Basically, Mr. Hart and "Historiann" took umbrage at former House speaker Newt Gingrich's statements that the Founding Fathers would not have approved of the progressive spending/social policies of today's congress and the Obama Administration.
But President Obama agrees with Gingrich! The Constitution did not approve!
We'll quote from Mr. Obama, from 2001:
"[The Warren Court] wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution. At least as it's been interpreted and more important interpreted in the same way that, generally, the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties; says what the states can't do to you, what the federal government can't do to you, but it doesn't say what the state government or federal government must do on your behalf."
"[One of the] great tragedies of the civil rights movement [was that it got away from] political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change."
Look, it's fine that we disagree about where this nation should head in 2009, that's politics. But there's no need to disagree about the historical facts. The "so called" Founders did not define, and did not allow, "economic freedom" as "redistributive change." On this, Newt Gingrich is quite right, and as we see, even President Obama agrees. Now that we've straightened out the facts about the Founders, let the debate commence.
"Historiann" asks, "And who wants to live in their world, anyway?" Some of us, my dear, some of us. Mebbe even most of us. We shall see.