Liberty means more than the Constitution

As Sheldon Richman writes, the Constitution is somewhat limiting of government, but not as much as was the previous government, the one preceding the Constitution - the one under the Articles of Confederation.

"Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.

"We might think those words -- or words to the same effect -- are in the U.S. Constitution. But they are not. They are from Article II of the Articles of Confederation, America's first constitution. They could have been placed in the U.S. Constitution but were deliberately left out in 1787."

So, if Ron Paul were elected, and the American people forced Congress to pass his plan based on the Constitution, the job of Liberty and Justice could remain unfinished. Ultimately, we may have to return to a State-based Articles of Confederation government. It wasn't lightly that abolitionist libertarian lawyer Lysander Spooner ridiculed the sanctity of the Constitution. Nor did H.L. Mencken's favorite writer, Albert Jay Nock, cavalierly call the Constitution a "coup d'etat."

For context on the fact that not all our Founders were good people, a reminder from Reason on what a monster Hamilton was.