Follow Us
Individual Blog Post From David Churchill BarrowAllCreatorsSiteStaff
David Churchill Barrow is an attorney and historian who was raised as a Massachusetts "Swamp Yankee," but now resides with his wife MaryLu near Tampa, Florida.
Thursday, August 13th 2015
Answer: The antithesis of American Constitutionalism.
Posted Thu Aug 13 2015 10:59
1 of 1 liked this
Some of the founding fathers objected to adding a "Bill of Rights" to the Constitution because they feared that some wiseguy would come along and claim that it is comprehensive and complete - that apart from its proscriptions, the federal government can do as it pleases. That wiseguy would be Woodrow Wilson.

"Self evident" truths? Rights "endowed by their Creator?" According to Wilson and the Progressives the founders talked that way because - well - that's how they talked back then. No eternal principles, no foundational truths. Move along to the next historical exhibit... Nothing more to see here. Separation of power? Limited government? Ancient and outdated obstacles to a better way of living ("better" as defined by the "progressives").

In this modern "brave new world" the ragged untutored polloi are incapable of making decisions of the least consequence. "Expert" and "professional" bureaucrats will take care of all that. The people need only clamor for the right "leader" to do the appointing.

"Progressivism" is the toxic mixture of Wilsonian constitutionalism (an oxymoron), bureaucracies based upon the model of Kaiser Wilhelm's Prussia, and the racism and eugenics of Margaret Sanger (the founder of Planned Parenthood).

Hillary Clinton calls herself a "Progressive."