Thread: "A Republic, if You Can Keep It"

Originally Posted by Hylander_1314

None taken.

But until we are back to using what we are supposed to use, and kick the moneychangers out of the temple, all we will accomplish is talk. The moneychangers won't give it up easily. And without understanding the nature of coin, credit, and circulation, it will only be a moot point.

The money in your pocket will only be yours when these wealthy swindlers are out of business and no longer in control of us by controlling our money, and controlling debt.

"People who will not turn a shovel full of dirt on the project (Muscle Shoals Dam) nor contribute a pound of material, will collect more money from the United States than will the People who supply all the material and do all the work. This is the terrible thing about interest ...But here is the point: If the Nation can issue a dollar bond it can issue a dollar bill. The element that makes the bond good makes the bill good also. The difference between the bond and the bill is that the bond lets the money broker collect twice the amount of the bond and an additional 20%. Whereas the currency, the honest sort provided by the Constitution pays nobody but those who contribute in some useful way. It is absurd to say our Country can issue bonds and cannot issue currency. Both are promises to pay, but one fattens the usurer and the other helps the People. If the currency issued by the People were no good, then the bonds would be no good, either. It is a terrible situation when the Government, to insure the National Wealth, must go in debt and submit to ruinous interest charges at the hands of men who control the fictitious value of gold. Interest is the invention of Satan". - THOMAS A. EDISON

"Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create deposits, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But, if you wish to remain the slaves of Bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create deposits".- SIR JOSIAH STAMP,(President of the Bank of England in the 1920's, the second richest man in Britain):

Now I have been kind enough to go over to the fairtax site and read up on it. And are you saying you wish not to reciprocate? That leaves us then with a onesided dialogue. Is that equitable?

If I disagree with about it, I disagree. That did not stop me from looking into it. And I've been there more than once. Afterall, I'm open to ideas that are equitable. My only concern is how to keep the genie in the bottle. Given enough time, congress has proven they can and will by those who serve corrupt every good idea to benefit themselves leaving us with the scraps from their table. That is what my grandparents missed, and so did my parents. That they had a Right to something far better than the scraps from Washinton DC's table. Their Right was to the united States of America, and all the liberty and bounty that she stands for.

You shut the money changers down by not giving them your money in greater quantity than you choose. When 35% or more of your money every week, month, year is extracted from you against your will by the force of a police state, then you are underwriting the very problem you claim you wish to solve.

No one forces you to borrow money to buy a house or start a business or get a credit card. While the frequent instance is that the bankers will rob you through interest charges, they are robbing you at your will. But, when the government forces your earnings from you, that is not robbing you at your will, that is robbing you at the point of gun.

Under the FairTax, you decide what you want to buy or hire. No one forces you to make those purchases. All essential necessary purchases are exempt up to the poverty line. All used products are exempt. All business purchases are exempt. So between business exemptions, used product exemptions and essential spending exemptions, the only money they get is the money you choose to give them.

That is a far superior taxation method for a free nation of free people, than any in the history of our nation.

Pass the FairTax, Stop Giving Them Your Money

www.fairtax.org

What do you mean "not wish to reciprocate"?

Exactly, but they (the moneychangers) are in the drivers seat right now. They have an illegal extortion ring, I mean collection agency called the IRS. They also have the Judiciary on their side who are more than willing to be duplicitous with them in slandering, robbing, and incarcerating anybody that won't "play ball".

We aren't going to get rid of them by just passing a tax plan. Officials who stand against them in the past have wound up dead. Ron Paul hasn't mostly because of his public exposure and the fact that there are more people now who are aware of these illegal practises. Otherwise he would have ended up in the same boat as Congressman Louis T. McFadden, Presidents, Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, and Kennedy. And anybody elsewho has tried to stop them in these illegal procedures. Judges will not let you defend yourself as you are told the Constitution and Supreme Court rulings in the past are inapplicable? Then what law is?

Honestly, I wish it was that easy, by just passing legislation. Legislation was passed to stop the 1st Bank of the United States that operated like the Federal Reserve (the moneychangers), and a young America was warned by Rothschild in London that if legislation to keep the bank going wasn;t passed, America would find herself embroiled in another war. The legislation wasn't passed, and 5 months later England attacked to start the War of 1812.

