Did the Founders want a LIMITED Federal Government?

[bigrebnc1775]

George Washington.

yell that's what I though you meant.
obama carter wilson FDR Johnson are overrated as presidents.
Thanks to Washington you have the right to critize him

I don't know that Carter is overrated, but you're right about the others. But Jake is absolutely right about George Washington. He was a big government guy. He was a Federalist in all but name only.

I also forgot about Bush 1 and two being overrated.
Washington, was the first President under the Constitution, I may be wrong but I do not think he would have invisioned the government we have now for the government he was trying to build.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

yell that's what I though you meant.
obama carter wilson FDR Johnson are overrated as presidents.
Thanks to Washington you have the right to critize him

I don't know that Carter is overrated, but you're right about the others. But Jake is absolutely right about George Washington. He was a big government guy. He was a Federalist in all but name only.

I also forgot about Bush 1 and two being overrated.
Washington, was the first President under the Constitution, I may be wrong but I do not think he would have invisioned the government we have now for the government he was trying to build.

Probably not, but that doesn't change the fact that he supported big government.

 

[Agit8r]

~ Secretary of the Treasury ~


He proposed, therefore, to pay the nation's debts in full and also to assume the unpaid debts of the various states. He urged this candidly as a means of both diminishing the fiscal importance of the states and cementing the loyalty of wealthy commercial interests to the federal government. With the nation's economy thus buttressed and biased toward commerce, Hamilton proposed that a national bank be established to help the federal government manage the nation's trade and finance. These proposals were accepted by Congress, and the Bank of the United States was chartered in 1791. His recommendations for a broad range of tariffs and bounties to stimulate the growth of manufacturing were not adopted at this time, however.


Hamilton's plans were so comprehensive and so brilliantly useful to commercial expansion that he aroused the opposition of Madison, Jefferson, and others who believed that such a strong government, informally allied as it was with the worldwide trading dominance of Great Britain, would subordinate agriculture and subvert the republican ideals of the American Revolution. Scorning the Jeffersonians as timid and backward-looking, Hamilton, with Washington's continuing support, organized a congressional majority for his policies.


He then took the lead in urging rapprochement with Great Britain, which culminated in Jay's Treaty (1794), and in firmly suppressing the so-called Whiskey Rebellion (1794), which was provoked by his excise taxes. By the time he retired from the Treasury Department in 1795, he had established the administrative and policy foundations of the new government, articulated a philosophy of "loose construction" of the Constitution, and founded, informally, the conservative Federalist Party as the instrument of his intentions.
~ Later Years ~
On leaving the government Hamilton resumed a busy and lucrative law practice. He continued to have a strong influence in the public councils, however. He supported a defiant posture toward France during the XYZ Affair (1798), and as inspector general of the army (1798-1800) he took charge of organizing the nation's defenses. Bitterly disappointed in President John Adam's erratic leadership, Hamilton openly opposed Adams's reelection in 1800. When it appeared, however, that Aaron Burr might win the presidency over Jefferson, Hamilton unhesitatingly threw his support to Jefferson, whose policies he scorned, rather than to Burr, whom he regarded as a man without principles.


This and other opposition by Hamilton so frustrated and angered Burr that he challenged Hamilton to a duel. The two men fought at Weehawken, N.J., on July 11, 1804. Hamilton apparently fired into the air, but Burr took direct aim. Hamilton fell mortally wounded and died the next day in New York. He was buried in Trinity churchyard, New York City. He left his wife and seven children heavily in debt, but friends soon paid off the debts. Hamilton was mourned by his countrymen as one who had devoted his life to the nation's growth in freedom and prosperity

Alexander Hamilton

More flattering than his worth, in my opinion. I must remember to visit his grave. I owe Burr a beer in the next life.

I'm certainly not saying that I agree with Hamilton's political philosophy, but it took real principle to break with Adams, and then to intervene on the behalf of Jefferson over Burr in the election of 1800. he had a strict code of honor... which would eventually cost his life

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I don't know that Carter is overrated, but you're right about the others. But Jake is absolutely right about George Washington. He was a big government guy. He was a Federalist in all but name only.

I also forgot about Bush 1 and two being overrated.
Washington, was the first President under the Constitution, I may be wrong but I do not think he would have invisioned the government we have now for the government he was trying to build.

Probably not, but that doesn't change the fact that he supported big government.

All I am saying is that his vision of big government is not what we have today.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I also forgot about Bush 1 and two being overrated.
Washington, was the first President under the Constitution, I may be wrong but I do not think he would have invisioned the government we have now for the government he was trying to build.

Probably not, but that doesn't change the fact that he supported big government.

All I am saying is that his vision of big government is not what we have today.

All I'm saying is that he was overrated, not that he was the worst President ever. I'd take a George Washington over any of the Presidents you named, for example.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Probably not, but that doesn't change the fact that he supported big government.

All I am saying is that his vision of big government is not what we have today.

All I'm saying is that he was overrated, not that he was the worst President ever. I'd take a George Washington over any of the Presidents you named, for example.

I'd take clinton over any President I named.
The only thing I have against clinton was the assualt weapons ban, and nafta

 

[Intense]

~ Secretary of the Treasury ~


He proposed, therefore, to pay the nation's debts in full and also to assume the unpaid debts of the various states. He urged this candidly as a means of both diminishing the fiscal importance of the states and cementing the loyalty of wealthy commercial interests to the federal government. With the nation's economy thus buttressed and biased toward commerce, Hamilton proposed that a national bank be established to help the federal government manage the nation's trade and finance. These proposals were accepted by Congress, and the Bank of the United States was chartered in 1791. His recommendations for a broad range of tariffs and bounties to stimulate the growth of manufacturing were not adopted at this time, however.


Hamilton's plans were so comprehensive and so brilliantly useful to commercial expansion that he aroused the opposition of Madison, Jefferson, and others who believed that such a strong government, informally allied as it was with the worldwide trading dominance of Great Britain, would subordinate agriculture and subvert the republican ideals of the American Revolution. Scorning the Jeffersonians as timid and backward-looking, Hamilton, with Washington's continuing support, organized a congressional majority for his policies.


He then took the lead in urging rapprochement with Great Britain, which culminated in Jay's Treaty (1794), and in firmly suppressing the so-called Whiskey Rebellion (1794), which was provoked by his excise taxes. By the time he retired from the Treasury Department in 1795, he had established the administrative and policy foundations of the new government, articulated a philosophy of "loose construction" of the Constitution, and founded, informally, the conservative Federalist Party as the instrument of his intentions.
~ Later Years ~
On leaving the government Hamilton resumed a busy and lucrative law practice. He continued to have a strong influence in the public councils, however. He supported a defiant posture toward France during the XYZ Affair (1798), and as inspector general of the army (1798-1800) he took charge of organizing the nation's defenses. Bitterly disappointed in President John Adam's erratic leadership, Hamilton openly opposed Adams's reelection in 1800. When it appeared, however, that Aaron Burr might win the presidency over Jefferson, Hamilton unhesitatingly threw his support to Jefferson, whose policies he scorned, rather than to Burr, whom he regarded as a man without principles.


This and other opposition by Hamilton so frustrated and angered Burr that he challenged Hamilton to a duel. The two men fought at Weehawken, N.J., on July 11, 1804. Hamilton apparently fired into the air, but Burr took direct aim. Hamilton fell mortally wounded and died the next day in New York. He was buried in Trinity churchyard, New York City. He left his wife and seven children heavily in debt, but friends soon paid off the debts. Hamilton was mourned by his countrymen as one who had devoted his life to the nation's growth in freedom and prosperity

Alexander Hamilton

More flattering than his worth, in my opinion. I must remember to visit his grave. I owe Burr a beer in the next life.

I'm certainly not saying that I agree with Hamilton's political philosophy, but it took real principle to break with Adams, and then to intervene on the behalf of Jefferson over Burr in the election of 1800. he had a strict code of honor... which would eventually cost his life

I think he broke with Adam's when he stopped getting his way. The Alien and Sedition Acts, were his style, not Adams.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

All I am saying is that his vision of big government is not what we have today.

All I'm saying is that he was overrated, not that he was the worst President ever. I'd take a George Washington over any of the Presidents you named, for example.

I'd take clinton over any President I named.

I wouldn't bother making a choice. They're all the same.

 

[mattskramer]

Some people such as yourself need to be reminded what the true intent of the founders of this country were.

Why? They intended some things that most people today see as good and some things that people see as bad. I guess that it would make for good story-time reading.



They were leaders that wrote a constitution that has survived since its ratification in 1788. The United States Constitution is the world's longest surviving written charter of government. I think that this is due in large part to its flexibility. Anyway, its survivability does not prove that a higher power was guiding the founders.



I would amend a few of the Amendments for the sake of clarification. For instance, the first amendment says that congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of religion. If my religion prohibits me from supporting a military, am I free from paying taxes?

The second amendment says that the right of people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. What is an "arm"? May I have several fully automatic machine guns and bazookas? May I have a tank? May I have an ICBM if I can afford one?

The second amendment says that the right of people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. What is an "arm"? May I have several fully automatic machine guns and bazookas? May I have a tank? May I have an ICBM if I can afford one

The word arms was used as a military term for firearms

Okay, SO what constitutes a firearm? Is a bazooka a firearm? If so, then am I allowed to bear them?

I would amend a few of the Amendments for the sake of clarification. For instance, the first amendment says that congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of religion. If my religion prohibits me from supporting a military, am I free from paying taxes?

No because you need the service to protect your ass. You are paying for protection. You do not have to serve but you do have to pay for the protection

Hey! That runs contrary to the first amendment. Requiring that I pay taxes runs contrary to my religious belief. Read: Religious Freedom Peace Tax Fund Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

CCW - What do I Believe?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Why? They intended some things that most people today see as good and some things that people see as bad. I guess that it would make for good story-time reading.



