Calvin Coolidge born July 4 Hero to tea partiers

[Dante]

Has the 10th been amendended? If it hasn't then 220 years the powers of the Federal Government have been legally defined

The operative phrase: "What you can't do is define the Constitution the way you want it to read. That is why we have courts"

Amusing how you hide from it and post replies to arguments of your own making. You have a mildly severe case of wingnut dis-ease

What's amusing is that you respond but will not answer the question. So I will directly ask you the question
Has the tenth Amendment beed repealed?

Of course it hasn't, and no one has said it has. You are inventing an argument and then winning it -- against yourself.

congratulations: you have officially graduated with honors from the USMB Wingnut Academy.

 

[Jeremy]

James Madison put it best.

"Each State, in ratifying the Constitution, is considered as a sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act. In this relation, then, the new Constitution will, if established, be a federal, and not a national constitution."



Too bad its turning out to be the other way around.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I get it...That was a Great job of Gooling for an opinion that matched yours.

Yet, the words of Madison are now supposed to carry weight and veracity when they reflect your central authoritarian politics, but are irrelevant when you have a SCOTUS ruling to cower behind?

Interesting.

I actually don't really have an opinion on the political structures states should or should not be able to institute in the theoretical absence of Article IV. Someone asked why states have the structures they do--that's why they do.

Are you familiar with the concept of a value neutral statement? Or do all statements of fact have ideological purpose in your eyes?

Thomas Jefferson described the Tenth Amendment as “the foundation of the Constitution” and added, “to take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specially drawn … is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition.” Jefferson's formulation of this doctrine of “strict construction” was echoed by champions of state sovereignty for many decades.

Philosophical approaches to the question of the scope of federal power have differed, going all the way back to the founding generation. You can find signers of the Constitution who took opposite sides on this issue (including the two primary authors of the Federalist papers, Madison and Hamilton). It's a debate that has been with us since the beginning and it has been at the center of many of the big events in American history. We fought a civil war over it, we now have thousands of pages of case law concerning it, more than two centuries of precedents, etc and yet it remains largely an open question (under what conditions do the powers granted in the Commerce Clause apply? how elastic is the elastic clause? do we prefer Jefferson's or Hamilton's interpretation of the general welfare clause?). There is no definitive answer to these questions. Instead we have an ongoing political debate that ebbs and flows based on political events--elections.

What is there to debate? The states have allowed the federal government to run out of control but that still does not negate that the tenth amendment still has the teeth that will take the bite out of the federal government. All we have to do is elected state officals that will invoke the tenth and all the powers that it has.

If you were political view were clear (instead of muddied, which it is), you will never get the state officials you want. What you are asking for is a new Progressivism, from the bottom up, to fix things. How funny.

 

[Dante]

The operative phrase: "What you can't do is define the Constitution the way you want it to read. That is why we have courts"

Amusing how you hide from it and post replies to arguments of your own making. You have a mildly severe case of wingnut dis-ease

What's amusing is that you respond but will not answer the question. So I will directly ask you the question
Has the tenth Amendment beed repealed?

Don't risk Carpel Tunnel on that cretin. Fair warning.

Dante Fevah strikes again!

 

[Dante]

James Madison put it best.

"Each State, in ratifying the Constitution, is considered as a sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act. In this relation, then, the new Constitution will, if established, be a federal, and not a national constitution."



Too bad its turning out to be the other way around.

You do know both Madison and Hamilton wrote the majority of the Constitution?

Well, it seems they both later disagreed with themselves and each other over what exactly the words they penned in the Constitution actually meant.

 

[Greenbeard]

What is there to debate? The states have allowed the federal government to run out of control but that still does not negate that the tenth amendment still has the teeth that will take the bite out of the federal government. All we have to do is elected state officals that will invoke the tenth and all the powers that it has.

The Tenth Amendment is a "not statement." As in "¬Federal power is state power." Using it requires delineating what federal power is, which is not a straightforward question (ask Washington and Madison about their decisions to charter a national bank, or Jefferson about his purchase of the Louisiana territory or his determination that the authority to regulate commerce entails the authority to place an embargo on all imports and exports).

 

[Big Fitz]

What's amusing is that you respond but will not answer the question. So I will directly ask you the question
Has the tenth Amendment beed repealed?

