So now you're going to argue that case law should be made on the basis of debate that we have no record of...
Dude, let's tally up the box score. You have argued:
1. Words and sentences mean what you wish them to mean. A typical post-modernist argument.
2. We should use, in the effort to determine legislative intent, nonexistent debates that you wish to have taken place.
Are you claiming to have read all of them? Maybe you would like to link me to your sources and i'll be glad to review.
Ah, yes: another "if it isn't on the Internet, it doesn't exist" constitutional scholar. Go to a library and look up the dead tree journals of various state legislatures.
To the contrary. YOU'RE the one who brought it up as if it would affect the argument, lol.
Dude, let's tally up the box score.
Yes, LET'S!
You have argued: 1. Words and sentences mean what you wish them to mean. A typical post-modernist argument.
straw man fallacy...and psychological projection.
2. We should use, in the effort to determine legislative intent, nonexistent debates that you wish to have taken place.
another straw man argument. YOU brought that puppy up. so it was YOU who are guilty of your own charge. I responded to it.
Ah, yes: another "if it isn't on the Internet, it doesn't exist" constitutional scholar.
You really like that straw man fallacy. it's also a ed herring. You never answered my questions. Are you claiming to have read them all? Do you have some links to which i might review what you are maintaining?
Pooh, even some book titles that go into that subject re the legislatures would be cool? that was not a slam on you. i was really serious if you had some particular publications in mind that helped you form your opinion.