They were leaders that wrote a constitution that has survived since its ratification in 1788. The United States Constitution is the world's longest surviving written charter of government. I think that this is due in large part to its flexibility. Anyway, its survivability does not prove that a higher power was guiding the founders.



I would amend a few of the Amendments for the sake of clarification. For instance, the first amendment says that congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of religion. If my religion prohibits me from supporting a military, am I free from paying taxes?

The second amendment says that the right of people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. What is an "arm"? May I have several fully automatic machine guns and bazookas? May I have a tank? May I have an ICBM if I can afford one?

Okay, SO what constitutes a firearm? Is a bazooka a firearm? If so, then am I allowed to bear them?

No because you need the service to protect your ass. You are paying for protection. You do not have to serve but you do have to pay for the protection

Hey! That runs contrary to the first amendment. Requiring that I pay taxes runs contrary to my religious belief. Read: Religious Freedom Peace Tax Fund Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

CCW - What do I Believe?

Okay, SO what constitutes a firearm? Is a bazooka a firearm? If so, then am I allowed to bear them?

The term "to keep and bear arms" means any firearm equal to what the military has, that can be carried by a person.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Why shouldn't law abiding citizens be allowed to have the equal to what the military has? What is the government afraid of?

Hey! That runs contrary to the first amendment. Requiring that I pay taxes runs contrary to my religious belief.

paying taxes on proprety you own is not unconstitutional, paying income taxes is. or at least was until a democrat made it legal

 

[bigrebnc1775]

All I'm saying is that he was overrated, not that he was the worst President ever. I'd take a George Washington over any of the Presidents you named, for example.

I'd take clinton over any President I named.

I wouldn't bother making a choice. They're all the same.

I didn't say they were differant, I just pointed out that I would chose Clinton before I would chose any of the ones I named

 

[JakeStarkey]

No, Little Saul from the Far Right: you have no right to a tank, a frigate, a nuclear bomb, a whatever. No wonder the rest of the world laughs at us when they read stuff such as you write.

You are an active radical reactionary with an agenda. You wish to overthrow the constitutional republic.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

No, Little Saul from the Far Right: you have no right to a tank, a frigate, a nuclear bomb, a whatever. No wonder the rest of the world laughs at us when they read stuff such as you write.

You are an active radical reactionary with an agenda. You wish to overthrow the constitutional republic.

idiot can you carry a tank? a frigate? a nuclear bomb?

OH so now you call it a constitutional republic? I see you listen to me.

 

[Intense]

No, Little Saul from the Far Right: you have no right to a tank, a frigate, a nuclear bomb, a whatever. No wonder the rest of the world laughs at us when they read stuff such as you write.

You are an active radical reactionary with an agenda. You wish to overthrow the constitutional republic.

Liberty is not about what you can censor or what image is presented to a world with more problems than it knows what to do with. the World is not our role model Jake.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

A fire Arm is defined as a personal weapon as in regards to what the military classifies them. A pistol, A rifle, a shotgun. Full automatic weapons are classified by the military as fire team or squad weapons. Machine guns are crew served weapons. Bazookas are support weapons. Tanks are crew served vehicles. Rocket launchers are support weapons.

The 1939 ruling of the Supreme Court defines that in order for a weapon to be protected by the Second Amendment it must be useful and usable by the military.

In all but 13 States fully automatic weapons CAN be owned. All that is required is a Federal License for each individual weapon.

The so called Assault Weapon ban, was illegal. For one there is no such thing as an assault weapon. For another those weapons classified as Assault weapons were in fact protected by the 1939 ruling.

For the slow, stupid and ignorant, personal weapons are all that is protected by the 2nd Amendment. As codified in law and Court rulings. That would be hand guns, rifles and shotguns.

 

[The T]

No, Little Saul from the Far Right: you have no right to a tank, a frigate, a nuclear bomb, a whatever. No wonder the rest of the world laughs at us when they read stuff such as you write.

You are an active radical reactionary with an agenda. You wish to overthrow the constitutional republic.

Liberty is not about what you can censor or what image is presented to a world with more problems than it knows what to do with. the World is not our role model Jake.

Jake would do well to study American Exceptionalism...the real definition...not the redacted version that Obama has handed to us.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yS4yf723kmY&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

BIG GOVERNMENT: Opposing Obama's Blueprint

 

[Agit8r]

If Reagan had been informed in our founding principles, HE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN A MODERN "CONSERVATIVE"

 

[The T]

If Reagan had been informed in our founding principles, HE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN A MODERN "CONSERVATIVE"

Didn't listen to what he said...did you?

You would do well to heed the lesson as well.

 

[Agit8r]

If Reagan had been informed in our founding principles, HE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN A MODERN "CONSERVATIVE"

Didn't listen to what he said...did you?

You would do well to heed the lesson as well.

yes. i did. You haven't read the founding father quotes thread, have you?

 

[The T]

If Reagan had been informed in our founding principles, HE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN A MODERN "CONSERVATIVE"

Didn't listen to what he said...did you?

You would do well to heed the lesson as well.

yes. i did. You haven't read the founding father quotes thread, have you?

Nope and and why should I? I steered clear of it.