[tacticalogic]

But in this case, here we have Madison himself saying, "Yes, you may use the commerce clause that way, even though that's not what we originally intended."

No, what we have is you interpreting Madison to be saying that.

A claw hammer was intended to pound and pull nails. Some people will use it for things it was not intended to be used for, and others will not. The difference basically comes down to a respect for the tool. You are advocating a philosophy that says no such respect is due the Constitution.

[robertpaulsen]

"No, what we have is you interpreting Madison to be saying that."

Baloney. These are your referenced letters. You should read them sometime.

In Madison's first letter to Cavel, he certainly does say that the Commerce Clause may be used discourage foreign imports to encourage local manufactures. Well, does he or not?

In his second letter, he admits to Cavel that this application of the Commerce Clause wasn't the original intent. Does he, or not?