Theodore and Woodrow: How Two American Presidents Destroyed Constitutional Freedom

Theodore and Woodrow: How Two American Presidents Destroyed Constitutional Freedom

Andrew P. Napolitano

Language: English

Pages: 320

ISBN: 1595553517

Format: PDF / Kindle (mobi) / ePub


“Either the Constitution means what it says, or it doesn’t.”

America’s founding fathers saw freedom as a part of our nature to be protected—not to be usurped by the federal government—and so enshrined separation of powers and guarantees of freedom  in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. But a little over a hundred years after America’s founding, those God-given rights were laid siege by two presidents caring more about the advancement of progressive, redistributionist ideology than the principles on which America was founded.

Theodore and Woodrow is Judge Andrew P. Napolitano’s shocking historical account of how a Republican and a Democratic president oversaw the greatest shift in power in American history, from a land built on the belief that authority should be left to the individuals and the states to a bloated, far-reaching federal bureaucracy, continuing to grow and consume power each day.

With lessons rooted in history, Judge Napolitano shows the intellectually arrogant, anti-personal freedom, even racist progressive philosophy driving these men to poison the American system of government. 

And Americans still pay for their legacy—in the federal income, in state-prescribed compulsory education, in the Federal Reserve, in perpetual wars, and in the constant encroachment of a government that coddles special interests and discourages true competition in the marketplace.

With his attention to detail, deep constitutional knowledge, and unwavering adherence to truth telling, Judge Napolitano moves through the history of these men and their times in office to show how American values and the Constitution were sadly set aside, leaving personal freedom as a shadow of its former self,  in the grip of an insidious, Nanny state, progressive ideology.

Thieves of State: Why Corruption Threatens Global Security

You're Not as Crazy as I Thought (But You're Still Wrong): Conversations between a Die-Hard Liberal and a Devoted Conservative

Imperial Hubris: Why the West Is Losing the War on Terror

The Huddled Masses: Immigration and Inequality

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

crowd and took him to the police for further investigation. There he was charged with violating the Espionage Act. The indictment against Randolph and his colleagues was dismissed by a white federal judge because, as Randolph said, “[H]e couldn’t believe we were old enough, or, being black, smart enough to write that red-hot stuff in The Messenger.”24 It’s sad when the sting and stench of racism are the only things that stop a judge from violating his sworn duty to uphold the Constitution.

he grew up in a pious house-hold, and religion served as one of the greatest influences on his life. Though these men were born into seemingly different circumstances, the parallels between their lives quickly began to emerge. During their youth, Roosevelt and Wilson suffered from debilitating handicaps that threatened to interfere with their ambitions. Roosevelt had asthma, as well as weak eyesight, and was generally in poor health. His condition was so bad that he had to be propped up in bed

influences of America? Does the direct election of senators touch anything except the private control of seats in the Senate?3 The passing of the Seventeenth Amendment was an important aspect of the goal of concentration of power, because it destroyed the balance of powers between the states, the people, and the federal government that the Constitution had originally set out; and it prevented the states as states from blocking federal encroachments of their sovereignty. The true nature of

governmental expansion. During this time of increasing governmental regulation, the courts attempted to uphold traditional notions of constitutionality and freedom. Progressives and modern historians and legal scholars have heavily criticized the Supreme Court for its attempt to uphold economic liberties through the “freedom of contract” doctrine during what legal historians call the Lochner Era. The case of Lochner v. New York in 190514 is criticized in history books and legal texts as one of

owners and workers, their natural rights to trade goods and services and money, and the natural economic laws of supply and demand did not exist or deserve protection. The theory of freedom of contract and economic liberty was originally set out in 1872 in the infamous Slaughterhouse Cases. The Slaughterhouse Cases were three separate cases that were argued and reported together. In this decision, the Supreme Court severely narrowed the protections of the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments by

Download sample

Download