James Madison Vetos The Bonus Bill!

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Oct 6, 2008
124,898
60,271
2,300
Brooklyn, NY
Madison Vetos the Bonus Bill!

1.On this day March 3, 1817 President James Madison, who believed that the Constitution should be strictly interpreted, as demonstrated in his veto of John Calhoun’s “Bonus Bill” that would have used federal funds to help build a “perfect of roads and canals” for the nation.

Madison believed “the permanent success o the Constitution depends on a definite partition of powers between the General and State Governments” and that he could find no provision in the Constitution that called on the federal government to build roads and canals. The idea of funneling federal funds to specific local projects originally came from Congressman John C. Calhoun, who wanted to use the earnings bonus from the Second Bank of the United States in this manner.

2. It is of more than passing interesting that Progressives view of government is of the contrary: powers must be centralized in an executive, and the bureaucrats that invest this type of government. “…the agencies comprising the bureaucracy reside within the executive branch of our national government, but their powers transcend the traditional boundaries of executive power to include both legislative and judicial functions, and these powers are often exercised in a manner that is largely independent of presidential control and altogether independent of political control.” The Birth of the Administrative State: Where It Came From and What It Means for Limited Government

3. . Woodrow Wilson essay “Socialism and Democracy:” ‘Limitations of public authority must be put aside; the state may cross that boundary at will.’The collective is not limited by individual rights. Progressives like Woodrow Wilson detested the separation, as it stood in the way of the Progressive agenda.

a. Woodrow Wilson essay “What is Progress?” Critique of the Constitution. “Government is a living thing, Darwinian, not Newtonian.” Wilson states that the Founders constructed a machine, one that moved ‘by virtue of the efficiency of checks and balances. It is accountable to Darwin, not to Newton. It is modified by its environment, necessitated by its tasks, shaped to its functions by the sheer pressure of life. No living thing can have its organs offset against each other, as checks, and live.’

b. Separation of powers should be discarded.



America stands at a crossroads today. Will it be James Madison, or Woodrow Wilson that we follow?
 
Nope I am saying that the American people for the most part do not learn anything at all from history.
 
Nope I am saying that the American people for the most part do not learn anything at all from history.

Well, it appears we have learned nothing from 1930s America when communism was viewed quite favorably. Fortunately, we are not so stupid now.

LMAO.
Good one :clap2:

this thread needs to be moved to the humor fourm.

What about that rally in Feb 1939? In Madison Square Gardens. Did that not happen? No 20,000 people rallying in support of totalitarianism in the US?
 
Well, it appears we have learned nothing from 1930s America when communism was viewed quite favorably. Fortunately, we are not so stupid now.

LMAO.
Good one :clap2:

this thread needs to be moved to the humor fourm.

What about that rally in Feb 1939? In Madison Square Gardens. Did that not happen? No 20,000 people rallying in support of totalitarianism in the US?

That was even before Bush. Who cares?
 
LMAO.
Good one :clap2:

this thread needs to be moved to the humor fourm.

What about that rally in Feb 1939? In Madison Square Gardens. Did that not happen? No 20,000 people rallying in support of totalitarianism in the US?

That was even before Bush. Who cares?

Those who do not learn from history are destined to repeat it. That's why intelligent people care.

But.... here is a little saying more appropriate for you..... It is better to say nothing and be thought a fool, than open your mouth and confirm it.
 
Nope I am saying that the American people for the most part do not learn anything at all from history.

Well, it appears we have learned nothing from 1930s America when communism was viewed quite favorably. Fortunately, we are not so stupid now.

My good friend USC seems unaware of this recent history:

” In the early days of the New Deal, Paul Appleby, then an Agriculture Department official* and a pundit among public administrators, said: "A man in the employ of the Government had just as much right to be a member of the Communist Party as he has to be a member of the Democratic or Republican Party." This attitude, modified and veiled, still persists.

Executive Order 10450, issued by the President on April 27, 1953, establishing broad new security standards for federal employment. Critics say that Ten-Four-Fifty results in a cold reign of terror among Government workers, that no man is safe from his neighbor's malice. Defenders say that Order 10450 is necessary to protect the U.S. from the infiltration of its Government by enemies.
EXECUTIVE Order 10450 requires that the hiring and continued employment of federal workers must, in the judgment of department and agency heads, be "clearly consistent" with the interests of national security. The order recognizes that an employee may be loyal, yet still be a security risk. ... The person with relatives behind the Iron Curtain may be exposed to overwhelming pressures. The alcoholic may unintentionally blab secrets.
But the system does not—and cannot—adhere strictly to judicial principles, with the "defendant" presumed innocent until proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. For guilt in the legal sense is not involved. The idea is not to wait until the drunken employee gives away an important secret; it is to get rid of him beforehand. “
Read more: National Affairs: THE MEANING OF SECURITY - TIME
 
Well, it appears we have learned nothing from 1930s America when communism was viewed quite favorably. Fortunately, we are not so stupid now.

