To: Paige
I've studied them both. Hamilton and Madison conspired in the early days. They had a big meeting in MA, I forget the name of it. They worked together to line up support and secretly draft plans for their new consolidated government, and seized the moment in Philly to instigate it.
In some ways Madison comes off worse than Hamilton. At least Hamilton was big gov all the way and no doubt about it. Madison helped create the monster, then scurried around trying to undo what he'd just done, apparantly caught flatfooted by the very things the antifeds had warned about and Madison as Publius had mocked--implied powers, unaccountable judiciary, etc.
61 posted on
05/23/2010 1:40:09 PM PDT by
Huck
(Q: How can you tell a party is in the majority? A: They're complaining about the fillibuster.)
To: Huck; Cheburashka
Why is it that no one, not Henry, not Yates, ever offered specific corrections to The Articles of Confederation?
What would you have done?
62 posted on
05/23/2010 2:12:35 PM PDT by
Jacquerie
(Islam is a barbaric social and political system in religious drag.)
To: Huck
Sorry, I totally disagree with you about Madison. Madison knew we needed a strong central government. Hamilton wanted a government much like England. Hamilton wanted us to have a “KING”. Madison studied hundreds of different philosophies and governments in order to put together a totally different type of government, which gave us a Constitutional republic.
That is as far as I'll go, I get paid to lecture about this... but the gist of this is - Madison was nothing like Hamilton and if you think so then you truly have not researched and read about these two men.
65 posted on
05/23/2010 6:10:47 PM PDT by
Paige
("All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing," Edmund Burke)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson