Federalist 46: Let's try it again.

[Listening]

This is from Madison in Federalist 46.

What do you think he was saying ?

If an act of a particular State, though unfriendly to the national government, be generally popular in that State and should not too grossly violate the oaths of the State officers, it is executed immediately and, of course, by means on the spot and depending on the State alone. The opposition of the federal government, or the interposition of federal officers, would but inflame the zeal of all parties on the side of the State, and the evil could not be prevented or repaired, if at all, without the employment of means which must always be resorted to with reluctance and difficulty.

 

[Bloodrock44]

Sounds to me he's saying when you are finally fed up with the federal government sticking their nose in your business and trying to run the show, give them a swift kick in the ass.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Sounds to me he's saying when you are finally fed up with the federal government sticking their nose in your business and trying to run the show, give them a swift kick in the ass.

Your post is an example of why we have a Constitutional Republic, and not a democracy, where citizens of the Republic are subject solely to the rule of law, not men; as men are incapable of ruling justly – the ignorant, errant notion that the states may ‘ignore’ the Federal government, the Federal Constitution, and the Federal courts is evidence of that.

 

[The T]

This is from Madison in Federalist 46.

What do you think he was saying ?

If an act of a particular State, though unfriendly to the national government, be generally popular in that State and should not too grossly violate the oaths of the State officers, it is executed immediately and, of course, by means on the spot and depending on the State alone. The opposition of the federal government, or the interposition of federal officers, would but inflame the zeal of all parties on the side of the State, and the evil could not be prevented or repaired, if at all, without the employment of means which must always be resorted to with reluctance and difficulty.

The PEOPLE should and do respect, and side with their respective STATE Governments. For it is the State government that is closer to the people than that of the FEDERAL government will EVER BE.

All there is to it.

 

[Listening]

Sounds to me he's saying when you are finally fed up with the federal government sticking their nose in your business and trying to run the show, give them a swift kick in the ass.

Your post is an example of why we have a Constitutional Republic, and not a democracy, where citizens of the Republic are subject solely to the rule of law, not men; as men are incapable of ruling justly – the ignorant, errant notion that the states may ‘ignore’ the Federal government, the Federal Constitution, and the Federal courts is evidence of that.

Well, you've shown yourself to be someone who thinks he knows a great deal about the Constitution, but in reality knows little.

But...give it a try. Explain what Madison was saying here. Expand the quote if need be. I didn't try to take it out of context.

I'll be waiting.

 

[The T]

Sounds to me he's saying when you are finally fed up with the federal government sticking their nose in your business and trying to run the show, give them a swift kick in the ass.

Your post is an example of why we have a Constitutional Republic, and not a democracy, where citizens of the Republic are subject solely to the rule of law, not men; as men are incapable of ruling justly – the ignorant, errant notion that the states may ‘ignore’ the Federal government, the Federal Constitution, and the Federal courts is evidence of that.

I'll take what are the NINTH and TENTH Amendments for $1,000 Alex.

Clayton? Shut the FUCK UP.

 

[MACAULAY]

Sounds to me he's saying when you are finally fed up with the federal government sticking their nose in your business and trying to run the show, give them a swift kick in the ass.

----------------------------------------------------

Excellent analysis.

The Founding Fathers knew that topography and climate and other factors would make people of one region different than the others...and they dreaded uniform regulations for all.

And the resolution was to allow State and Local government regulate all that was not of national significance--like Defense.

But, Loons and Socialsist now want to control, from such shit-stains as Chicago, Detroit, New York and Los Angeles...these rotting cities.....the blight of the American system...now claim the right to control everything that happens on a Nebraska Farm....and look out "Terrorists" to these radical loons is every White Boy with a shotgun from Montana to Mississippi.

Fuck Obama and his Chicago Mobster/Marxists.

 

[Indeependent]

This is from Madison in Federalist 46.

What do you think he was saying ?

If an act of a particular State, though unfriendly to the national government, be generally popular in that State and should not too grossly violate the oaths of the State officers, it is executed immediately and, of course, by means on the spot and depending on the State alone. The opposition of the federal government, or the interposition of federal officers, would but inflame the zeal of all parties on the side of the State, and the evil could not be prevented or repaired, if at all, without the employment of means which must always be resorted to with reluctance and difficulty.

What is the scale of measurement for when the populace of a State is aligned with their Officers?

 

[The T]

Sounds to me he's saying when you are finally fed up with the federal government sticking their nose in your business and trying to run the show, give them a swift kick in the ass.

----------------------------------------------------

Excellent analysis.

The Founding Fathers knew that topography and climate and other factors would make people of one region different than the others...and they dreaded uniform regulations for all.