LMAO.
Good one :clap2:

this thread needs to be moved to the humor fourm.

What about that rally in Feb 1939? In Madison Square Gardens. Did that not happen? No 20,000 people rallying in support of totalitarianism in the US?

Let's not forget that Henry Wallace, VP to Roosevelt, was almost the President. He ran on the pro-Soviet Progressive Party ticket, and got a million votes.
 
Well, it appears we have learned nothing from 1930s America when communism was viewed quite favorably. Fortunately, we are not so stupid now.

LMAO.
Good one :clap2:

this thread needs to be moved to the humor fourm.

What about that rally in Feb 1939? In Madison Square Gardens. Did that not happen? No 20,000 people rallying in support of totalitarianism in the US?

What of the KKK rally in DC in '28? At one time the KKK had over 4 million members in the US. And then there was the Bund.
 
I am amazed at how some can recall madison, etc and not remember Bush II.

If you are referring to the OP, President Bush has no place in this argument.

I cannot see any way that your attempt to bring in same is other than an admission that you have no purchase against the well-proportioned argument the OP presents.
 
I am amazed at how some can recall madison, etc and not remember Bush II.

If you are referring to the OP, President Bush has no place in this argument.

I cannot see any way that your attempt to bring in same is other than an admission that you have no purchase against the well-proportioned argument the OP presents.

Ohh I am OT on this, it does not refer to this thread per sie, but to all threads and right wing posters.
 
I am amazed at how some can recall madison, etc and not remember Bush II.

If you are referring to the OP, President Bush has no place in this argument.

I cannot see any way that your attempt to bring in same is other than an admission that you have no purchase against the well-proportioned argument the OP presents.

Ohh I am OT on this, it does not refer to this thread per sie, but to all threads and right wing posters.

Well, then, I may be able to rope you into this one...

Are you disagreeing with the sotto voce that favoring the Constitution is right wing, and that Woodrow Wilson's comment re: the Constitution "could be stripped off and thrown aside like a garment,"is left wing?
 
Well, it appears we have learned nothing from 1930s America when communism was viewed quite favorably. Fortunately, we are not so stupid now.

LMAO.
Good one :clap2:

this thread needs to be moved to the humor fourm.

What about that rally in Feb 1939? In Madison Square Gardens. Did that not happen? No 20,000 people rallying in support of totalitarianism in the US?

You mean the one that was in support of Nazi Germany. Not communism.
 
Interesting thread. I've always considered Madison among the more liberal founders. The trouble with history is it moves forward and while Madison may have felt that way then, he may have changed given that states can do or will not do all sorts of things that oppose the central idea of a unified nation and a free people. Slavery being chief among them.

But Calhoun is a heavy thinker and while he could justify slavery by some magic, his writings on government are among the best we have.

"I next assume, also, as a fact not less incontestable, that, while man is so constituted as to make the social state necessary to his existence and the full development of his faculties, this state itself cannot exist without government. The assumption rests on universal experience. In no age or country has any society or community ever been found, whether enlightened or savage, without government of some description.

Having assumed these, as unquestionable phenomena of our nature, I shall, without further remark, proceed to the investigation of the primary and important question — What is that constitution of our nature, which, while it impels man to associate with his kind, renders it impossible for society to exist without government?" John C. Calhoun: Disquisition on Government

But the question is only answerable in time. Coolidge/Hoover led us to disaster. FDR led us away from that precipice of disaster. Reagan/Bush Jr led us to the same near disaster. Obama pulled us back from the brink again.

The question here should be do we want a society so open and free the corrupt rule, or do we want one of law, regulation, and honor, and are we both willing to pay for it and to support it? Seems the republicans want the former, as for the latter it still needs followers it seems.
 
If you are referring to the OP, President Bush has no place in this argument.

I cannot see any way that your attempt to bring in same is other than an admission that you have no purchase against the well-proportioned argument the OP presents.

Ohh I am OT on this, it does not refer to this thread per sie, but to all threads and right wing posters.

Well, then, I may be able to rope you into this one...

Are you disagreeing with the sotto voce that favoring the Constitution is right wing, and that Woodrow Wilson's comment re: the Constitution "could be stripped off and thrown aside like a garment,"is left wing?

Not necessarially, but that does remind me of Bush and his "It's just a damned piece of paper".
How does that figure in?
 

Forum List

Back
Top