Don't risk Carpel Tunnel on that cretin. Fair warning.

Dante Fevah strikes again!

 

[Dante]

Has the 10th been amendended? If it hasn't then 220 years the powers of the Federal Government have been legally defined

The operative phrase: "What you can't do is define the Constitution the way you want it to read. That is why we have courts"

Amusing how you hide from it and post replies to arguments of your own making. You have a mildly severe case of wingnut dis-ease

Yeah, I know. I was there earlier and read their highly biased review. Intellectual impartiality my copious pasty white ass.

This is the kind of character we need in a president again:

A quiet and somber man whose sour expression masked a dry wit, Calvin Coolidge was known as "Silent Cal." After learning of his ascendancy to President on the death of Warren Harding in 1923, Coolidge was sworn in by his father, a justice of the peace, and promptly went back to bed.

Someone unimpressed with and hostile to the power of Washington.

I love the fact that he had one of the richest most successful men in the world as his Sec Treas: Andrew Mellon. Proof that successful businessmen know how to grow business by getting out of the way. Much better than tax cheat, Little Timmy Geithner.

Your interpretations and conclusions of what you've read would be amusing if you were not trying to pass them off as somehow worthy of consideration when debating larger issues.

Your world view is so distorted, viewing the world through a prism, would be an improvement.

you have potential, but is being held back by your wingnut dis-ease.

lighten up Francis, and the world of truth just may come knocking at your door.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The operative phrase: "What you can't do is define the Constitution the way you want it to read. That is why we have courts"

Amusing how you hide from it and post replies to arguments of your own making. You have a mildly severe case of wingnut dis-ease

What's amusing is that you respond but will not answer the question. So I will directly ask you the question
Has the tenth Amendment beed repealed?

Kiddo, you are not a constitutional expert, remember? You are simply unhappy that it is not being interpreted the way you want it to be. Let you in on a secret: it never will be.

Well junior I am more of an expert then you. all that has to be done is elect state wide political officals that will interpret it the way it was meant to be used and your case will be lost.

 

[Dante]

Don't risk Carpel Tunnel on that cretin. Fair warning.

Dante Fevah strikes again!

It's not a cure, but it may help.

Drink away.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

What is there to debate? The states have allowed the federal government to run out of control but that still does not negate that the tenth amendment still has the teeth that will take the bite out of the federal government. All we have to do is elected state officals that will invoke the tenth and all the powers that it has.

The Tenth Amendment is a "not statement." As in "¬Federal power is state power." Using it requires delineating what federal power is, which is not a straightforward question (ask Washington and Madison about their decisions to charter a national bank, or Jefferson about his purchase of the Louisiana territory or his determination that the authority to regulate commerce entails the authority to place an embargo on all imports and exports).

Has the tenth been repealed?

 

[JakeStarkey]

What's amusing is that you respond but will not answer the question. So I will directly ask you the question
Has the tenth Amendment beed repealed?

Kiddo, you are not a constitutional expert, remember? You are simply unhappy that it is not being interpreted the way you want it to be. Let you in on a secret: it never will be.

Well junior I am more of an expert then you. all that has to be done is elect state wide political officals that will interpret it the way it was meant to be used and your case will be lost.

Although I kick your butt every time on this issue? OK, believe it if it makes you feel better. And I find it funny you are a neo-Progressive.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The operative phrase: "What you can't do is define the Constitution the way you want it to read. That is why we have courts"

Amusing how you hide from it and post replies to arguments of your own making. You have a mildly severe case of wingnut dis-ease

What's amusing is that you respond but will not answer the question. So I will directly ask you the question
Has the tenth Amendment beed repealed?

Of course it hasn't, and no one has said it has. You are inventing an argument and then winning it -- against yourself.

congratulations: you have officially graduated with honors from the USMB Wingnut Academy.

Well then what does the tenth say?
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
So your arguement is moot. finished over. Next.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Kiddo, you are not a constitutional expert, remember? You are simply unhappy that it is not being interpreted the way you want it to be. Let you in on a secret: it never will be.

Well junior I am more of an expert then you. all that has to be done is elect state wide political officals that will interpret it the way it was meant to be used and your case will be lost.

Although I kick your butt every time on this issue? OK, believe it if it makes you feel better. And I find it funny you are a neo-Progressive.