And the resolution was to allow State and Local government regulate all that was not of national significance--like Defense.

But, Loons and Socialsist now want to control, from such shit-stains as Chicago, Detroit, New York and Los Angeles...these rotting cities.....the blight of the American system...now claim the right to control everything that happens on a Nebraska Farm....and look out "Terrorists" to these radical loons is every White Boy with a shotgun from Montana to Mississippi.

Fuck Obama and his Chicago Mobster/Marxists.

Well stated.

 

[Listening]

This is from Madison in Federalist 46.

What do you think he was saying ?

If an act of a particular State, though unfriendly to the national government, be generally popular in that State and should not too grossly violate the oaths of the State officers, it is executed immediately and, of course, by means on the spot and depending on the State alone. The opposition of the federal government, or the interposition of federal officers, would but inflame the zeal of all parties on the side of the State, and the evil could not be prevented or repaired, if at all, without the employment of means which must always be resorted to with reluctance and difficulty.

What is the scale of measurement for when the populace of a State is aligned with their Officers?

The next election cycle.

 

[The T]

This is from Madison in Federalist 46.

What do you think he was saying ?

If an act of a particular State, though unfriendly to the national government, be generally popular in that State and should not too grossly violate the oaths of the State officers, it is executed immediately and, of course, by means on the spot and depending on the State alone. The opposition of the federal government, or the interposition of federal officers, would but inflame the zeal of all parties on the side of the State, and the evil could not be prevented or repaired, if at all, without the employment of means which must always be resorted to with reluctance and difficulty.

What is the scale of measurement for when the populace of a State is aligned with their Officers?

Doesn't Matter as ALL have (or are supposed to have) equal VOICE. Prevents tyranny of the MOB/Majority.

 

[JakeStarkey]

This is from Madison in Federalist 46.

What do you think he was saying ?

If an act of a particular State, though unfriendly to the national government, be generally popular in that State and should not too grossly violate the oaths of the State officers, it is executed immediately and, of course, by means on the spot and depending on the State alone. The opposition of the federal government, or the interposition of federal officers, would but inflame the zeal of all parties on the side of the State, and the evil could not be prevented or repaired, if at all, without the employment of means which must always be resorted to with reluctance and difficulty.

Madison: I hold it for a fundamental point that an individual independence of the States, is utterly irreconcileable with the idea of an aggregate sovereignty. I think at the same time that a consolidation of the States into one simple republic is not less unattainable than it would be inexpedient. Let it be tried then whether any middle ground can be taken which will at once support a due supremacy of the national authority, and leave in force the local authorities so far as they can be subordinately useful.
Virginia Plan

 

[eagle1462010]

As usual with the Founding Fathers they put more faith in as LOCAL AS POSSIBLE. Which is exactly why they enumerated Federal Powers, which were not heeded by our country.

In this paper he plainly was trying to point out that if the Federal Gov't and the State's had a disagreement that THE PEOPLE would ULTIMATELY DECIDE as both Gov'ts were of the people. He was putting out scenarios that could happen as well. Basically saying that the people would rise up, should the Federal Gov't go against the people's will.

Clearly the Civil War is a Specific Example of this. The people refused to accept the Federal Gov'ts laws and went to War. Other states joined and our country forever changed.

It was these things he was trying to discuss here.

 

[NYcarbineer]

This is from Madison in Federalist 46.

What do you think he was saying ?

If an act of a particular State, though unfriendly to the national government, be generally popular in that State and should not too grossly violate the oaths of the State officers, it is executed immediately and, of course, by means on the spot and depending on the State alone. The opposition of the federal government, or the interposition of federal officers, would but inflame the zeal of all parties on the side of the State, and the evil could not be prevented or repaired, if at all, without the employment of means which must always be resorted to with reluctance and difficulty.

Who cares? He's dead now.

He's talking about how he thinks you should deal with something like the Whiskey Rebellion.

 

[eagle1462010]

This is from Madison in Federalist 46.

What do you think he was saying ?

If an act of a particular State, though unfriendly to the national government, be generally popular in that State and should not too grossly violate the oaths of the State officers, it is executed immediately and, of course, by means on the spot and depending on the State alone. The opposition of the federal government, or the interposition of federal officers, would but inflame the zeal of all parties on the side of the State, and the evil could not be prevented or repaired, if at all, without the employment of means which must always be resorted to with reluctance and difficulty.

Who cares? He's dead now.

He's talking about how he thinks you should deal with something like the Whiskey Rebellion.

Typical liberal respect for the Founding Fathers and the constitution.

 

[Indeependent]

This is from Madison in Federalist 46.

What do you think he was saying ?

