Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Tau Food; achilles2000; rockrr; Sherman Logan
Tau Food to achilles2000: "Here we have three members of our Founding generation (Washington, Jefferson and Hamilton) struggling and wrestling with an issue of Constitution interpretation and you feel comfortable in finding that the answer adopted by President Washington and Secretary Hamilton was just obviously wrong.
You must at times wonder how Washington, Hamilton and others could have become so confused about the one and only true and correct interpretation of the Constitution that you have so readily discovered.
How could they have completely missed the answer that you think is so obvious? "

In fact, there is solid proof that our Founders knew exactly what they were doing constitutionally, on this issue and others.
The proof is that where they determined a need for Constitutional Amendments, they went ahead and passed them -- the 11th & 12th Amendments were adopted in the 1790s.
That demonstrates beyond all reasonable doubt where our Founders believed they needed Amendments, and where simple laws passed by Congress, signed by the President, were adequate constitutionally.

353 posted on 06/17/2014 2:45:27 PM PDT by BroJoeK (a little historical perspective...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies ]


To: BroJoeK

This discussion has descended into silliness. You and others have a fifth grade emotional attachment to certain figures you treat as demigods. The Federalists clearly didn’t like the compromise they were forced into in the Constitution and set about trying to get the powers they wanted by going around the Constitution. Hamilton was very aggressive in this and was supported by mercantilist interests.

Go ahead and claim that the Alien & Sedition Act was Constitutional, or that the “necessary and proper” clause allows the government to do anything it deems “necessary and proper” (in which case we can dispense with the rest of the Constitution), that the power to “coin money” means printing up fiat money, or that Article 1, Section 9, Clause 4 means the federal government can levy an income tax directly on citizens, or any other nonsense you like. Even if Washington, Hamilton, Madison, and Jefferson swore on a stack of Bibles that those things are true, they would still be unconstitutional. Your assumption that leaders engaging in acts of realpolitik actually tell us what the Constitution says is either nothing other than a modified version of the doctrine of the Royal Perogative, over which Charles I lost his head, or some mystic vision of Hamilton and others as oracles. The purpose of the Constitution was to have a written document that objectively defined the limited powers of the federal government. It wasn’t some mystical text that required Delphic oracles to proclaim the meaning, and the Federalists were not empowered to declare as law that the Constitution means “up” when it says “down”.

The progressives own you, and you don’t even know it.


361 posted on 06/17/2014 6:16:51 PM PDT by achilles2000 ("I'll agree to save the whales as long as we can deport the liberals")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 353 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson