Archive for the 'The Founders' Category
Posted by jccaldara on Dec 20 2011 |
Constitutional History, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Theory, Economic LIberties, Economics, Events, History, PPC, The Founders, U.S. Constitution, federalism
You may have heard about our Free People, Free Markets class, you may have even taken the course already. If not, I want to encourage you to learn more about something that is certain to enrich your life. Over the years, Free People, Free Markets: Principles of Liberty has taught hundreds of interested liberty lovers the fundamentals of economics, philosophy, and history regarding our country’s founding and economic foundations. If ever there was a time to deepen your love affair with liberty and freedom, THIS is it.
The class meets for 5 consecutive Saturdays, from 9am to noon, starting with the last Saturday in January, the 28th at Colorado Christian University’s business school, room 103 (8787 Alameda Ave, Lakewood). For more info, please call Andy Anderson at 303-829-9435.
Need more reasons why you should enrich your love of liberty? How about this:
You have a strong love of freedom. It’s a natural part of being human. But too few of today’s adults were taught the fundamentals of a free society. We have a wonderful seminar to offer you. It pulls together the basic principles of liberty and a free market, showing you that these cohesive fundamentals allow society to work well, and to honor the individual. The course material springs from the great thinkers and achievers who shaped America. It is designed for business and community leaders and the general public as well as for college students.
The course makes the moral and philosophic case for free-market capitalism. One of the most important concepts of Western Civilization is the acquisition of property as an unalienable right. The course develops the relationship between economic liberty and political liberty. Participants learn the principles behind wealth-creation. They are introduced to the philosophy of the Austrian School of Economics and its connection to the founding ideas of the American experiment. Participants are awakened to their heritage of economic liberty. It will be more than worth your time.
Classes held on five consecutive Saturdays. The course is designed for business and community leaders, college students, and the general public. If desired, you may obtain three college credits through the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs by paying the usual college per-credit fee.
Come if you love liberty. Come if you love collectivism, but need to understand the libertarian position. Come if you want to receive an inexpensive, thorough, and energetic exposure to the founding principles of economic and political liberty.
For more information about the course itself contact Penn Pfiffner at 303-233-7731 or constecon@hotmail.com. For more information about registering and any other matters contact CRBC at 303-829-9435 or principlescourse@smallbizgop.
no comments for now
Posted by jccaldara on Dec 06 2011 |
Constitutional History, PPC, Taxes, The Founders, Thomas Jefferson, U.S. Constitution, iVoices.org
Here we go again. The Left’s latest attempt to defame the Tea Party movement appears in the latest issue of Vanity Fair magazine. In the article, “Debt and Dumb,” the authors distort the founding era record and our Constitution to vilify Tea Partiers. As we’ve seen recently, the Constitution is back in vogue and even the Left is using it to further their big government agenda. (”What’d the founders think? Well, look at Hamilton!”)
Um, okay. Let’s look at him.
Rob Natelson deconstructs the Vanity Fair article in this constitution.i2i.org blogpost. As Rob notes, VF does a great job revising history to fit their beliefs. Over on iVoices.org, Rob sits down with one of my minions to talk about the VF article and why it’s dead wrong. Podcast here.
no comments for now
Posted by jccaldara on Oct 24 2011 |
PPC, The Founders, Thomas Jefferson, iVoices.org
Those sympathetic to the British Crown spent a lot of time hurling insults and demonizing the American Patriots of the 18th century. Today many on the left, sympathetic to the centralization of power in Washington, DC hurl insults at the modern day Tea Party. The similarities between the two are striking says Rob Natelson in his blog post. Rob sat down with one of my minions on iVoices.org to talk about the attacks heard back in the 18th century and how they relate to the attacks on the Tea Party in the 21st century. (Side note: the attacks in the 18th century were much more creative and clever). Listen to Professor Rob Natelson explain the similarities in sentiment between the attacks then and now. Take pride Tea Parties, if John Hancock could take it, so can you.
