American Republic



Rand Paul: Liberal Democrats are against Human Life


80% of American People Do Not Agree with Late Term Abortions

Rush Limbaugh

RUSH ARCHIVE:  Rand Paul has done something that no other Republican has done.  He has turned the abortion issue around on the Democrats.

Megyn Kelly then turned to Dana Perino and asked her opinion on this.

abortion-anti-hope-mommy-pro-lifePERINO:  It’s a change.  So what Rand Paul basically did is say, “I’m going to take your typical question for a Republican that you never ask the Democrats.”  What he was saying is, “Why doesn’t anyone ever ask the Democrats where they stand on late-term abortion in particular?”  And on that question, I think Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s answers to you were very telling.

RUSH:  Right.  And Megyn Kelly then replied.

KELLY:  I was confused as to why she wouldn’t just — I mean, third trimester —

PERINO:  They will cede no ground.

KELLY:  Why not?  That’s an easy thing.  Even if you are pro-choice, 80 plus percent of the American people say, “Not in the third trimester, because that’s a baby.  That is a baby.”

liberal-compassion-abortionRUSH:  Let me answer this, then.  It’s not a baby until the Democrat woman decides it’s a baby.  There is no 80%, there is no third trimester.  Abortion is valid whenever the woman wants.  That’s Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s view.  Now, one thing they’re right about on this show.  Just like public opinion has really shifted on this whole notion of health care being a right and the whole idea of Obamacare never has been a majority, abortion in this country is dramatically shifting.  It has always been, despite what people would tell you, abortion has always been a pretty much 50-50 issue.  There have been moments where it’s been 60-40, but it has never been what the left would like you to believe 100 to zero or 80 to 20 in favor of pro-choice.  It’s never been.

And now, particularly among Millennials, the whole idea of abortion any time, anywhere, is losing ground rapidly.  Or that’s what the mention here of this 80% that Megyn Kelly mentioned. Even if you’re pro-choice, 80 plus percent of the American people say no abortion third trimester because that’s a baby, that’s a baby. People have decided that in the third trimester, life has begun.

Just telling you that 80% of the American people think so.  That’s a shift.  This puts the Democrats in a very small minority, but as I said earlier, it’s not gonna change their attitude. 

This is perhaps the most important, defining issue. Perhaps the most defining, the most important, the most crucial, you must agree with this or you’re not a real Democrat position, is there is no baby at any time until the woman decides to give birth.  No such thing as a third trimester baby. The abortion remains the sacrament, and any time it happens is fine and dandy, ’cause they fear if they give ground on this, that other things are going to begin to crumble that make up the issue coalition of the Democrat Party.

Rand Paul: Liberal Democrats are against Human Life

Note: This article was accompanied by photos of Goznell’s freezer. The images were so horrible I didn’t want to post them here, so I have taken the opportunity to post pro-life images instead. ~C.D.

Michelle Malkin Shows Us Progressivism’s Freezer

That veil of truculent, sullen dispirited surrender got ripped from the eyes of those who could see. A reporter went after Senator and aspiring GOP Presidential Candidate Rand Paul on comments he had made that suggested he favored restrictions on late term abortions.

jane-roe-vs-abortionThe Feminist Cause began as a fight against what they believed was systemiccorruption oppression. After the Roe v. Wade decision, the widespread legality of abortion upon demand made the profit motive increasingly paramount as Planned Parenthood cornered the market on aborting fetuses. As the movement increasingly gained power and effected the regulatory capture of the authorities that were supposed to make sure Women’s Health Centers were at least somewhat healthy, the chop-shop clinics of sadistic killers like Kermit Gosnell proliferated across the land.

We all know, in the back of our minds, that this travesty occurs hundreds of thousands of times every year in America. We’ve seen the dry, emotionless statistics, heard the screech of the harpy when we fight it, and given in to a certain cynical realism. As long as it’s happening to the type of baby that ends up in Kermit Gosnell’s sort of a clinic the republic will survive even if the poor, defenseless fetuses don’t.

Without Feeling, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz defends slaughter of Infants

abortion4That veil of truculent, sullen dispirited surrender got ripped from the eyes of those who could see. A reporter went after Senator and aspiring GOP Presidential Candidate Rand Paul on comments he had made that suggested he favored restrictions on late term abortions. He responded with condign redirection.

The ball was now in the court of Democratic Leader Congresswoman Deborah Wasserman-Schultz. She gave an honest expression of what the Progressive Left truly feels.

“Here’s an answer,” she said in an emailed statement. “I support letting women and their doctors make this decision without government getting involved. Period. End of story. Now your turn, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)

[Rush Limbaugh notes that Schultz does indeed support the government getting involved. For example, Democrats support federal funding of Planned Parenthood and the Supreme Court decision of Roe v. Wade.]

Rand Paul Answers

abortion3-pro-life“Sounds like her answer is yes, that she’s okay with killing a seven-pound baby,” he said.

According to, this is a fairly vanilla and plausible position for a Democrat to take. They asked people when they believed life began and offered them three options: at conception, at fetal viability, and at birth. The results by partisan affiliation follow below.

With Democrats, the breakdown is (39/20/31). I guess what you should take from this is that life at conception Democrats have an 8-point lead over those who feel it begins at birth. Independents have a breakdown of (52/22/13), and Republicans have the strongest numbers regarding life at conception (71/17/7).

abortion5-jesus-pro-lifeThus, you could reasonably surmise that 31% of Democrats, 13% of Independents and 7% of Republicans could justify snuffing a 7Lb baby like an unwanted puppy under virtually any circumstance. You could probably jawbone at least 51% of Democrats, 35% of Independents and 24% of Republicans into doing it if you were overbearing and obnoxious enough. Only 39% of Democrats, 52% of Independents and 71% of Republicans would express a significant and principled objection regarding a typical day in the professional life of Kermit Gosnell. Out of that, perhaps one individual in twenty has the actual courage to stand up and rage against the Abortion-Industrial Complex that has made a mockery out of most debates over so-called women’s issues.

abortion-2-pro-lifeSo if Rand Paul comes off as a wee bit petulant or ungentlemanly during these discussions excuse me while I go find an air sick bag. He didn’t even originally bring up the topic of abortion in his New Hampshire meeting with the presstitutes. They asked. He answered. The scab got picked and the lid got ripped off of Hell. No matter how hard Planned Parenthood, Congresswoman Wasserman-Schultz, the academic lefty lickspittles who tried to sell abortion as a form of Pre-Crime insurance against the dirty unwashed of America’s lower classes, and no matter how hard “ethicists” from the great and renowned Oxford University tell us it’s perfectly ok to execute inconvenient or economically marginal newborns due to their close resemblance to fetuses; we all know it’s murder.

This is why Congresswoman Wasserman-Schultz talks about privacy and doctor-patient confidentiality. Opening this entire process to the sort of sunshine we get from Project Veritas would not be much different than what we all got to be sickened by when we opened Kermit Gosnell’s refrigerators at his abortion clinic. I’m certain the odor that came out of those charnel iceboxes was not the smell of feminine empowerment in the morning.