WTF? Someone who doesn't know what that means? Have we found a Unicorn... or a Dodo?
Seriously, someone who didn't just miss texting they missed IM too... ? What cave or backwoods shack has he been living in?
Good lord toolsmith drop some of the internet sources you post and review pmconusa's posts.
You will find just how stupid you are and how much you do not know.
He is not any of those things .
He is the " Prophet" the master of certainty and has gotten his vast knowledge from a spare mason jar taken from Funk and Wagnels
"The simple theory was that "laws constrain men; the Constitution constrains government."
"The founding premise was as I cited in basic terms. The reality that it has not been lived up to is beside the point as to that assertion."
When the original Constitution was written, it was designed as a mutual defense pact whose provisions applied to the States as entities and to the four possible violations that could be perpetrated on the States as a whole; war was the primary one followed by treason, piracy and counterfeiting of the means of exchange. Only when this original agreement was amended by the Bill of Rights (the first ten amendments) did it have the potential to become a Constitution of governance of the people, making the state constitutions redundant. Some thought the amendments unnecessary and actually fought against their inclusion because they were already incorporated in the constitutions of the several states, particularly Virginia whose representatives at the Constitutional Convention actually wrote the document. Madison, in an attempt to restrain the proponents of a national repetition of the state provisions penned the ninth and tenth. These were intended to prevent the federal authority from becoming a government of the people of the States, as opposed to the States themselves. Madison himself said it best:
James Madison: Federalist 51
"The great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others. The provision for DEFENSE must in this, as in all other cases, be made commensurate to the danger of attack. Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place. It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.
You will note I have highlighted the word defense. The original Constitution was designed not as a framework for governance, but as a contract for the protection of the States. I have noted in past posts, the prohibitions in the Constitution. These were acknowledged by Chief Justice John Marshall in McCulloch vs. Maryland in 1819. Like you have, he added the caveat “If a certain means to carry into effect of any of the powers expressly given by the Constitution to the Government of the Union be an appropriate measure, not prohibited by the Constitution, the degree of its necessity is a question of legislative discretion, not of judicial cognizance”. Just as Alexander Hamilton got Washington to sign the National Banking Act, the end justifies the means.
Everything I quoted you as saying is true. But in order to make your second point true you had to add the caveat “as to that assertion”. If you remove it you have “The reality that it has not been lived up to is beside the point”. That is not true.
The problem is it is the point and it has been what I have been stating over and over again in my posts. Every single problem we face as a society can be traced back to either action or inaction by a government run amok with power or impotence. I am still waiting for you to prove that is not true. Your continued personal attacks on the messenger have not altered the truth and I am continually reinforced to spout them because every one of your personal attacks has not altered them.
I just didn't bother !
OMFG. He probably doesn't get that one either....I don't believe it appears in any Federalist papers.
The Federalist Papers were not about the deliberations before the signing ,but were in fact
produced to explain what they had done in Philadelphia.This was necessary because the participants
original purpose was supposedly to fix the articles of confederation! They all ended up signing the constitution presented for ratification.
Correction there was one who didn't sign.
Correction #2 there were a few who didn't sign.
Delegates to the Constitutional Convention were sworn to secrecy with regard to the deliberation. Therefore they did not inform the public what they were doing and did not consult with the people who sent them. If they had not done this I suspect they would still be trying to draft it today. They came to that result only by agreeing to defer including a Bill of Rights until after they had finally agreed to the compromise document that they presented to the States on a take it or leave it basis. They breached their original charter to fix the Articles of Confederation that was a mutual defense pact. The main reason the pact was a failure, you guessed it, how to equitably pay for it. It was not resolved by the Constitution as the tax system that was incorporated into the Constitution was unfair to the slave States even after they had agreed to exchange increased representation in the House. It was ultimately the cause for their secession and resulting retaliation by the North and a Civil War.
The Federalists Papers were written as sales brochures to encourage the people to pressure their legislatures to ratify the document. They were written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay. John Jay was not a delegate to the Convention and James Madison was the primary author of the Constitution.
Three delegates to the Convention did not sign in agreement. They were George Mason of Virginia, Edmund Randolph, also of Virginia and later the first Attorney General and who pleaded, along with Thomas Jefferson that Washington not sign Hamilton's National Bank Act as being unconstitutional and Eldridge Gerry of Massachusetts. A fourth, John Dickenson of Delaware did not sign because he was ill and gave his proxy to George Read a fellow delegate from Delaware.
Gees, no wonder no one believes anything you say. You can't even get your history right.
Toolsmith: Twitterese is a language that has evolved among today's youth because they are not learning proper English either in the home or in the schools. It is proof positive that our mandated public education system is a total failure and certainly never worth the money being thrown at it. Since I prefer to communicate in English in both conversation and the written word I have very little contact with those who speak Twitterese and am unaware of a written dictionary that incorporates the several that have been used in this post. There is such a dictionary but when I requested a definition came up blank. I believe the reason is the same used by the OED or Webster to not include certain vulgar words in an attempt to exclude them from the lexicon.
It is unfortunate that soon, lack of what this shorthand means will make those of us who prefer English and have no children, illiterate in the modern world.
Ok I got the number of non signers wrong.Me bad!
But you just said in your true fashion what I said in first part of my comment.
Which I finish with the required :
Please list those who do not believe me on AMG.
You stay that as a fact so provide the specifics .
Captain Insufferable is really spun up now.
Too bad that with all his classic "literacy," he hasn't gone beyond understanding what HE says to being able to discern what OTHERS say. His tortured distortion of my very simple declaration about "the theory" reveals a compulsion to twist and bend and unscrew and tie in knots his own language to avoid the very slightest hint of being off base in his comments.
As I've said, whether you believe me or not, is it's no wonder he hasn't sold a book when he writes so condescendingly and otherwise puts on airs that go out of their way to alienate anyone open to his offerings.
But then he has the tablets, and isn't about to give them up.
WTF is much older that twitter, or even texting... it was used extensively in IM (instant messaging) and on various bulletin boards, email traffic, and computer forums even in the 1980s. Like its cousins FUBAR and SNAFU (which date back to at least WWII) it is used to avoid using the actual F-bomb. The F-bomb itself dates to the early 1800s in London... you can thank the London Bobbys for inventing it.
Toolsmith: I believe the origin of the f...word stems from the German family of Hans Fugger who was purported to be the richest man in the world during the 1400s. He cornered the silver market and was instrumental in the development of the capitalist model. It is easy to imagine those whom he bested in finance to consider they had been Fuggered.
The book “The Richest Man Who Ever Lived,” by Greg Steinmetz’s is an interesting read not only for insight into the Fugger family but Steinmetz's references to the corruption in the Catholic church at this time and the rise of Martin Luther.
Bruce: In your post #40 you ask me to name those I alluded to. I am one of them. The remainder are those who now know the truth and choose to remain anonymous or face the same diatribes you impose on me. I respect their decision and believe I have weathered the diatribes quite well since you have yet to prove me false.
Believe me ,it has nothing to do with truth except, the only truth we have attempted to convey to you is your
arrogant, obnoxious ,condescending attitude towards everyone. Going back to beginning we attempted to convey this to you.
You have failed to act on well intentioned comments so you get what you so rightly deserve IMO.
P.S. by the way those who you allege to know the truth ,do not remain silent in fear of any diatribe,it is the uselessness of attempting to tell you anything.
May you live at least a short time longer and enjoy a can of Alpo everyday.
Bruce should have begun his post with the always cordial "if you don't believe me......"
My friend ,you are correct that was a lapse on my part .
Although I did edit my post a bit.
My attitude toward everyone is the same as that to myself; we are all ignorant until knowledge is revealed to us. What I have conveyed in my posts is knowledge I have gleaned either through experience or analysis of the world around me. If people already know what I post they gain no benefit from what I say but experience has shown by the number of posts, other than yours and a few others, is I have knowledge they may not have and have an interest in learning.
You and your friends, on the other hand, do not want to learn, because you already know everything you believe you need to know and benefit from the life your politicians have made possible. Yes, our politicians control the supply of nature's wealth that makes possible not only our lives, but our lifestyle. They do this through the tax code that allows some to retain more than others and others to get enough through the national dole and others to get nothing.
I have already admitted that the knowledge of what and how our politicians have done this cannot and has not been reversed in the past because they have contrived a system that is almost impossible to overturn. When it has and is being accomplished in other countries of the world the winners simply employ the same economic system and the process of decay starts all over again.
We are the last society on the planet who can reverse this cycle because we are one of the very few who produce a surplus of human fuel. But, as I have warned, our time is running out and the time when food prices will skyrocket can actually be calculated based on the continued increase in our population and the decrease in production of the basic food staples. Like your friend Mel refers to the Brunswick Times Record as having their head in the sand, you both have your heads in the sand. When you hear the train whistle it is time to get off the tracks.
By the way, none of the adjectives you cite can apply to educators. You have never challenged the facts I have cited because you can't. The lies you believe must remain unexposed to hide your ignorance of reality so the best you can do is berate the messenger since you can't dispute the message. I guess I am fortunate in that in the old days they used to shoot the messenger for things they didn't want their subjects to hear.
Thank you pmconusa.
If we believe in the founding documents, which is to say that we agree that we are endowed by our Creator with unalienable rights, then we should understand that there is no Shadowy Hand that may certainly control us apart from what is ordained by that Creator. What is left to us is to decide what we personally believe, and not to just believe in anything, because it is made clear in the book left to us by that Creator that there is only one way and truth and life (John 14:6).
Then it is left us to obey by loving each other right where we live, and love is defined as actively seeking another's higher good. In seeking other's higher good, we also may act from time to time to prevent any human from controlling or seeking to control another's destiny apart from pointing them towards and admonishing them to seek and follow that Creator. This is the basis of our founding documents, and I believe why Jefferson pledged eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. Political correctness has infested almost everything, the most recent effect of which we have seen in the regressive and human-nature denying PROMISE program as it was implemented in the schools of Broward county, which is directly responsible for the neglect of clear warnings that a young man was moving toward a destructive act.
The denial of personal responsibility and abandonment of the development of character is not only aiding those who would be called by many political names, but it is the scheme of an unseen force, and not a human one. Those of us who claim the Constitution would also do well to review and renew our beliefs, for that is where the true battle lies.
Knucklehead: What I have been claiming all along is that we are not governed by an unseen force but by a government who we have given the power to distribute nature's wealth unequally through the tax system. If we were governed by the laws of your creator this would not be the case and we would not be experiencing the societal problems we face today. Madison so aptly said that if all men were angels we would not need government but, if we are to have a government of men they must first govern themselves. It is the later in which our government has failed because they have been corrupted by those who put them in power.
Well said, and I agree. However, I think we should not stop at identifying a government out of control (Income Tax, Depression Era "reforms", intentional erosion of liberties through the Gun Control Act, Immigration "Reform" Act,, many of the ways civil rights laws have been enacted, and Federal legislation by feeling and not thinking). If we do that, then we may waste our efforts trying to fix a system when the problem is not the system, but us. I think we need to think about the roots of corruption, and that is corrupt individual heart and minds.
Knucklehead: It is the system that causes the problems we face by the very fact that government is the decider of who gets how much of what through the tax system. It is said that money is the root of all evil. All too true. Adam and Eve were guilty of theft of God's property and when he laid down the law to Moses it mostly had to do with theft. The native Americans did not use money until the arrival of those dastardly English landed in the 1600s. Under God's law usury was forbidden because it was a disguised form of stealing. Today, the banks and other lenders employ it legally. Labor unions steal from their employers through extortion. Management steals the profits of business owners through a means we can only call embezzlement. There are so many benefiting from this system that it has never been abandoned but only reemployed by the winners when governments are overthrown.
As I have pointed out in my books, this recycling can only go one so long as a country begins to consume all of the real backing of money that is being produced. You cannot eat gold. Even those with money know this is coming and are selling their gold in exchange for the paper they used to buy it. When the government fails or is overturned the currency will be revalued and exchanged on some basis of one for some other number greater than one. Those holding gold will get nothing.
The U. S. government is bankrupt under every definition of the term. It can declare it but cannot escape a repeat until the economic system is changed. The problem is that the dollar is the world's currency for trade and when the dollar goes down, so will every other currency pegged to the dollar.