REPOST: How Tyranny Came to America [re: Constitutionalism 101]

Constitution Party / www.constitutionparty.org ^ | 2000 | Joseph Sobran

[petitfour]

Thanks for the heads-up! I'll read it when I get the chance.

[Southack]

"Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated." --Thomas Jefferson

"Looks like somebody agrees with my interpretation after all, huh?" - Sofa King

Who would disagree with Jefferson's point in the first place? Congress has the power to tax and spend, and Congressional power is checked and balanced by the Judicial and Executive branches, hardly an "unlimited" mandate.

[Southack]

"in the alternative of meaning nothing or meaning everything, had the former meaning taken for granted." - James Madison

Contrary to popular Libertarian sentiment, the American Republic was never a dictatorship run by Madison. Instead, Madison was merely *one* minority vote among numerous Founding Fathers.

Moreover, the "alternative" is not between "everything" or "nothing", but rather somewhat less stark than that, as countless court cases over the last 2 centuries reveal.

[gorush]

...then why waste ink enumerating limited duties when your (misguided) interpretation of "general welfare" allows the feds to do whatever they deem beneficial at any time?

re: your point that Madison was just one of many with his own opinion...an honest reading of the Federalist papers, not to mention the quote offered from Jefferson, shows that Madison's view was indeed the majority position.

[Southack]

"Apparently he's deluded into thinking socialism is somehow a more 'Christian' and 'humane' form of government."

Although I strongly believe that you've fingered precisely the wrong person between the two of us as being "deluded", I 'll give you one chance to substantiate your claim above; as in, just precisely *how* is it apparent that I think socialism is more Christian and humane.

I'll be waiting...

[Southack]

"re: your point that Madison was just one of many with his own opinion...an honest reading of the Federalist papers, not to mention the quote offered from Jefferson, shows that Madison's view was indeed the majority position."

That's pure rubbish.

The Federalist Papers weren't even *written* by a majority of the Founders, and they certainly weren't ever voted into any legislation (a process that involves careful political compromises and a majority vote), so there is NO LEGITIMATE WAY that you can claim that such non-statute sources represent actual law (or even majority opinion, for that matter).

[gorush]

When logic and truth are not effective, it is time to stop debating.

[Southack]

"When logic and truth are not effective, it is time to stop debating."

From your posts so far, that's hardly stopped you yet.

[Sofa King]

"Who would disagree with Jefferson's point in the first place? Congress has the power to tax and spend, and Congressional power is checked and balanced by the Judicial and Executive branches, hardly an "unlimited" mandate."

Let's see, um, YOU?

"Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated." --Thomas Jefferson

That's EXACTLY what I was saying, and you were disagreeing.

[Southack]

"Who would disagree with Jefferson's point in the first place? Congress has the power to tax and spend, and Congressional power is checked and balanced by the Judicial and Executive branches, hardly an "unlimited" mandate." - Southack

"Let's see, um, YOU?" - Sofa King

Cite the post # in which I disagreed, as you claim, with Jefferson, or else admit that you are wrong.

[Sofa King]

Wow. You really are stupid. You honestly think that we've all just forgotten about post #50, don't you?

[Southack]

I'm not disagreeing with Jefferson in Post #50, but rather, asking you to explain your own rantings.

[Sofa King]

Your own words, after I expressed the exact same sentiment as Jefferson- "No, I don't buy your above explanation"

Why don't you just admit that you're wrong? You're denying your own words despite the fact that they're right there in glorious HTML for everyone to see. That means you've lost, and the only one here who can't see it is you.

[Southack]

"Your own words, after I expressed the exact same sentiment as Jefferson- "No, I don't buy your above explanation"

Ah, but you didn't express Jefferson's sentiment that Congressional powers merely aren't unlimited, nor did I disagree with that sentiment.

In fact, an *honest* reading of every post on this thread will reveal that I already pointed out that Congress couldn't legislate control over gambling, for instance.

What I disagreed with was your assertation that you could throw parts of our Constitution completely away, as if such parts were merely redundant.

[Sofa King]

From the very same post you were disagreeing with-

"..the enumerated power here is the ability to tax, not the power to care for the general welfare of the nation. In other words, the government uses it's enumerated powers to work for the general welfare of the nation- and pays for it with the taxes collected as allowed for by this clause."

What exactly about that quote shows that I'm in favor of unlimited federal powers?

[Southack]

What ridiculous strawman argument are you throwing around now? Did you not understand my words above, or have you simply dropped down into the lower levels of whatever responses you've got left? What's next, personal insults, feigned boredom, or rationalizations for fleeing this thread?!

[Sofa King]

You are truly sad. I understand you words above quite well, which is exactly why I am not letting you convince me that you were actually taking the opposite stance than you really were earlier. What's your next retort, "Well that depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is?

[Southack]

"What's next, personal insults, feigned boredom, or rationalizations for fleeing this thread?!" - Southack

"You are truly sad." - Sofa King

As predicted...

[Sofa King]

It's a simple fact.

[Southack]

"It's a simple fact."

No, it's merely a simple diversion from your failed argument (e.g. your wild-eyed claim that I contradicted/disagreed with Jefferson, even though I posted a specific *limit* on Congressional power that can only *agree* with Jefferson's point about Congression powers not being unlimited).