[robertpaulsen]

"I mean, do you agree with the concept of a "republic" in that its distinguishing feature is a constitution that defines the limits of the government within bounds?"

Of course. I believe the U.S. Constitution was written to define the limits of the federal (not state) government.

State constitutions define the limits of each state. That was the original intent of the Founding Fathers.

[William Terrell]

Then we agree that a constitution defines the operational bounds of a government. In order to do so, it defines the areas of sovereignty that administrators and elected officials may assume, by specifically naming powers, over the states and people, that they can wield.

You agree?

[P_A_I]

William Terrell:
"I mean, do you agree with the concept of a "republic" in that its distinguishing feature is a constitution that defines the limits of the government within bounds?"


_____________________________________


Of course. I believe the U.S. Constitution was written to define the limits of the federal (not state) government.
State constitutions define the limits of each state.
That was the original intent of the Founding Fathers.

21 robertpaulsen

---

Paulsen misunderstands & ignores the words of the US Constitution once again.

It was the original intent of the Founding Fathers, clearly written, that all States have republican forms of government - wherein all judges & officials are pledged to support the US Constitution - notwithstanding any Thing in the Constitutions of any State to the Contrary.