If an act of a particular State, though unfriendly to the national government, be generally popular in that State and should not too grossly violate the oaths of the State officers, it is executed immediately and, of course, by means on the spot and depending on the State alone. The opposition of the federal government, or the interposition of federal officers, would but inflame the zeal of all parties on the side of the State, and the evil could not be prevented or repaired, if at all, without the employment of means which must always be resorted to with reluctance and difficulty.

What is the scale of measurement for when the populace of a State is aligned with their Officers?

The next election cycle.

Presidential or Gubernatorial?
Witticisms hardly befit what could very well be an interesting exchange.
For instance, today's media outlets selectively report on how popular a Governor or State Senator is, but in truth, the residents of a State are never asked about each and every issue.

 

[MACAULAY]

As usual with the Founding Fathers they put more faith in as LOCAL AS POSSIBLE. Which is exactly why they enumerated Federal Powers, which were not heeded by our country.

In this paper he plainly was trying to point out that if the Federal Gov't and the State's had a disagreement that THE PEOPLE would ULTIMATELY DECIDE as both Gov'ts were of the people. He was putting out scenarios that could happen as well. Basically saying that the people would rise up, should the Federal Gov't go against the people's will.

Clearly the Civil War is a Specific Example of this. The people refused to accept the Federal Gov'ts laws and went to War. Other states joined and our country forever changed.

It was these things he was trying to discuss here.

--------------------

Very good post sir. Do you think that some states, or even sections of states, of the Union, could attempt to secede NOW, and this time...the rest of the States let them go?

What if this time, Texas and Louisiana, and Mississippi said "We are off!!!" and nobody in New York, New Jersey, and New England....gave enough of a shit to do anything about it?

 

[Indeependent]

As usual with the Founding Fathers they put more faith in as LOCAL AS POSSIBLE. Which is exactly why they enumerated Federal Powers, which were not heeded by our country.

In this paper he plainly was trying to point out that if the Federal Gov't and the State's had a disagreement that THE PEOPLE would ULTIMATELY DECIDE as both Gov'ts were of the people. He was putting out scenarios that could happen as well. Basically saying that the people would rise up, should the Federal Gov't go against the people's will.

Clearly the Civil War is a Specific Example of this. The people refused to accept the Federal Gov'ts laws and went to War. Other states joined and our country forever changed.

It was these things he was trying to discuss here.

--------------------

Very good post sir. Do you think that some states, or even sections of states, of the Union, could attempt to secede NOW, and this time...the rest of the States let them go?

What if this time, Texas and Louisiana, and Mississippi said "We are off!!!" and nobody in New York, New Jersey, and New England....gave enough of a shit to do anything about it?

Most people are interested in their own daily routine and comfort and will not really care about and State seceding.

 

[eagle1462010]

As usual with the Founding Fathers they put more faith in as LOCAL AS POSSIBLE. Which is exactly why they enumerated Federal Powers, which were not heeded by our country.

In this paper he plainly was trying to point out that if the Federal Gov't and the State's had a disagreement that THE PEOPLE would ULTIMATELY DECIDE as both Gov'ts were of the people. He was putting out scenarios that could happen as well. Basically saying that the people would rise up, should the Federal Gov't go against the people's will.

Clearly the Civil War is a Specific Example of this. The people refused to accept the Federal Gov'ts laws and went to War. Other states joined and our country forever changed.

It was these things he was trying to discuss here.

--------------------

Very good post sir. Do you think that some states, or even sections of states, of the Union, could attempt to secede NOW, and this time...the rest of the States let them go?

What if this time, Texas and Louisiana, and Mississippi said "We are off!!!" and nobody in New York, New Jersey, and New England....gave enough of a shit to do anything about it?

Keeping the United States whole is still our main priority. It would take the Feds getting completely out of control, and if that happened enough for 3 states to secede then it would more than likely be more than 3.

It's a what if scenario, and without that scenario specified it would be hard to make a decent overall statement about it.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The Framers were not of one mind, nor did they speak with one voice, where their views often changed over time.

The opinions and perceptions of those from the Foundation Era consequently lack any authority on their own, and are relevant only in the context of Constitutional case law in conjunction with other relevant sources as determined by judicial review.

Justice Kennedy expressed it best in Lawrence:

Had those who drew and ratified the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth Amendment or the Fourteenth Amendment known the components of liberty in its manifold possibilities, they might have been more specific. They did not presume to have this insight. They knew times can blind us to certain truths and later generations can see that laws once thought necessary and proper in fact serve only to oppress. As the Constitution endures, persons in every generation can invoke its principles in their own search for greater freedom.

LAWRENCE V. TEXAS

That the Framers did not presume to have a comprehensive knowledge of liberty is a credit to their wisdom and humility when addressing the serious and vital subject of citizens’ inalienable rights.