October 19, 2016 --

With just one more LPR scheduled for posting around November 5, before Election Day, this LPR asks clicksters to consider the possibility of President Hillary Clinton in the context of insight from Federalist Papers Nos. 1 and 57.

Federalist No. 1 points out: "History will teach us"¦that of those men who have overturned the liberties of republics, the greatest number have begun their career by paying an obsequious court to the people, commencing demagogues and ending tyrants." Is Hillary Clinton "paying an obsequious court to the people"? She promises, for example, free college. Notwithstanding her huge fees from Wall Street speaking appearances, she claims to want the wealthy to pay their "fair share of taxes." (Have Wall Street companies paid Candidate Clinton millions of dollars so that she will raise their taxes?) Is her deminizing of political opponents merely prelude to becoming our first imperial president, stifling dissent as "hate speech" -- and vigorously backed by a media that has transformed itself from journalism enterprise to semi-official propaganda arm of a Clinton White House?

Federalist No. 57 (cited many times by LPR) opens by acknowledging "a class of citizens which will have least sympathy with the mass of the people, and be most likely to aim at an ambitious sacrifice of the many to the to the aggrandizement of the few." There can be no doubt that we have "a class of citizens" that looks down on their fellow countrymen, described by Hilary Clinton as "deplorables," "irredeemables." It seems to LPR that "snob" is an apt term to describe this class. That Candidate Clinton has acknowledged (in leaked excerpts of her Wall Street appearances) that she is separated from most Americans by considerable distance, is it l far-fetched to consider the reality facing citizens, not found on the lists of big bucks contributors to the Clinton campaign: they will have to sacrifice for the benefit of the well-connected.

No. 57 also warns tha without "communion of interests and sympathy of sentiments" between officials and the people, "every government degenerates into tyranny."
Can we expect that the administration of President Hillary Clinton will be transparent? Up to now, what has been transparent about Candidate Clinton? Certainly not the Email matter, Certainly not her speechifying to the moneyed interests. Certainly not her scripted meetings with partisan propagandists in the media. Certainly not her activities with respect to the Clinton Foundation while she was secretary of state.

Is a secretive dissembler as president preferable to a flawed candidate who,h owever, would not reduce the Constitution to a meaningless shell, leading to rule by an imperial president?

Federalist No. 57, attributed to James Madison, expresses confidence in the commitment of the American people to freedom. This election, LPR believes, will test that commitment. Do the American people remain committed to freedom, or do they prefer the political transformation of our Republic into an Imperial Presidency, where the constitutional principle of separation of powers is discarded and Congress and courts defer to a Supreme Leader of the United States?