Replies

I beliebe Madison's intentions were good, for whatever that's worth. The quality of his notes on the Convention demonstrate his integrity. By all accounts they were thorough and fair. He's a tough one to figure out. He seems to have really believed the Constitution would function the way he believed. He seems completely miffed when almost immediately the things he thought wouldn't happen started happening, some of which at the hands of his constitutional allies. Near the end of his life he was still trying to explain to people how he thought it was supposed to work. I just don't get how he could be so brilliant and so blind at the same time.

I often wonder what might have been different if his friend Thomas Jefferson had been in the country for the framing--if he'd been there. Jefferson surely demonstrated a greater mistrust of government than Madison. TJ trusted Madison, and seems to have somehow been a bit of a centrist on the issue of the Constitution, but I wonder if he'd have had a different view if he'd been there. I even wonder if it was an accident or not that he was out of the country at the time.

Your posts are increasingly scattershot ad hominems against brilliant men who risked all.

The state Constitutions were a prelude to the federal Constitution. There is hardly a single idea or article contained in the federal Constitution that was not proposed or essayed in a state Constitution.

Are you saying that Jefferson would have demanded staying with the Article? Since you despise the Constitution and admire the Articles, how can you support someone who supported the Constitution?