1 posted on
03/15/2010 8:36:16 AM PDT by
Publius
To: 14themunny; 21stCenturion; 300magnum; A Strict Constructionist; abigail2; AdvisorB; Aggie Mama; ...
Ping! The thread has been posted.
Earlier threads:
FReeper Book Club: The Debate over the Constitution
5 Oct 1787, Centinel #1
6 Oct 1787, James Wilson’s Speech at the State House
8 Oct 1787, Federal Farmer #1
9 Oct 1787, Federal Farmer #2
18 Oct 1787, Brutus #1
22 Oct 1787, John DeWitt #1
27 Oct 1787, John DeWitt #2
27 Oct 1787, Federalist #1
31 Oct 1787, Federalist #2
3 Nov 1787, Federalist #3
5 Nov 1787, John DeWitt #3
2 posted on
03/15/2010 8:38:08 AM PDT by
Publius
(The prudent man sees the evil and hides himself; the simple pass on and are punished.)
To: Publius
Well
obviously John Jay was a warmongering Neo-Con RINO!
/JUST kidding
3 posted on
03/15/2010 8:43:33 AM PDT by
Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus
(We bury Democrats face down so that when they scratch, they get closer to home.)
To: Publius
Hello Friend. Just received a very good read from a friend at work last Friday. If you want options, I strongly encourage you to read “The Grey Book.” It is a well written plan for an alternative to the corrupt gang ruling from DC.
5 posted on
03/15/2010 9:18:31 AM PDT by
Neoliberalnot
((Freedom's Precious Metals: Gold, Silver and Lead))
To: Publius
The Federalist controversy happened when American States were in charge of the Federal government.. and how much power the federal government had and retained was an issue.. on a number of issues..
The current situation is the federal government has all the power and the States have become mere provinces like in Canada.. mere vassals.. The States now serve the federal government not the other way around...
The political poles are those that want the (1)federal government to have even more power and the States LESS, and those that want the (2)States to have more power and the federal government LESS....
This dichotomy is NOT championed well.. These issues are clouded in reams of mush mouth and verbiage.. Its quite simple really.. We need some word butchers that can get down to the bone.. and trim the fat..
BUT; we would need some people that even know that this is the problem first..
Then it would fairly easy to butcher those mired in the quicksand of words..
6 posted on
03/15/2010 9:26:16 AM PDT by
hosepipe
(This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole....)
To: Publius
Funny, we didn’t need consolidation to beat the Brits. And of course, we already WERE the United States before the constitution.
7 posted on
03/15/2010 9:28:48 AM PDT by
Huck
(Q: How can you tell a party is in the majority? A: They're complaining about the fillibuster.)
To: EdReform
17 posted on
03/15/2010 11:13:50 AM PDT by
EdReform
(Oath Keepers - Guardians of the Republic - Honor your oath - Join us: www.oathkeepers.org)
To: Publius
Jay was an experienced diplomat who saw the danger of remaining an association of thirteen petty states. The foreign policies of the European powers was one of containment of the little, suspicious, American nations.
Jay clearly explains that to remain a loose and weak association was to invite more war.
The first duty of government is protect its citizens, a task the Articles were incapable of.
21 posted on
03/15/2010 12:29:53 PM PDT by
Jacquerie
(It is only in the context of Natural Law that our Declaration & Constitution form a coherent whole)
To: Publius
24 posted on
03/16/2010 4:38:06 PM PDT by
TASMANIANRED
(Liberals are educated above their level of intelligence.. Thanks Sr. Angelica)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson