The founders, with all their faults were trying to do something profound, they were trying to break with MONARCHY.

It wasn't, that they didn't specifically like King George; they just didn't like "The Divine Right of Kings" as a principle.  Despite history not being taught anymore, some of you nevertheless know the phrase "The Divine Right of Kings". It means, for those of you educated more recently, since GOD has obviously selected "THE KING", and if you reject the King, you reject GOD.

Simultaneously, since GOD by definition cannot be wrong, the judgment of the KING is likewise infallible. The King (like GOD) exists in a sphere above human frailty and is UNDENIABLE, UNQUESTIONABLE, and from whose awful justice, there is no APPEAL.

 There were people who believed that if you denied the infallibility of the King you were also denying GOD, and would be struck down. John quipped, "Luckily they had Ben Franklin on their side, so they knew how to deal with bolts from above". This was an incredibly bold and dangerous proposition. Since religion had previously been  woven so tightly to political authority in most monarchies, making this clean break with state religion was part of the rejection of the "Divinity of the King".   [more]

2nd part of a report on John Nichols appearance at the Palm Beach Democratic Club. John is a writer for The Nation, and a author of the book, "The Genius of Impeachment: The Founders' Cure for Royalism"

John addressed issues surrounding the election, the pending Presidency of Barack Obama, and the continuing need for Congress to perform it's Constitutional responsibilities.

Written in two part by AveryVoice.com reporter and political editor, RW Spisak Jr. janhuss@bellsouth.net