John Adams quotes:
Banks have done more injury to the religion, morality, tranquility, prosperity, and even wealth of the nation than they can have done or ever will do good.

James Madison quotes:
History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling the money and its issuance.

Madison's statement is the one that is most important. Even Napoleon knew and he was considered a madman.

Napoleon Bonaparte quotes:
When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes. Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain.

So how do we get rid of them so that we can get back to square one, and turn this situation around? It won't happen by passing legislation. The moneychangers are so entrenched it will be like pulling sideways impacted wisdom teeth.

Originally Posted by Hylander_1314

Exactly, but they (the moneychangers) are in the drivers seat right now. They have an illegal extortion ring, I mean collection agency called the IRS. They also have the Judiciary on their side who are more than willing to be duplicitous with them in slandering, robbing, and incarcerating anybody that won't "play ball".

We aren't going to get rid of them by just passing a tax plan. Officials who stand against them in the past have wound up dead. Ron Paul hasn't mostly because of his public exposure and the fact that there are more people now who are aware of these illegal practises. Otherwise he would have ended up in the same boat as Congressman Louis T. McFadden, Presidents, Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, and Kennedy. And anybody elsewho has tried to stop them in these illegal procedures. Judges will not let you defend yourself as you are told the Constitution and Supreme Court rulings in the past are inapplicable? Then what law is?

Honestly, I wish it was that easy, by just passing legislation. Legislation was passed to stop the 1st Bank of the United States that operated like the Federal Reserve (the moneychangers), and a young America was warned by Rothschild in London that if legislation to keep the bank going wasn;t passed, America would find herself embroiled in another war. The legislation wasn't passed, and 5 months later England attacked to start the War of 1812.

John Adams quotes:
Banks have done more injury to the religion, morality, tranquility, prosperity, and even wealth of the nation than they can have done or ever will do good.

James Madison quotes:
History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling the money and its issuance.

Madison's statement is the one that is most important. Even Napoleon knew and he was considered a madman.

Napoleon Bonaparte quotes:
When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes. Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain.

So how do we get rid of them so that we can get back to square one, and turn this situation around? It won't happen by passing legislation. The moneychangers are so entrenched it will be like pulling sideways impacted wisdom teeth.

Well, the only political solutions I'm aware of are reversing the policies that caused the disaster and in this country that's done with legislation. For fiscal and financial issues, I'm focusing on the FairTax, because once we pass that legislation, repeal all income tax legislation, abolish the IRS and hopefully within the 7 year sunset provision repeal the 16th Amendment, the issue of mandated income taxation has been resolved which puts all taxes back in the hands of the people of the United States which puts all federal revenue back under the control of the people of the United States. Now, the people control their Congresscritters and the policies of our country, because we control the money, the way it was intended all along.

For me that's the logical rational constitutional way to take our country back. Then, we can study the situation with the Federal Reserve, that's already in the works now with the demand for an audit. But who will do the audit? Who will authorize it? Congress? A Democratic Congress that imposed the Federal Revenue Act and the Federal Reserve System to begin with are going to "audit" their moneychangers? I don't think so. We need a Republican Congress to audit the moneychangers and even then, we're going to have to force the issue. We also have to come up with a plan for an alternative system to the Federal Reserve and unlike the FairTax, there's been no group studying this and coming up with an alternative system, so we're stuck until there's a sound plan that replaces the Federal Reserve.

I believe the Federal Reserve will collapse on its own accord once we pass the FairTax and do so with an alternative that arises from the honest elements of our banking system, which is most of it. Lets see what happens after we pass the FairTax.

Ok Judy, now we can communicate. Ok, I understand your position. And as a possible interim fix, the fairtax may be viable, although I would think that to be Constituional, it would have to be uniform throughout the several states, not just on how much is comsumed. Otherwise smaller states with smaller populations are at an unfair advantage over states with larger populations. The details like the Constitution was; could be sorted out so that it is equitable for all the states. And a strict mechanism inbedded in it so that Congress couldn't just arbitrarily raise the percentage, nor reduce the base line so as to make the people again dependent upon Washington for our bare essentials.

