Kalamata to OIFVeteran, post #649:
"There were many anti-federalists who didn't believe the Constitution provided enough protection from big-government tyrants (such as Henry Clay and Abraham Lincoln turned out to be.)
The framers never envisioned a usurper could navigate past so many barriers, particularly when the powers of the federal government were distinctly listed and defined.
But slick rhetoricians, who can also act out the part of sincerity (like Clay and Lincoln,) can easily fool the masses." Kalamata's repeated insane attacks on Kentucky Senator Henry Clay (1777 - 1852), normally called "the Great Compromiser," but Dan-bo calling Clay everything from "tyrant" to "slick rhetorician" -- what in the world is that all about?
From 1803 until his death in 1852 Clay was many things -- speaker of the US House of Representatives and diplomat to France under President Madison, Secretary of State under President John Quincy Adams, originally a Jeffersonian Democrat Clay became a Whig in opposition to Andrew Jackson, several times candidate for President and influential US Senator whose work earned him the sobriquet "the Great Compromiser" -- but never President.
Young Abraham Lincoln admired Clay, calling him, "my ideal of a great man."
Many historians agree, ranking Clay among the most influential Americans never elected President.
How then does such a man merit insane hatred from Kalamata, with labels like "tyrant" and "slick rhetorician"?
Well... apparently because of what Clay called his "American System", which we can boil down to the seven words which even today drive our Democrats stark raving mad: make America great by putting Americans first.
Clay's "American System" was based on Hamilton's ideas and included three main features:
- Protective tariffs to encourage American manufacturing.
- A national bank to stabilize the economy.
- "Internal improvements" (roads, canals, harbors, etc.) to help bind the nation together economically.
While Clay was Speaker of the US House of Representatives, President Madison adopted the first two of his ideas.
The third, "internal improvements" had already been accepted in 1806 by President Jefferson, in funding the Cumberland Road, roughly today's US-40, which Clay continued to fund.
And although President Madison vetoed SC Senator Calhoun's 1817 Bonus Bill (for roads, canals & navigation improvements), on grounds of strict construction, President Monroe approved Clay's 1824 Rivers and Harbors bill.
Jefferson's 1808 Plan for Internal Improvements
And let's back up enough here to notice that every Founder, without exception wanted and supported "internal improvements", beginning with President Washington.
In 1787 Federal authority for internal improvements was proposed at the Constitution Convention, but was defeated as likely to generate too much opposition to the Constitution itself.
That's because every project (then as now) creates both supporters and opponents -- for example, a new bridge puts ferry-boat operators out of business.
So the 1787 Convention thought it best to leave such decisions to states.
But every President requested Federal money for internal improvements, including Jefferson -- ironically, after Jefferson himself had opposed Federalists projects on grounds of "strict construction", President Jefferson's own projects were opposed by Federalists on those same grounds!
Frustrated, President Jefferson proposed a constitutional amendment to authorize Federal internal improvement projects.
Jefferson's amendment was killed by Old Republican "Quid", John Randolph (who you may remember coined the term "Doughfaced northerners").
Anyway, for Madison in 1817 the issue was not just strict construction, but also "corruption," what Democrats like Kalamata decry as "crony capitalism".
But notice that all the actors then -- Calhoun, Madison & Clay -- were Democrats, and so corruption had nothing to do with party affiliation.
We should also notice that during these decades Federal government spent many millions of dollars building dozens/hundreds of forts, lighthouses, post offices, naval ships & facilities, arsenals, mints, postal roads, military cannon, hand weapons, ammunition & endless other supplies.
In all that time we can expect that everyone involved clearly understood the difference between legitimate versus illegal practices and all were subject to law enforcement.
So there is no reason for us to think that Kalamata's charge of alleged "crony capitalism" would be more or less a problem with "internal improvement" projects than with any of those others.
In short, such claims are a red herring.
And name-calling Henry Clay a "tyrant" is sheer hyperbolic nonsenses. ![]()
>>Kalamata wrote: “There were many anti-federalists who didn’t believe the Constitution provided enough protection from big-government tyrants (such as Henry Clay and Abraham Lincoln turned out to be.) The framers never envisioned a usurper could navigate past so many barriers, particularly when the powers of the federal government were distinctly listed and defined. But slick rhetoricians, who can also act out the part of sincerity (like Clay and Lincoln,) can easily fool the masses.”
>>BroJoeK wrote: “Kalamata’s repeated insane attacks on Kentucky Senator Henry Clay (1777 - 1852), normally called “the Great Compromiser,” but Dan-bo calling Clay everything from “tyrant” to “slick rhetorician” — what in the world is that all about?”
Clay was a filthy, greedy, protectionist, crony-capitalist Hamiltonian, who was corrupt to the core. It is nothing personal.
****************
>>BroJoeK wrote: “How then does such a man merit insane hatred from Kalamata, with labels like “tyrant” and “slick rhetorician”? Well... apparently because of what Clay called his “American System”, which we can boil down to the seven words which even today drive our Democrats stark raving mad: make America great by putting Americans first.”
