OK. Fair enough. Billthedrill and I had an e-mail exchange in which he suggested that people agree with the Anti-Federalist writer and don’t see a need to comment or contest his stance.
I’ve read everything with interest.
I’ve only commented when I thought I had a slightly different take on what you and Bill have put together.
It’s been a very informative series so far and deeply appreciated.
What’s been missing from most discussions about the Constitution is historical context.
You and Bill are doing a great job supplying context in this series.
At 71, he points out that the able administration of government is the key and that everything will not automatically turn rosy once the Constitution is ratified and the new government inaugurated. That he was right is incontrovertible, but why? How do form and function intersect here?
Government had to be implemented after the design was approved. Implementation rarely goes exactly as planned.