PDA

View Full Version : The Anti Federalists - right again.




Anti Federalist
03-29-2011, 02:53 PM
Regarding loss of liberty through Article Six of the Constitution: treaties.

Here we are, at war again, as the enforcement arm of the UN.



Richard Henry Lee 12 Oct. 1787

http://www.constitution.org/afp/fedfar04.htm

There are certain rights which we have always held sacred in the United States, and recognized in all our constitutions, and which, by the adoption of the new constitution in its present form, will be left unsecured. By article 6, the proposed constitution, and the laws of the United States, which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby; any thing in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.

It is to be observed that when the people shall adopt the proposed constitution it will be their last and supreme act; it will be adopted not by the people of New-Hampshire, Massachusetts, etc. but by the people of the United States; and wherever this constitution, or any part of it, shall be incompatible with the ancient customs, rights, the laws or the constitutions heretofore established in the United States, it will entirely abolish them and do them away: And not only this, but the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance of the federal constitution will be also supreme laws, and wherever they shall be incompatible with those customs, rights, laws or constitutions heretofore established, they will also entirely abolish them and do them away.

By the article before recited, treaties also made under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law: It is not said that these treaties shall be made in pursuance of the constitution — nor are there any constitutional bounds set to those who shall make them: The president and two thirds of the senate will be empowered to make treaties indefinitely, and when these treaties shall be made, they will also abolish all laws and state constitutions incompatible with them. This power in the president and senate is absolute, and the judges will be bound to allow full force to whatever rule, article or thing the president and senate shall establish by treaty, whether it be practicable to set any bounds to those who make treaties, I am not able to say: if not, it proves that this power ought to be more safely lodged.

The federal constitution, the laws of congress made in pursuance of the constitution, and all treaties must have full force and effect in all parts of the United States; and all other laws, rights and constitutions which stand in their way must yield: It is proper the national laws should be supreme, and superior to state or district laws: but then the national laws ought to yield to unalienable or fundamental rights — and national laws, made by a few men, should extend only to a few national objects. This will not be the case with the laws of congress: To have any proper idea of their extent, we must carefully examine the legislative, executive and judicial powers proposed to be lodged in the general government, and consider them in connection with a general clause in art. 1. sect. 8, in these words (after inumerating a number of powers) "To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof." — The powers of this government as has been observed, extend to internal as well as external objects, and to those objects to which all others are subordinate; it is almost impossible to have a just conception of these powers, or of the extent and number of the laws which may be deemed necessary and proper to carry them into effect, till we shall come to exercise those powers and make the laws. In making laws to carry those powers into effect, it is to be expected, that a wise and prudent congress will pay respect to the opinions of a free people, and bottom their laws on those principles which have been considered as essential and fundamental in the British, and in our government. But a congress of a different character will not be bound by the constitution to pay respect to those principles.

Pericles
03-29-2011, 03:29 PM
Every dire prediction they made has come to pass.

belian78
03-29-2011, 03:42 PM
Just picked up The Anti Federalist papers today, can't wait to get home and dig into it.

South Park Fan
03-29-2011, 03:48 PM
It seems that those who criticize the state's actions before they are performed have an inherent disadvantage in the history books, even when they are proven right, since their views have long since been forgetten/distorted. For example, your average high school US history student will tell you that the Articles of Confederation were ineffective and that a strong central government was needed to keep stability, despite every single one of the predictions of the "Antifederalists" coming to pass.

DamianTV
03-29-2011, 04:23 PM
What else would you expect from Public Schools Government Propoganda Indoctrination Facilities?

Anti Federalist
03-30-2011, 11:04 PM
///

heavenlyboy34
03-30-2011, 11:34 PM
AF, I would give you +rep, but I'm out right now. IOU 1 +rep. :cool: Thanks for this post. :)

jmdrake
03-31-2011, 10:13 AM
I was talking to a neocon friend who I'm trying to help see the light about a year ago. He does at least see that continuing the Afghanistan war is not a good idea. But he can't bring himself to admit that he was wrong on Iraq. His answer? "People think we went to war over WMDs. But that's not it. We had to enforce those U.N. resolutions". I thought conservatives were against the U.N.?

Pericles
03-31-2011, 10:40 AM
It seems that those who criticize the state's actions before they are performed have an inherent disadvantage in the history books, even when they are proven right, since their views have long since been forgetten/distorted. For example, your average high school US history student will tell you that the Articles of Confederation were ineffective and that a strong central government was needed to keep stability, despite every single one of the predictions of the "Antifederalists" coming to pass.
I think to be fair in the course of history, there were problems under the Confederation that were solved via the Constitution. The Barbary pirates problem started early on, and the central government of the Confederation could never get the states to agree and fund a Navy to deal with the problem of protecting sea borne commerce. 20% of the funds raised by the central government went to "tribute payments" to try to protect American shipping. For the same price as one year's "tribute", the frigate Constitution was built and outfitted. Multiply by 6 and problem solved.