Domain: tiger-web1.srvr.media3.us Does it matter what the "Founders intentions" were? | Page 2 | Political Talk
Started By
Message

re: Does it matter what the "Founders intentions" were?

Posted on 1/26/14 at 4:49 pm to
Posted by SammyTiger
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Feb 2009
78901 posts
Posted on 1/26/14 at 4:49 pm to
It is pretty ridiculous how we group the founders intentions together like they all agreed on everything.

There were fierce debates, and a lot of them favored strong central government.
Posted by Patrick O Rly
y u do dis?
Member since Aug 2011
41187 posts
Posted on 1/26/14 at 4:49 pm to
quote:

The consitution and a republic gov't is only as good as the people who uphold it. It's the responsibility of the citizenry to make sure good and honorable people are tasked with that. In the last 80 years, we have failed that responsibility miserably.



I'd argue that's a failed premise. In my opinion, they're created and controlled by the wealthy who establish a new political class, who work together to protect and expand their wealth.

One of the main motivations behind the creation of the constitution was the desire to coin currency so they could enter into trade agreements with other countries, who were reluctant to enter into 13 separate colonies, each with their own currency. Jefferson and most of the anti-federalist were farmers. From the get go, it was based around competing economic interest.
Posted by Patrick O Rly
y u do dis?
Member since Aug 2011
41187 posts
Posted on 1/26/14 at 4:50 pm to
quote:

Everything in the constitution speaks to limited central government and states rights supersceefing the central government powers



And you didn't read past the thread title.

How is all that working? Hmm?
Posted by Blue Velvet
Apple butter toast is nice
Member since Nov 2009
20112 posts
Posted on 1/26/14 at 4:54 pm to
Posted by goatmilker
Castle Anthrax
Member since Feb 2009
75330 posts
Posted on 1/26/14 at 4:58 pm to
quote:

Either they didn't write the Constitution well enough, or maybe old pieces of paper with dead men's signatures on it aren't as powerful as we've been led to believe.


This is coming from a failed anarchist right?

Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
117153 posts
Posted on 1/26/14 at 5:00 pm to
quote:

a lot of them favored strong central government.

No. Very few. There is always going to be dissent but the vast majority of the founders were fearful of strong central govt.
Posted by Patrick O Rly
y u do dis?
Member since Aug 2011
41187 posts
Posted on 1/26/14 at 5:01 pm to
quote:

This is coming from a failed anarchist right?





eta: I honestly don't know what that means.
This post was edited on 1/26/14 at 5:04 pm
Posted by LongueCarabine
Pointe Aux Pins, LA
Member since Jan 2011
8205 posts
Posted on 1/26/14 at 5:05 pm to
quote:

I'm not sure if they thought it would do better or didn't care.


That is one of the most ignorant statements I've read, and I've read quite a few.

Does the phrase "Our lives, our fortunes, our sacred honor" mean a damn thing to you?

They tried to come up with a better system of government than any nation had ever had. They largely succeeded. What they couldn't foresee is that ignoramuses "educated in the law" would create rights out of thin air.

LC
Posted by Patrick O Rly
y u do dis?
Member since Aug 2011
41187 posts
Posted on 1/26/14 at 5:08 pm to
quote:

Does the phrase "Our lives, our fortunes, our sacred honor" mean a damn thing to you?



No. I'm not a collectivist.
Posted by Mr. Misanthrope
Cloud 8
Member since Nov 2012
6376 posts
Posted on 1/26/14 at 5:11 pm to
quote:

That is one of the most ignorant statements I've read, and I've read quite a few.

Does the phrase "Our lives, our fortunes, our sacred honor" mean a damn thing to you?

They tried to come up with a better system of government than any nation had ever had. They largely succeeded. What they couldn't foresee is that ignoramuses "educated in the law" would create rights out of thin air.

LC


Thank you.


Posted by SammyTiger
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Feb 2009
78901 posts
Posted on 1/26/14 at 5:18 pm to
quote:

No. Very few. There is always going to be dissent but the vast majority of the founders were fearful of strong central govt.


Strengthening the Federal government was the whole impetus behind the constitution. John Adams, and Alexander Hamilton are always forgotten when it comes time to talk about what the founding fathers wanted.

Obviously what we have today is beyond what they could have imagined, but you have to judge there views in the parlance of their times. in 1787 the actual logistics of running country from washington DC so different than todays.
Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
117153 posts
Posted on 1/26/14 at 5:31 pm to
quote:

They tried to come up with a better system of government than any nation had ever had. They largely succeeded. What they couldn't foresee is that ignoramuses "educated in the law" would create rights out of thin air.


Huzzahs!
Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
117153 posts
Posted on 1/26/14 at 5:34 pm to
quote:

Strengthening the Federal government was the whole impetus behind the constitution. John Adams, and Alexander Hamilton are always forgotten when it comes time to talk about what the founding fathers wanted.


No. What the founders envisioned was states rights with a very limited federal binding.
Posted by SammyTiger
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Feb 2009
78901 posts
Posted on 1/26/14 at 5:34 pm to
quote:

They tried to come up with a better system of government than any nation had ever had. They largely succeeded. What they couldn't foresee is that ignoramuses "educated in the law" would create rights out of thin air.


Anyone with a basic understanding of how the common law works would foresee that. So the founders probably could have.
Posted by Patrick O Rly
y u do dis?
Member since Aug 2011
41187 posts
Posted on 1/26/14 at 5:39 pm to
True. And having other branches of government set up as checks has proved to be ultimately a failure, and has served in reality as a rubber stamp of legitimacy for its actions.
Posted by LongueCarabine
Pointe Aux Pins, LA
Member since Jan 2011
8205 posts
Posted on 1/26/14 at 5:50 pm to
quote:

True. And having other branches of government set up as checks has proved to be ultimately a failure, and has served in reality as a rubber stamp of legitimacy for its actions.


It is a failure of men, not of the instrument nor the government the Founders instituted.

LC
This post was edited on 1/26/14 at 5:52 pm
Posted by Patrick O Rly
y u do dis?
Member since Aug 2011
41187 posts
Posted on 1/26/14 at 5:51 pm to
quote:

It is a failure of men, not of the instrument.



Nonsense. If men are flawed, then what they create is flawed as well.

Like the saying goes, if men are angels, you don't need government. If men aren't angels, you dare not have one.

P'O
This post was edited on 1/26/14 at 5:53 pm
Posted by joshnorris14
Florida
Member since Jan 2009
46757 posts
Posted on 1/26/14 at 5:53 pm to
quote:

This is coming from a failed anarchist right?



How does one fail at Anarchy?

Initiating force against someone?

I'm confused by what you are saying.
Posted by GeauxxxTigers23
TeamBunt General Manager
Member since Apr 2013
62514 posts
Posted on 1/26/14 at 5:55 pm to
We have the government we deserve.
Posted by gthog61
Irving, TX
Member since Nov 2009
71001 posts
Posted on 1/26/14 at 5:57 pm to
quote:

We have the government we deserve.


The maybe 10% of people who are like me don't.
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 6Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram