Posted on 01/24/2013 6:20:45 AM PST by ProgressingAmerica
For those of you who didn't catch the tail end of Mark Levin's show Tuesday night, here's what he discussed in the last 5 minutes.(mp3)
At the Constitutional Convention, July 17th, 1787, delegate Gunning Bedford of Delaware made the following proposal:
Mr. BEDFORD moved that the 2d. member of Resolution 6. be so altered as to read "and moreover to legislate in all cases for the general interests of the Union, and also in those to which the States are separately incompetent," or in which the harmony of the U. States may be interrupted by the exercise of individual Legislation."
That proposal has progressivism written all over it. And as is made clear by the debate that ensued, the Founders resoundly rejected it.
Mr. RANDOLPH. This is a formidable idea indeed. It involves the power of violating all the laws and constitutions of the States, and of intermeddling with their police.
Mr. L. MARTIN considered the power as improper & inadmissible. Shall all the laws of the States be sent up to the Genl. Legislature before they shall be permitted to operate?
I liked the opening line of Madison's comment the best:
Mr. MADISON, considered the negative on the laws of the States as essential to the efficacy & security of the Genl. Govt. The necessity of a general Govt. proceeds from the propensity of the States to pursue their particular interests in opposition to the general interest.
In other words, the states have a specific claim to persue their own best interests, regard of whatever is being called the "general interest" of the day. For Madison, the states were never incompetent; or, certainly not nearly as incompetent as the federal government.(or, as the Founders then referred to it, the general government) Hello 10th amendment. 9th amendment too.
The proposal created quite an outburst, as is made evident by this:
Mr. Govr. MORRIS was more & more opposed to the negative. The proposal of it would disgust all the States.
I would encourage all to listen to the last few minutes, starting at 1:07. It should be noted that the primary pillar of progressive ideology is rule by unelected bureaucrats, but said rule needs to have no opposition from some pesky state legislature.
"We are impatient of state legislatures"
Yeah you are, Mr. Wilson. You certainly are.
Hear me clearly: Who cares?
Boehner and the R’s need to re-educate and they’re not doing it, not making arguments. Arguing on the basis of founding fathers is tin ear at best. The networks, the teachers, all those in charge of the media and schools (hence, a la Marx) hate our founding fathers. The language to re-educate needs to change. No, I don’t have the answers, but the drivel of preaching to the choir is past time...we’re in post-America now and to get back to something better takes new tactics, new methods, new people (i.e., Boehner has to go, but he’s the horse we have at the moment)...let’s see if they can kick out McConnell.
I’m not hating your post, I’m just tired of the preaching to the choir stuff...it doesn’t move the football down the field as we already know this stuff.
Then why have FR at all?
bump
We are all frustrated.
Deep down, we all know that the former informed and moral American people are now idiotic and ignorant enough to elect Obama, one of the most failed presidents in the history of our country.
I’m beginning to give up on any political means, because they don’t exist any longer, due to a dumbed down American populace.
We have become a nation of whining idiots and illegal interlopers. As long as the checks come, the tv works, and the iPhone is charged all is well so they can discuss whose baby daddy did what to who, what team won what irrelevant sporting event, and where we eating tonight...
It is going to take a major reset event for things to change. That event can be anything from a massive depression to outright rebellion.
wow, never seen such depression.
Actually, I feel the same way.
We no longer have rule by law.
We are almost fully Soviet now.
The only reason they aren’t hauling us off to the gulags is because we are ineffective and they don’t fear us.
Of course, they saw the country becoming more settled and may have understood that would mean changes. Some of them believed in setting up public institutions -- like a national bank or university -- but there wasn't quite the same idea of improving humanity through government action that came along later.
I'd say it took the industrial revolution and the philosophy of Hegel to bring progressivism into its own. You needed a philosophy of change and progress, a belief that a golden age lay in the future, not in the past. And the industrial revolution brought so much change and upheaval, that it became more common to look to government either to protect against harmful change, or to direct the powerful new forces to produce major changes in society.
That he wrote what are now the ninth and tenth amendments two years later just shows that his views had matured in the meantime as a result of the debates at the ratifying conventions and the widespread demands for a Bill of Rights limiting the powers of the federal government.
Then why have FR at all?
I think you read it wrongly.
wow, never seen such depression.
Actually, I feel the same way.
We no longer have rule by law.
We are almost fully Soviet now.
The only reason they aren’t hauling us off to the gulags is because we are ineffective and they don’t fear us.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.