But those could be worked out. And it could help turn us around back towards the Constitutional justice and Americanism.

Now, With the Federal Reserve, and the Act that created it, neither of them square with the supremacy clause of the Constitution as being in line with the Articles of coin. There is no authorization for Congress to set up a bank, nor allow the construction of a bank then transfer it's responsibility to said bank. So in that respect, the Federal Reserve Act is actually null and void. Same for the 16th Ammendment. It does not square with the Constitution, therefore, it is to be treated as null and void and the Constitution is to be used as the framework. So even though Congress has been turning their collective heads the other way and ignoring the truth, that doesn't make it right, nor does it make it legal and binding. Usage does not warrant legallity. Please don't ask me to quote the case as it just popped into my mind, but I know I read it in a case somewhere on the Supreme Court website.

So Article I Section VIII Clause V says Cngress has the authority to "coin" money and set the value thereof................

Article I Section X Clause I says, No State shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit(print paper money); make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts;............................

So, the beauty of checks and balances and it is simplistic in nature. Congress can coin the money to be used uniformly throughout the several states. The Treasury is tied to the Executive so that the Treasury is the repository for the nation's wealth. It is square one. It also is the repository for the bullion that is used for said coin that Congress has the authority to produce. So there is the checks and balances for making coin. And if we were still using a real silver dollar, it would contain something like 370 or 374 grains of pure silver. And if we were able to transport a citizen from the 1790s to today, they would understand that kind of coin, even though it wasn't a Spanish Mill Dollar, they would understand the silver coin, and it's value.

So the mechanisms are there, hiding in plain sight, and all it requires is an adherence to the written structure that was laid out before our very eyes.

Now I couldn't agree more with you on the point of transitioning from this debt based corrosive money and taxing scheme. Like G. Edward Griffen commented, we've been using the Federal Reserve System for so long, that we're like the addict who's strung out on heroin. If we stopped cold turkey it would probably result in death, but it would only take about 4 to 5 years to transition back to honest Constitutional money, and banking, and then the issue of taxation could also be finely adjusted to accomodate the needs of a small restricted government, which by all the waste they produce we could cut spending by a good 60 to 70% to start with, and the debt that we have been forced into could actually start to be paid off, and as it got paid off, taxes could be reduced, just as President Andy Jackson did after killing the 2nd Bank of the United States.

Here's the part I had a hard time coming to grips with. Since our current monetary system is debt based, as the debt is retired, so will the money supply requirements. As Benjamin Franklin so simply put it, Only enough needs to be made to ease the flow of commerce. For some reason, that just rocked my boat for a long time as it just didn't make sense. What I finally came to understand, is that if there is no debt, nationally, then the prices of items and services are lower. Your paycheck won't look grandiose, but you will have real money in your pocket. Something of real value that isn't thought up out of thin air.

The real beauty of it all, is that the issue of tax and banking could be done simultaniously. It's actually a requirement because of the nature of both and how they are intertwined.

We knock out both of those with a one-two punch, curtail a lot of the oppressive meddling by Congress through a prostitutionally loose interpretation of the interstate commerce clause, then we will see business return.

The tariffs that worked so well in the past for cheap imports of what was lower quality items would again function as they did. And the World Court, and Court of International Settlement along with the UN could all go to _________ (I'll let you fill in the blank).

So, even though the fairtax may not necessarily be an end to it all, it could possibly fill a void to reach a possible end. The most important issue is equity throughout the several states, as an unfair advantage or disadvantage, could by replacing one unfair system for another by application could set off a powder keg of tax revolt. So I would caution wisdom, and a willingness to correct financial trespasses where needed.

And before I forget, I would like to say thankyou for your willingness to engage in a civil discourse, and a willingness to see another point of view, even if you're not sure of it, or even in complete disagreence of it. I have even a greater respect for you for that. Thankyou.

Originally Posted by Hylander_1314

Ok Judy, now we can communicate. Ok, I understand your position. And as a possible interim fix, the fairtax may be viable, although I would think that to be Constituional, it would have to be uniform throughout the several states, not just on how much is comsumed. Otherwise smaller states with smaller populations are at an unfair advantage over states with larger populations. The details like the Constitution was; could be sorted out so that it is equitable for all the states. And a strict mechanism inbedded in it so that Congress couldn't just arbitrarily raise the percentage, nor reduce the base line so as to make the people again dependent upon Washington for our bare essentials.