Joey’s words are always deceptive, when they are not astonishly ignorant. Clay was certainly Lincoln’s “kind of guy.” The Hamiltonian so-called “American System,” that Clay promoted, was, in fact, the crony-capitalist “British Mercantilist System,” renamed to fool the masses. The King had used the mercantilist system to keep the colonies suppressed under his economic thumb. The politically-connected in American have used it to enrich themselves at the expense of the taxpayer and raw-material exporters; of late, at the expense of the taxpayer and his g-g-g grandchildren. To give you an idea of how economically awful the mercantilist system is, John Maynard Keynes embraced it, while Adam Smith and Milton Freicman rejected it, as have all of the Austrians.
****************
>>BroJoeK wrote: “Clay’s “American System” was based on Hamilton’s ideas and included three main features: Protective tariffs to encourage American manufacturing. A national bank to stabilize the economy. “Internal improvements” (roads, canals, harbors, etc.) to help bind the nation together economically.”
Those are the talking points, but they are far from reality. It was just another crooked scheme to transfer the wealth of those who are not politically-connected, into the pockets of those who are. However, it has the appearance of making a nation prosperous due to the debt it accumulates. Imagine a spendthrift with a pocket full of credit cards, blank checks, and lots of friends to share his “wealth” with, and you will understand the so-called “American System.”
****************
>>BroJoeK wrote: “While Clay was Speaker of the US House of Representatives, President Madison adopted the first two of his ideas. The third, “internal improvements” had already been accepted in 1806 by President Jefferson, in funding the Cumberland Road, roughly today’s US-40, which Clay continued to fund. And although President Madison vetoed SC Senator Calhoun’s 1817 Bonus Bill (for roads, canals & navigation improvements), on grounds of strict construction, President Monroe approved Clay’s 1824 Rivers and Harbors bill. Jefferson’s 1808 Plan for Internal Improvements.”
Joey is conflating valid internal expenditures with crony-capitalist boondoggles and power grabs. Compare those items he listed above, with those in Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution.
Make note that Monroe vetoed an 1822 bill (which Clay promoted) to turn the National Road into a Toll Road, asserting a national toll system would usurp sovereignty and jurisdiction from the states. Clay eventually abandoned his support for the National Road.
Madison also made it clear that any road that crossed multiple states, such as the National Road, even though they were of great national purpose, required an authorizing amendment to the Constitution to become a lawful federal project (although the National Road could reasonably be considered a Post Road.)
****************
>>BroJoeK wrote: “And let’s back up enough here to notice that every Founder, without exception wanted and supported “internal improvements”, beginning with President Washington. In 1787 Federal authority for internal improvements was proposed at the Constitution Convention, but was defeated as likely to generate too much opposition to the Constitution itself. That’s because every project (then as now) creates both supporters and opponents — for example, a new bridge puts ferry-boat operators out of business. So the 1787 Convention thought it best to leave such decisions to states. But every President requested Federal money for internal improvements, including Jefferson — ironically, after Jefferson himself had opposed Federalists projects on grounds of “strict construction”, President Jefferson’s own projects were opposed by Federalists on those same grounds!”
You simply cannot trust politicians to follow the law.
****************
>>BroJoeK wrote: “Anyway, for Madison in 1817 the issue was not just strict construction, but also “corruption,” what Democrats like Kalamata decry as “crony capitalism”. But notice that all the actors then — Calhoun, Madison & Clay — were Democrats, and so corruption had nothing to do with party affiliation.”
Clay was no 19-century “democrat” (e.g, he was not a Jeffersonian Republican.) He was more like the democrats of today.
****************
>>BroJoeK wrote: “We should also notice that during these decades Federal government spent many millions of dollars building dozens/hundreds of forts, lighthouses, post offices, naval ships & facilities, arsenals, mints, postal roads, military cannon, hand weapons, ammunition & endless other supplies. In all that time we can expect that everyone involved clearly understood the difference between legitimate versus illegal practices and all were subject to law enforcement.”
All of those are authorized federal powers by Article I, section 9 of the Constitution, as ratified by the several states. All other “internal improvements” are usurpations.
Again, you simply cannot trust politicians to follow the law. Some usurp for altruistic purposes (Jefferson’s Louisiana Purchase,) and others do it line their pockets and the pockets of their political allies (federally-funded boondoggles.) But it is a rare politician who does not usurp power from the people from time to time.
****************
>>BroJoeK wrote: “So there is no reason for us to think that Kalamata’s charge of alleged “crony capitalism” would be more or less a problem with “internal improvement” projects than with any of those others. In short, such claims are a red herring. And name-calling Henry Clay a “tyrant” is sheer hyperbolic nonsenses.”
It is okay to label a tryant, “a tyrant,” Joey.
Mr. Kalamata