What dream world do you live in? Do they have padded walls? I am sure it's nice for people with your condition but I will not be visiting
Junior I am still waiting on reply's from you on other threads. So when are you going to start kicking my butt I would klike to be there to see it.

 

[Oddball]

James Madison put it best.

"Each State, in ratifying the Constitution, is considered as a sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act. In this relation, then, the new Constitution will, if established, be a federal, and not a national constitution."



Too bad its turning out to be the other way around.

Yeah, but that Madison quote doesn't count, as it doesn't buttress a central authoritarian opinion.

Despots are picky like that.

 

[Greenbeard]

What is there to debate? The states have allowed the federal government to run out of control but that still does not negate that the tenth amendment still has the teeth that will take the bite out of the federal government. All we have to do is elected state officals that will invoke the tenth and all the powers that it has.

The Tenth Amendment is a "not statement." As in "¬Federal power is state power." Using it requires delineating what federal power is, which is not a straightforward question (ask Washington and Madison about their decisions to charter a national bank, or Jefferson about his purchase of the Louisiana territory or his determination that the authority to regulate commerce entails the authority to place an embargo on all imports and exports).

Has the tenth been repealed?

Are you even bothering to read other people's posts? It's common courtesy to at least take the time to do that. Especially if you're going to quote them when you're posting your non sequiturs.

 

[Oddball]

I get it...That was a Great job of Gooling for an opinion that matched yours.

Yet, the words of Madison are now supposed to carry weight and veracity when they reflect your central authoritarian politics, but are irrelevant when you have a SCOTUS ruling to cower behind?

Interesting.

I actually don't really have an opinion on the political structures states should or should not be able to institute in the theoretical absence of Article IV. Someone asked why states have the structures they do--that's why they do.

Are you familiar with the concept of a value neutral statement? Or do all statements of fact have ideological purpose in your eyes?

When an ideologue is doing the selective "fact" slinging, like you do, then it's highly unlikely that the ideology of the ideologue isn't in play...Which itself 'splains your cherry picking of the likes of Madison when it suits you.

 

[Avorysuds]

Unfortunately for you, there was a shift in power from the States to the Federal Government after the Civil War. Prior to the Civil War, the country was too dispersed and communications took too long to execute a strong central government. At the time of the founding of the country, residing power at the State level made sense.

However, once the States Rights folks made a power grab in the 1860s it all became moot. We went from a bunch of united states to "The United States"

We are now the primary economic and military power on earth...there is no going back to a bunch of united states

What shift in power? Has the Tenth Amendment been repealed?

You are not a constitutional expert, so end of that comment. The CW made states' right a moot point in terms of federalism. Supremacy is vested in the national government, with the states having specified powers. The states are not sovereign equals of the national government.

I have been here a short time, reading before posting as most of the post here are just personal, attacks or just made up facts with nothing given to back them up.

I have noticed you use that one liner quite a few times, "You are not a constitutional expert (or scholar)." After you make that statement I see you provide your opinion without anything to back it up and maybe I'm worng but are you a constitutional expert or scholar?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

What shift in power? Has the Tenth Amendment been repealed?

You are not a constitutional expert, so end of that comment. The CW made states' right a moot point in terms of federalism. Supremacy is vested in the national government, with the states having specified powers. The states are not sovereign equals of the national government.

I have been here a short time, reading before posting as most of the post here are just personal, attacks or just made up facts with nothing given to back them up.

I have noticed you use that one liner quite a few times, "You are not a constitutional expert (or scholar)." After you make that statement I see you provide your opinion without anything to back it up and maybe I'm worng but are you a constitutional expert or scholar?

From one newbie to another welcome to the board.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The Tenth Amendment is a "not statement." As in "¬Federal power is state power." Using it requires delineating what federal power is, which is not a straightforward question (ask Washington and Madison about their decisions to charter a national bank, or Jefferson about his purchase of the Louisiana territory or his determination that the authority to regulate commerce entails the authority to place an embargo on all imports and exports).

Has the tenth been repealed?

Are you even bothering to read other people's posts? It's common courtesy to at least take the time to do that. Especially if you're going to quote them when you're posting your non sequiturs.

Will you answer the question?
Has the tenth Amendment been repealed?
And yes I read evey post I reply to.