But those could be worked out. And it could help turn us around back towards the Constitutional justice and Americanism.

Now, With the Federal Reserve, and the Act that created it, neither of them square with the supremacy clause of the Constitution as being in line with the Articles of coin. There is no authorization for Congress to set up a bank, nor allow the construction of a bank then transfer it's responsibility to said bank. So in that respect, the Federal Reserve Act is actually null and void. Same for the 16th Ammendment. It does not square with the Constitution, therefore, it is to be treated as null and void and the Constitution is to be used as the framework. So even though Congress has been turning their collective heads the other way and ignoring the truth, that doesn't make it right, nor does it make it legal and binding. Usage does not warrant legallity. Please don't ask me to quote the case as it just popped into my mind, but I know I read it in a case somewhere on the Supreme Court website.

So Article I Section VIII Clause V says Cngress has the authority to "coin" money and set the value thereof................

Article I Section X Clause I says, No State shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit(print paper money); make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts;............................

So, the beauty of checks and balances and it is simplistic in nature. Congress can coin the money to be used uniformly throughout the several states. The Treasury is tied to the Executive so that the Treasury is the repository for the nation's wealth. It is square one. It also is the repository for the bullion that is used for said coin that Congress has the authority to produce. So there is the checks and balances for making coin. And if we were still using a real silver dollar, it would contain something like 370 or 374 grains of pure silver. And if we were able to transport a citizen from the 1790s to today, they would understand that kind of coin, even though it wasn't a Spanish Mill Dollar, they would understand the silver coin, and it's value.

So the mechanisms are there, hiding in plain sight, and all it requires is an adherence to the written structure that was laid out before our very eyes.

Now I couldn't agree more with you on the point of transitioning from this debt based corrosive money and taxing scheme. Like G. Edward Griffen commented, we've been using the Federal Reserve System for so long, that we're like the addict who's strung out on heroin. If we stopped cold turkey it would probably result in death, but it would only take about 4 to 5 years to transition back to honest Constitutional money, and banking, and then the issue of taxation could also be finely adjusted to accomodate the needs of a small restricted government, which by all the waste they produce we could cut spending by a good 60 to 70% to start with, and the debt that we have been forced into could actually start to be paid off, and as it got paid off, taxes could be reduced, just as President Andy Jackson did after killing the 2nd Bank of the United States.

Here's the part I had a hard time coming to grips with. Since our current monetary system is debt based, as the debt is retired, so will the money supply requirements. As Benjamin Franklin so simply put it, Only enough needs to be made to ease the flow of commerce. For some reason, that just rocked my boat for a long time as it just didn't make sense. What I finally came to understand, is that if there is no debt, nationally, then the prices of items and services are lower. Your paycheck won't look grandiose, but you will have real money in your pocket. Something of real value that isn't thought up out of thin air.

The real beauty of it all, is that the issue of tax and banking could be done simultaniously. It's actually a requirement because of the nature of both and how they are intertwined.

We knock out both of those with a one-two punch, curtail a lot of the oppressive meddling by Congress through a prostitutionally loose interpretation of the interstate commerce clause, then we will see business return.

The tariffs that worked so well in the past for cheap imports of what was lower quality items would again function as they did. And the World Court, and Court of International Settlement along with the UN could all go to _________ (I'll let you fill in the blank).

So, even though the fairtax may not necessarily be an end to it all, it could possibly fill a void to reach a possible end. The most important issue is equity throughout the several states, as an unfair advantage or disadvantage, could by replacing one unfair system for another by application could set off a powder keg of tax revolt. So I would caution wisdom, and a willingness to correct financial trespasses where needed.

And before I forget, I would like to say thankyou for your willingness to engage in a civil discourse, and a willingness to see another point of view, even if you're not sure of it, or even in complete disagreence of it. I have even a greater respect for you for that. Thankyou.

Okay! Now you see my plan. Good! I'm still not clear what your concern is about the states and the apportionment issue. There is no mandate under the FairTax on any state to come up with any specific amount of money. The States just collect whatever the people choose to pay when they spend on new products and services at the 23% rate. The FairTax doesn't tell Delaware you must raise x amount and Texas you must raise x amount based on your population. The FairTax is free and has no mandate. Delaware because of its large financial empire may have more money flowing into new products and services than say Mississippi, a much larger but poorer state. And Texas because of its good management, oil resources and huge defense industry may have more money flowing into new products and services than say poor bankrupt illegal alien-infested welfare-dependent California even though California has a much larger population than Texas. There is no mandate, there is no x amount of revenue to raise by the government or any x amount imposed on any state, so there is no apportionment required.

Yes, the rate may go up, OR the rate may go down. It's whatever the people want. I'm guessing when people are looking at those receipts day after day they're going to understand OH MY GOD THIS IS SO STUPID and tell those dumb ass Congresscritters, "you stupid treasonous thieving bunch of SOBs, you cut spending on pork, you whittle down the profits of the defense industry, you stop these stupid boon-doggles like HUD Slave Cabins enriching Obama White House Advisers like Valerie Jarrett and crooks like Tony Rezko off the backs of the poor. You get these illegal aliens out of our country and bring our jobs shipped out to China, Mexico, Japan, Korea and India back into our country, so we can put 42 million unemployed and underemployed Americans sucking up $600 billion a year in "aid" back to work at good wages with benefits so we can cut that entitlement budget by 80% in 3 years or you're treasonous asses are going to be at the back of Soup Line with a turn that never comes up between your visits to the court house to address the lawsuits filed against you for the financial devastation you have caused our country and our people."

I'm just betting that when Americans see those FairTax receipts day after day after day they're going to wake the hell up and tell these treasonous thieves, "your party is over". I may be wrong, but I'm betting those general revenue rates will go down ... and go down quickly, too!

That's just it. Dealing with Congress. How many people fear their Congress? This is a crime in itself. Jim Traficant from Ohio was railroaded out of Congress and falsely imprisoned for something he didn't do. Even reporters asked him why he didn't just admit to what the judge wanted him to, and he replied that he would rather go to prison than admit to something he wasn't guilty of. But he also chastised Congress, and he railed on his dem collegues for making the IRS, and FBI so big, that Americans fear their government. As he put it, Americans should never fear their government, and this guy doesn't.

The issue that still bothers me, is the base ammount. Using it to prop up social security, medicaid, and medicare are big thorns that create vacuums where money just disappears. Like everything government gets into, they submarine it. By rights, those "programs" along with a myriad of other waste should have never been implimented. They do not help the country as a whole, and only serve to undermine the American Spirit of individual success, fight, and ingenuity. And as long as there are freebe programs for people to suck off of, you will have people voting themselves wealth from the Treasury through elected officials who promise the moon to them. And that's where the trouble therein lies. Those dependent on government for their daily existance, are not masters to their servants, but the other way 'round is what happenned. The servant has become the master. And look at the thanks the veterans of World War and the aging veterans of the Civil War got from Congress when they protested. There should be something for veterans and that is where it should stop. Just as it was before. Veterans put their lives on the line for the Constitution. That is their oathe. To uphold protect and defend the Constitution. Not Congress, the Executive, the District of Columbia or the several states, individually or as a whole in the Union. That is a big issue my Uncle has being a veteran himself.

So for myself, the simplest way, is a return of the "Old Republic" to coin George Lucas' phrase, and a return to the Constitution as it gives very simple cures to many of our modern ills. As long as people aren't afraid to be self sufficient, self reliant, and charitable as Americans were once known for, and a great understanding of what their Rights were and what the Constitution stood for. That is what people from the old country were most impressed with when they came to America. That is where national pride, and state pride arrise from.

The arguements I hear on it from folks, is that "you can't just fix it that quick". Ask them why? Well you just can't is the response. But would you please qualify why? And I lose them right there. They can't. You may hear excuses, but that's all they are. Excuses.

This you may find intersting, especially the part about Cultural Marxism, and how it has been used to destroy American values.

http://www.youtube.com/user/OriginalInt ... G21RJm6h0A

There's a lot of info in it, so take your time. I hope you enjoy it.

