Warping the Hamilton legacy - ignoring the Bill of Rights

© 2016 Jim Spence - Once upon a time American school children were taught why the Bill of Rights (the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution) were required to be added for the Constitution to be ratified. The History Channel took a shot at U.S. history last year with a documentary on Alexander Hamilton. The show included plenty of commentary from left wing newsman Tom Brokaw and New York Times/Democratic Party political hack/"economist" Paul Krugman.
Hamilton's story presents an interesting challenge for the Democrats even though they love the idea that Hamilton favored a strong central government. A strong central government runs counter to the fact that Hamilton was one of the authors of the Federalist Papers, which opposed a stronger federal government. The two-hour piece seemed innocuous enough unless you understood how short it was on crucial details.
To be sure, Hamilton was a business-oriented politician who understood the importance of the nation having fungible debt (trading freely in the marketplace) and a common currency. He also knew the Articles of Confederation, which was the governing document of the nation until it was replaced by the Constitution, was too weak to help the young American nation develop into a superpower. Unfortunately, instead of the show teaching the viewer about Hamilton in the proper context, it takes on a tone that goes something like this: “Let us show you why even a founding father businessman like Hamilton knew the United States government needed to be all powerful, with an iron grip on all aspects of life.” Of course this slanting of the Hamilton story is very far from the actual Hamilton world view. Instead, it represents the view of modern-day Democrats wanting to twist history out of context to fit their opinions.
There was never a single mention of the Bill of Rights during the segment of the show on the ratification battle for the U.S. Constitution. This battle pitted Hamilton against Thomas Jefferson. Anyone with an ounce of understanding of the ratification battle knows that the Bill of Rights (the first ten amendments) were required by virtually every founder as protection against government, which they all knew would ALWAYS be grabbing for more and more power. It is the essential nature of government.
The ratification battle was not a case of big government types versus limited government types. It was a process of making sure those who fought and won the revolution against an oppressive government only granted LIMITED powers to the new central government. Arming the government with powers to dominate all aspects of life was NOT something anyone, least of all Hamilton, wanted to do. Sadly, America has lost its awareness of how important the Constitution and Bill of Rights were to strengthening the central government, while also limiting it. The five year battle and victory over the oppression of George III could easily to forfeited with the stroke of a pen had it not been for the Bill of Rights.
Since the time of Hamilton, America has increasingly neglected the basic education of its citizens. You can see it in the way Democrats have chipped away at constitutional rights in an effort to control all of us from Washington D.C.  
Consider the 1st Amendment. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” The Little Sisters of the Poor had to sue Barack Obama to exercise their freedom of religion. So did Hobby Lobby.
Amendment II: “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” Democrats do everything in their power to infringe on the rights of the people to KEEP AND BEAR arms. There is nothing ambiguous about this fact nor is there anything unclear about the amendment.
Consider Amendment # IV: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” The federal government subjects hundreds of millions of citizens to unreasonable searches and seizures at airports every year. The TSA seizes water bottles, hand lotions, tooth paste, and God knows what else.
How about Amendment V? “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” The oppressive tax system takes private property away from law abiding citizens every day for wasteful public use. The examples are everywhere.
How about Amendment VI? "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.” Does anyone believe the court system is much more than an extortion mechanism for trial lawyers and a farce for the rest of us?
Amendment VIII: “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” Does anyone think that the fines Americans are assessed by Obamacare for not buying health insurance are not excessive?
Look at Amendment IX, “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” The EPA seems to feel it has title to and rights to dominate everything.
Amendment X reads, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” As a matter of routine. the federal government holds the states and citizens hostage taking powers and controls it was specifically prohibited from seizing by the Constitution. Forcing people to buy health insurance under threat of a fine is a power NOT delegated to the United States by the Constitution.
Perhaps the reason why the producers the show about Alexander Hamilton skipped over the facts about the Bill of Rights including how integral those amendments were to the ratification of the Constitution because they knew those protections have been reduced to the object of ridicule by anyone who is literate and chooses to read the document.