the boy prolly failed lunch... and they whined about Bush's grades
Posted on 01/28/2010 4:16:03 PM PST by history_48
Take your argument up with Jefferson and Franklin. They’ll set you straight on the matter.
Take your argument up with Jefferson and Franklin. They’ll set you straight on the matter.
I just now mentioned Obama’s screw up to my family. I said he’s supposedly a Con-law professor, but I’m not sure who’s constitution. My 13-year old daughter piped up with “Kenya’s?”.
Heh, heh... We’re raisin’ her right!
exactly — I don’t for an instant question the enormous and fundamental importance of the Declaration of Independence, and I think it was a tremendous thing for Lincoln to create this evolving sense of nationhood from 1776 to 1863, but the legal and “constitutional” fact is that there was no USA before 1788-89.... one can point to fundamental ideas extending back even well before the Declaration, in terms of certain aspects of the colonies.... but how can one say there was a “constitution” in existence before or during the Articles of Confederation?
That's at the TOP OF THE DOCUMENT.
When you are a totalitarian democrat, the Constitution means nothing. All should remember that.
I guess US history and government isn’t taught in Indonesia
Exactly right. This is why I say, he may be a US citizen but he is no American. You are. You get it. Congratulations.
How would the Indonesian know that?
The Constitution the way I look at it is what made the USA officially a Republic. I would think the people of the time considered the colonies to be a collections of independent states united for the purpose of winning independence. Even after the Constitution was ratified there was a still a strong sense of states rights and the Tenth Amendment was taken a lot more seriously.
Anyone send this to Drudge yet?
re: “United States of America”
the phrase in 1776 had a dramatically different meaning to nearly everyone then what it came to mean a decade or two later
I think you are being completely “anachronistic” in the sense of importing a later meaning of “nation” back to 1776 which had a “moral” but not yet a legal or constitutional basis — and Franklin and Jefferson had many views which were not widely shared in 1776, although more so later
in 1776 the whole emphasis (for nearly all) was still upon “STATES” — 13 of them — and “America” was still much more of a geographical refence than any “constitutional” government — there was no national govt. yet -— the Continental Congress had no authority over anything or anyone except its own meetings
virtually everyone signing their names to that document still had a strong sense of their state as sovereign vis-a-vis both England and the “United States of America”
before 1787 it was extremely controversial (and still was for quite awhile afterwards with the “anti-federalists”) to regard the separate states as in any way answerable to or subordinate to a national government
why did General Washington have such terrible times trying to get enough troops, funds, supplies, etc.? in considerable part because there was no “nation” to speak of, simply 13 emerging states each jealously guarding their own sovereignty
yes, Jefferson and Franklin were among the earliest to think about and display a definite sense of nationhood, but they were way ahead of their peers
who can say that in 1776 the predominant view in the newly independent “states” was that there was in existence a sovereign national government with its own “constitution” and its legal authority over anything?
The nearly universal view (except among the “Tories” who were beginning to flee) was that each state was the primary locus of sovereignty and decision-making
the “national” congress could only pass resolutions as suggestions — there were no national laws, no federal govt, all legal authority resided with each state and locale
here’s a question: in 1776, could the (2nd) “Continental Congress” actually “do” anything except recommend, resolve, persuade? They could not pass a law binding on any state or citizen, they could not raise armies or (UGH) tax anyone etc. the states were still the locus of legal and sovereign powers (except according to the Brits, of course)
the “Articles of Confedertion” did not even exist in 1776... sure we can say that an idea of nation was rapidly emerging, and that Franklin and Jefferson were at the forefront, but even in 1786-87 the numbers of people who thought there would/should be any national govt. with the slightest authority over the states on anything at all was still very limited
The Revolutionary Founders acted upon their own moral authority.
They knew what they were doing.
yes — another way to look at it is that before 1787-91 very few people in North America would have questioned the idea that any one or more of the 13 new “states” had every legal and moral right to strike out on their own as an independent nation
had any state declared itself completely independent of any connection at all with the others, declining to participate in any way with the Continental Congress at that time, I do not think there could have been any sense of imminent “civil war” (so long as that state did not attack any neighbors) .... others would have regarded that as unwise, dangerous etc. but few of that time would have thought “Pennsylvania has no RIGHT to go its own way”
sure, it was widely recognized that there were political, military, and economic benefits to cooperation, especially so long as Britain wanted to re-assert authority, but it would have been perfectly understandable to just about anyone across the 13 “states” if Virginia or New York or any state declared itself independent, sovereign, and completely free of all outside obligation and authority
that IS how it functioned until the constitution was adopted -— that Continental Congress could not command anyone to do anything
General Washington could not rely upon the slightest “national” support of the Continental Army -— all that could be done was to request and implore that the various states provide funds, supplies, troops......
of course there was an evolving idea of a potential nation.... but in 1776 there was neither a “government” of those united states of america nor was there hardly anyone who imagined that a “constitution” for such a government already existed
hey, I loudly applaud the “moral authority” and vision exemplified especially by Jefferson, Franklin and the best of their peers
I’m not questioning that by the mid-1770s J&F and a few others were coming to a more distinct idea of “America” and “USA”.... but they were still in a tiny minority (yes a visionary minority) in beginning to regard a nation as anything more than delegated powers of the sovereign states
I don’t hesitate to apply all kinds of great adjectives to describe the historical importance of 1776 and the DofI and all that was happening to transform 13 “colonies” into the beginnings of a nation
but how can there be a “constitution” that almost no one imagined existed at that point?
most of the states were still very jealously protecting their powers and prerogatives, and viewing the Continental Congress as purely an advisory and coordinating body
as mentioned in another post, there was no sense then in which the 2nd Continental Congress could pass a law over anyone.... they spoke, debated, passed resolutions, and a wonderful, famous “declaration” ... but they could not order any state or person to do anything
Has anyone besides me noticed how the Kenyan looks like a lecturing imam when he holds his index finger up while instructing us on his ideas?
As they said back then, either they hang together or they would hang separately so the states really had no choice but to unite for their own survival. But it is a fact there was no true national government until several years later.
You learn these techniques as a child and your use them as an adult ~ pretty much unchanged.
Don't mean nothin'
You learn these techniques as a child and your use them as an adult ~ pretty much unchanged.
Don't mean nothin'
the boy prolly failed lunch... and they whined about Bush's grades
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.