The base rate is based upon the existing revenue stream raised by income taxes. The FairTax planners made the FairTax rate of 23% with the Rebate available to US citizens and Legal Residents, "revenue-neutral". And the reason they did that was not to confuse 2 issues, 1) how we collect the tax with 2) how we spend the money collected. They are different processes in Congress. The objective of the FairTax is to eliminate income taxes by replacing them with a simple, efficient tax method that restores liberty to the people and our businesses and puts control of the revenue stream back in their hands on a daily voluntary basis.

After the FairTax is passed, the separate issues of how much is now up to the people through their Congress, and it's up to them to decide if the rate is too high and the amount generated too large, and if so what appropriation measures they want to use to reduce the size and cost of government so the rate can be reduced. Do they want to cut defense? Do they want to cut pork? Do they want to cut education? Do they want to cut entitlements for people under 65? Do they want to reduce benefits to our Seniors? Do they want to cut funding for National Council of La Raza and the National Endowment for the Arts and other phony 501 C 3 "charities"? Do they want to cut benefits for government workers and our military? These are all complex debates that take place every year during the appropriations process and is not part of the FairTax legislation.

However, the FairTax will in due course and fairly rapidly reduce the cost of entitlements for people under 65 because it will stimulate our economy, put illegal aliens at a distinct disadvantage, bring our industries home, recreate jobs and reflate wages such that unemployment and underemployment, the primary causes of the growth in these entitlements, will be significantly reduced decreasing significantly the public aid that will no longer be needed. And this will happen without any legislative changes, it will happen naturally as our jobs come home, illegal aliens go home, and Americans get their jobs back with more expendable income through the FairTax.

Once Americans are back to work, illegal aliens are out of the country, people are free from the intrusion of government in this area of their lives, our businesses are free from the invasion of government in this area of their business, Americans can think straight again and have at their disposal every time they go shopping or pay a bill, a reminder of the cost of the size of our federal government. With that freedom and that information, they are now empowered to decide what further cuts to the size and scope of the US government they would like to see, and then they can pick up the phone or write a letter or send a fax and let their voices be heard. Individual citizens can also manage to their own account how much they spend and accordingly how much of their money is used to pay for this over-bloated government.

There are already separate organizations working on many different ways and means to reduce the size and cost of government. But they can't succeed in my opinion, until the people have the financial power to control the revenue stream. The FairTax gives them that power, to decide voluntarily, how much of this federal government they want to pay for. This in turn puts all our government workers at the federal level on notice, that they must earn their pay, do their jobs, be prudent and honest, be loyal and they must serve, not control, the people of the United States.

www.fairtax.org

Unless it is spelled out plainly in the Constitution, they should not be meddling. At all period, or we end up again where we are now. No matter what plan is used. Follow the wording of the 10th Ammendment. In other words, Feds, BUTT OUT!!!!!!!!!

Originally Posted by Hylander_1314

Unless it is spelled out plainly in the Constitution, they should not be meddling. At all period, or we end up again where we are now. No matter what plan is used. Follow the wording of the 10th Ammendment. In other words, Feds, BUTT OUT!!!!!!!!!

I agree the Feds should butt out of all spending programs that don't fulfill their obligations under the Constitution. There may be debates on what that is, but IF Americans use logic and reason in those determinations, they will see that many of the entitlement programs, all the pork, and much of the foreign aid actually violates the mission of our government under the US Constitution.

It's a re-education process. The more the people learn and understand, the more united we'll all be on the matter of our federal government, it's size, scope and cost, as well as what to do about it.

Yes, and education of the truth is tantamount to the people understanding, and not some Cultural Marxist revisionist version of it.

Court Chief Justice John Marshall was perhaps the wisest man ever to hold the position he did. His understanding, and strict definitions did more for keeping things even than has ever been done since. Also when speaking Constitutionally, we must remember that the clauses were mutually understood by the FOunding Fathers to be narrow in scope and that they were not meant in any way shape or form to expand the size of government, nor to usurp the states or the people. So if those were the contemporary ideas of that time, then the people and the state legislators should be in the streets with pitchforks and torches demanding respect for their individual sovereignty.