- Obama: Hole U.S. ‘digging out of’ requires billions more in unemployment benefits
- Obama’s regulatory agenda will cost U.S. economy $143B next year: report
- Patriot Act author on James Clapper: Fire, prosecute him
- Russia P.M. Medvedev: No amnesty for political prisoners
- Michigan GOP Senate hopeful reminds government is the ‘servant’
- Christmas, by Congress: Members mull a 15-cent tax on trees
- U.S. unemployment falls to five-year low of 7 percent; 203K jobs added
- World mourns Nelson Mandela and celebrates his life; burial set for Dec. 15
- Bill O’Reilly reminds: Nelson Mandela ‘was a communist’
- John Boehner says GOP should support gay candidates: ‘I do’
Latest Giles Unger Items
I always have to suppress a horse laugh when conservative friends piously assure me they are "strict constructionists" when it comes to interpreting our revered U.S. Constitution. The Mosaic myth that our founding document was set in stone by visionary statesmen who studded it with inherent virtues that can be tampered with only at our peril, is just that — a myth.
In 1766 there was an estimated population of 2.5 million people in the 13 British Colonies in America. If you remove the women and children and then the Tories with their women and children, you had no more than half a million males, most of whom were semiliterate agriculturists. A small group of well-educated lawyers and occasional government officials helped hold the country together, and from that group came the men we know as the Founding Fathers.
If Patrick Henry were alive today, he would almost certainly be a front-runner for the Tea Party presidential nomination. The Revolutionary orator, who today is remembered primarily for a single passionate speech, was in his day an important spokesman for minimalist rule - for those who opposed the establishment of any strong central government.