500 Words or Less: The Basics of the Bill of Rights

Many people realize that the Bill of Rights are the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America. What many do not realize about the Bill of Rights is that it was added after the Constitution was ratified. This little tidbit of knowledge is critical to understanding the relevance and importance of these amendments.

During the Constitutional Convention, the topic of a Bill of Rights was brought up. Some wanted a Bill of Rights and some opposed the proposition. Some argued that a Bill of Rights appeared in every state constitution and was needed for the federal Constitution. Those that opposed this idea cited that to write them down was to subject those inalienable rights to scrutiny from the government. If the government was not to infringe on the right of the press, for instance, they would need to define what the press actually was so they could make sure they didn’t infringe on their freedoms. This alarmed a majority of these men enough that they voted against including a Bill of Rights.

The Bill of Rights was introduced in the first Congress by James Madison. During the ratification debates most of the ratification delegations issued supplementary ideas they would like introduced in the first Congress. There was no authority to change the proposed Constitution, but these men had faith in the good will of their fellow men to give their thoughts a fair hearing. A majority of these notes concerned a Bill of Rights. James Madison took these notes and condensed them down to a much smaller list. This was the start of the Bill of Rights. After congressional deliberation, there were 12 Amendments transmitted to the states for approval. We all know today that 10 made the cut. We had a Bill of Rights.

Now I ask you- what rights do the Bill of Rights give us? If you said anything other than none you are incorrect. “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights”. The Bill of Rights give us NO rights. They describe SOME of the inalienable rights that are inherent and not to be encroached by government.

The 2nd Amendment, for instance,  does not give us the right to keep and bear arms. It describes an inherent right, already possessed by the people, that shall not be infringed by government. The way this idea has been turned on its head has made the pursuit of liberty difficult.When you understand the 2nd Amendment in this true sense then you see how our government has violated our rights, not protected them. Government gives us no rights.

The people have inherent rights. SOME of these rights are listed in our Bill of Rights. The 9th Amendment is the catch all for our rights and states that even though we haven’t listed a certain right, it is the people’s, not the governments prerogative to claim it. The 10th Amendment further secures this claim.

Join me at Constitutional Cappuccino to get plugged into a website that is all about the education Americans need to move our country back to its proper trajectory. My new book “Patriot Ammo: The Words Behind Our Flag” is also available and teaches of our founding documents and principles. The book would make a great present for anybody 16 and up.

Advertisements

A Time for Conservatives to Unite

With Super Tuesday behind us it is time to face reality. tRump must be stopped. He is no conservative and his presence in the Republican nomination process allows a Hillary victory. It is time for conservatives to unite.

It is now apparent that Ted Cruz is the man to take tRump down and the one to beat Hillary. Rubio’s poor showing (congratulations on Minnesota though) in this election cycle shows he is consistently taking a back seat to Cruz with conservative voters. Cruz has shown he can stand toe to toe with tRump and win. Texas was a big win, but Oklahoma is even bigger by the fact it was the first closed primary state. When tRump cannot rely on democratic voters he is definitely put at a disadvantage.

Rubio has some problems of his own. Florida is around the corner and if he loses to tRump there it could seriously damage his future chances at office. It would definitely harm any future campaign he was looking to enter. Rubio is the last of the establishment’s candidates and even with their backing he is not competitive.

There have been indications that the GOP establishment is biting the bullet and may get behind a Cruz candidacy. Lindsey Graham came out after his now infamous “no help from Senate after Cruz is shot on the Senate floor” remarks and lamenting the fact it may be time to unite behind Ted Cruz to take out tRump. Other indications show that the anti-Cruz establishment stance is softening out of desperation over a tRump candidacy.

This brings me to the point of this article. Cruz must ask Rubio to be his nominee for 2016. Right now if that was done it would cement the anti-tRumpers into one coalition. Carson and Kasich would see the writing on the wall and either have to support tRump or be forced out of their campaigns. Cruz/Rubio would take the tRump campaign to task and they would be the Republican team for 2016.

If Cruz and Rubio act quickly enough, they could win Florida for their efforts. This would really put a crimp in the tRump machinery and more importantly for Rubio preserve his image for future political office. This would be a win-win situation for Cruz and Rubio on all fronts.

Some will say that this will be impossible due to the differences of the candidates. Poppycock is my response. Look to 1980. Reagan picked George Bush who is the one who created the term “voodoo economics” to describe Reagan’s economic policies. They ended up with a successful run together and Bush benefited with becoming President afterwards. Rubio is still young. He has plenty of time for future runs. This would look good on his resume.

Looking back to the founding of our country we witness James Madison firmly on the side of the federalists early on. Through his association with Jefferson however, he soon became a major force in the anti-federalist camp. He had argued against a Bill of Rights during the constitutional convention yet was the one who proposed during the first Congress that a Bill of Rights was necessary. This was due to Jefferson’s influence with Madison. I see something like that happening if Cruz and Rubio team up. Rubio seems to be a smart man who knows the Constitution but has kept some bad company. A little guidance and working with a consistent constitutional conservative will help him for the rest of his years.

I do not know if this is just tilting at windmills but to me it seems like solid logic. Everyone who has a potential to be a winner in this deal has it under their control to make this happen. This allows conservatism to prosper and we can bring the Constitution back to the White House and move toward prosperity again.

Cruz/Rubio 2016. Bring the Constitution back to the White House.cruzrubio2016