"...thought of your approach..."
"...you are asking for, a hundred thousand page manual of explicit orders down to the last degree..."
From my posts: "Can those currently in positions of leadership be expected to openly come out with such clarity if the Founders themselves were reluctant to clearly word the Amendment as follows:" (What followed is omitted for this post)
I have not claimed as mine any "approach" nor have I asked for "orders". I questioned whether current leadership can be expected to clearly state something when the Founders were reluctant to do so. I offered one example of what was not written because "the Founders themselves were reluctant" to do so. While I did not go into the reasons for that reluctance as you did, I did acknowledge it.
Whether or not "...those currently in positions of leadership (can) be expected to openly come out with such clarity if the Founders themselves were reluctant to..." has still not been addressed.
Nowadays politicians do not have the requisite body parts to speak clearly lest they offend one side or the other of any issue.
What you think was unexpressed or not expressed clearly by the Founders was, at the time, not necessary to express. That’s why the Federalist’s opposed the Bill of Rights. Why tell the feds that they don’t have the power to do something that they were not given the power to do.
They wasn’t a reluctance to be clear. There was an understanding of what the words meant before lawyers got their hooks into them. Think about it — there were few or no challenges to our 2A rights in the 50 some years after the Constitution but the further away we got and the more the words ‘evolved’ and new meanings were attached to them is when the challenges proliferated.