no comments for now
Posted by jccaldara on Oct 18 2011 |
Constitutional Amendments, Constitutional History, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Theory, Continuing Legal Education, Events, Kopelization, Originalism, PPC, The Founders, U.S. Constitution, obamacare, supreme court
no comments for now
Posted by jccaldara on Sep 27 2011 |
Constitutional Amendments, Constitutional History, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Theory, Necessary and Proper, Originalism, PPC, Religion and the Law, Taxing and Spending Clause, Tenth Amendment, The Founders, U.S. Constitution
Constitutional scholar and Senior Fellow in Constitutional Jurisprudence Rob Natelson released a fantastic book last year called The Original Constitution: What It Actually Said and Meant. The book was and is a huge hit. What the book did was fill a gap that was left by constitutional scholars who never got around to writing a comprehensive look at our nation’s founding document aimed at the lay person. Sure there are a lot of books out there on particular parts of the Constitution, but none that cover the whole shebang and none of them were written with your average Joe (or Jane) in mind. Rob Natelson stepped up and filled that gap.

Turns out however that Rob was not satisfied the first time around. He went back and re-worked his first edition and created and even bigger and better second edition to his book. You can find the second edition both on Amazon.com and the Tenth Amendment Center’s store. So how is this second edition different than the already fantastic first edition? Rob explains all that in this iVoices.org podcast with one of my minions Justin Longo. You can also go to Rob’s blog – constitution.i2i.org – to see what Rob has to say about his second edition.
It’s difficult to improve upon a great thing. But somehow Rob did it with this new book. Thank you for all your hard work Rob. You are doing an incredible job educating us mere mortals on our nation’s founding era history.
Speaking of education… don’t forget that THIS FRIDAY is our huge Constitution event down in Colorado Springs at the Antlers Hilton. There are a few spots remaining, so please RSVP as soon as you can. Do not miss this opportunity to see constitution scholars Rob Natelson and Dave Kopel in action!
no comments for now
Posted by jccaldara on Jul 20 2011 |
Constitutional History, Constitutional Law, Health Care, PPC, The Founders, U.S. Constitution, health control law, iVoices.org, obamacare
Exactly who is Chief Justice John Marshall? That question has special importance today. Due to a belief that Chief Justice Marshall was a progressive judicial activist, many today are using his words as ammunition in the case for our overbearing and clearly unconstitutional federal regulatory state. However, like he’s often done many times before, Professor Rob Natelson is here to set the record straight. In a recent blog post on constitution.i2i.org and this iVoices.org podcast, Rob explains why Marshall may have gotten this ill deserved reputation and also why it’s wrong. Rob explores three cases which, when taken in the context of the law and language of the time, irrefutably dispel the notion that Marshall would have ever been in favor of the vast regulatory state we have now – let alone the health control law. In fact, Rob and Dave Kopel let Marshall refute Obamacare in his own words! How’d they do that? With a little research and a dash of creativity. In this article, “Health Laws of Every Description”: John Marshall’s Ruling on a Federal Health Care Law,” Rob and Dave use Marshall’s own words to help destroy another pro-Obamacare argument.
no comments for now
Posted by jccaldara on Jun 16 2011 |
Constitutional History, Constitutional Law, Idiot Box (TV Show), PPC, The Founders, Thomas Jefferson, U.S. Constitution
Rob Natelson’s constitutional scholarship is unprecedented. If you only looked at his latest book, The Original Constitution: What It Said and Meant, you’d be astounded at the amount of never before seen facts and figures about our founding. Beyond just his newest book, Rob’s research has taken him to original documents from the 17th century like legal contracts, influential essays, letters from the Founders, and even pre-Revolutionary War pamphlets. These pamphlets formed the basis of a blog post and iVoices.org podcast from Rob. In his blog post, Rob cites the pre-Revolution pamphlets and their messages as evidence against an all-powerful Commerce Clause. The same all-powerful Commerce Clause that threatens to be the justification for an all-powerful federal government. Even before the war, the Founders made it clear what the federal government was allowed to do and definitely not allowed to do. In this iVoices.org podcast, Rob goes into more detail about the influential pamphleteers and the impact their writings had on the pre-Revolution colonies and our founding documents.
no comments for now
Posted by jccaldara on May 25 2011 |
Constitutional History, Constitutional Law, PPC, TABOR, Taxes, The Founders, U.S. Constitution
The old saying that politics makes strange bedfellows came to mind after reading Vincent Carroll’s op-ed this morning in the Denver Post. In the column, Vincent points out that anti-TABOR forces are drawing heavily from the Founders in their lawsuit that alleges TABOR is unconstitutional. In particular they quote James Madison from his Federalist No. 10. The argument is that Madison, along with the other Founders, rejected “direct democracy” in favor of representative democracy. And look, it’s even in the Constitution itself – “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government.” The lawsuit argues that our Taxpayer Bill of Rights is a form of direct democracy as it requires a vote of the people to raise taxes and debt.
Leaving aside my argument that this lawsuit is not really about TABOR but more about our petition process, it’s a bit ironic that big government elites all of the sudden fancy themselves constitutional scholars taking on the important fight to secure our founding documents from perversion and ignorance. So I’m supposed to believe that tax and spend, no limits on government, elitist, living constitutionalists are now walking hand in hand with James Madison and Thomas Jefferson? Strange bedfellows doesn’t even begin to describe that phony alliance.
Our Constitutional scholar Rob Natelson doesn’t buy it either. As is always the case with Rob’s research, he visits the 18th century writings to discover the truth. What Rob finds is that the Founders used the word “republic” in a different way than the lawsuit’s proponents lead us to believe. “They all define ‘republic’ as merely ‘commonwealth’ or ‘a government controlled by more than one person,” says Rob. Not only that, the governments the Founders looked to for inspiration and guidance employed elements of direct citizen action. For example, the early Roman state had a republican form of government and yet legislation came out of popular assemblies where citizens voted in person. In his op-ed, Vincent quotes heavily from Senior Fellow Rob Natelson as he makes the case that the Founders would have had no beef with our citizen initiative process in general and our Taxpayer Bill of Rights in particular.
The evidence is convincing: this lawsuit will go nowhere. It’s unfortunate that in the next policy fight our big government opponents will have all but forgotten their affection for the Founders and our founding era documents. I predict this love affair is a one time occurrence. Mere puppy love – fickle and fleeting.
1 comment for now
Posted by jccaldara on May 05 2011 |
Constitutional Amendments, Constitutional History, Constitutional Law, Events, Originalism, PPC, The Founders, U.S. Constitution, federalism
If you’ve ever dreamed of being in the same room as not one, but TWO real life geniuses, then you’ll want to attend our program for the grassroots on Sunday, May 15th, from 1:15 to 5pm at the Red Rocks Community College. Both constitutional law professor Rob Natelson and our Second Amendment expert and constitutional law professor Dave Kopel will be educating the class on how to use our constitution to fight federal overreach. By the time the program is over, you will know the constitutional information you need to restore liberty and constitutional government in America! And maybe have a higher IQ through osmosis.
The program discusses:
* Why the Constitution was adopted and what purpose it serves
* Untruths spread about the Founders and the Founding spread by those who seek to discredit it
* How the Constitution was to be interpreted.
* What key provisions in the Constitution really meant.
* How politicians and courts have destroyed limits on federal power and driven America toward bankruptcy
* How you can use the tools provided by the Constitution to restore the Founders’ vision
* And much more!
Please go to our event page here for more detailed information including the class schedule. Space is extremely limited so please RSVP now!
1 comment for now
Posted by jccaldara on Mar 31 2011 |
Constitutional History, Constitutional Law, Kopelization, PPC, The Founders, U.S. Constitution
Our resident constitutional scholars, Dave Kopel and Rob Natelson, joined forces to write an article for the National Law Journal titled, “Health insurance is not ‘commerce.” In the article, Kopel and Natelson make the case that one solitary and erroneous Supreme Court case from 1944 is to blame for the false idea that buying insurance does indeed qualify as “commerce.” Commerce that the federal government — congress — can regulate. But as the authors state,
But that assumption is wrong: In fact, the congressional power to regulate “Commerce…among the several States” does not include authority to regulate health insurance. Under the Constitution, health insurance is a matter of state, not federal, jurisdiction.
Kopel and Natelson believe that when the case is brought before the Supreme Court, the court will have an opportunity to overturn this erroneous precedent and return to an original understanding of our founder’s definition of the word commerce. Therefore, insurance markets will rightly be placed back in the hands of state and local governments.
no comments for now
Next »