Does 2016 America Pass The “Adams Test”?

It’s hard not to think about that whole “nation of men or nation of laws?” thing these days.

Or, as Hillary and her supporters would respond: YOU RACIST!

Anticipating a probable Clinton win, people have started picking out their chief worries: the Second Amendment, anyone? Or how about the First? From religious institutions to bloggers to business owners, these could be the times that try (gender selection)’s souls.

The amendments themselves will remain on that “piece of paper” (Obama), but a remade Supreme Court will give the okey-dokie artichokey to Clintonian executive orders. Sort of a “if you like your gun, you can keep your gun” thing.

We’ve always heard, and now have the Wiki-proof of, Hill and Bill’s disdain for the “help”, from Secret Service to domestics. Now we know how little their minions think of us, from “medieval” Catholics to unkind impressions of Hispanics and African-Americans.

Team Hillary, calling themselves “Clinton World”, snarking back and forth via email all day, accomplishing nothing.

While they swoon in hypocritical outrage over the clown Trump.

Whatever else happens with the Donald, by the way, his campaign has achieved one thing: just by its existence and persistence, we see the complete ethical and moral hollowing-out of the political/media complex. Hate-filled frauds.

Meanwhile, back to that “nation of laws” idea. ┬áJohn Adams, our second president and first vice president, once wrote:

“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

Do we pass this test? Do we have to wait for Tuesday night’s results?

Or do we already know?




Should we give illegal immigrants the right to vote in school elections? (Audio) Author WARD FARNSWORTH discusses his book on everyday Stoicism (Audio) Sean Rima: Russia and The Pukes. “Just Please Make Up Your Mind,” Summer 2018 Edition CHRIS HOGAN says people in their 20’s should plan for retirement now (Audio) Trump backtracks from the word “would” to “wouldn’t,” and it’s not graceful (Audio)