Quote:
danielpalos
How did you reach your interpretation from the emphasized portions of the quotes?
Simply stating that I am wrong, while resorting to fallacy, doesn't imply that you are correct. Only that you prefer to resort to the fallacy of argumentum ad ignorantiam.
Why was the same objection not reached under the Articles of Confederation, if the detractors of the Constitution were not simply resorting to fallacy, as well? There is no specific enumeration of powers in the Articles. Why would that constitutional precedent not be a valid precedent, and an example of Madison's view of presenting examples of specifics that concurs with my own?
|
EXACTLY, as Madison pointed out, the SAME language was included in the Articles and that language was NOT an enumeration of general powers under the Articles, just as it was not under the proposed Constitution, what he said was that the "detractors" of the proposed Constitution (the Anti-Federalists) were "stooping" to "misconstruction" of the proposed text. Madison says that the Anti-federlasts claim that the "general welfare" clause of the proposed Constitution amounted to an general grant of power to legislate and spend on anything considered "general welfare" was "absurd" and based on his accusing them of "stooping" to such a "misconstruction" in his opinion intentionally disingenuous.
And the very point you make, that the SAME language already existed in the Articles of Confederation and nobody would argue that the national government under the Articles had any such broad general power to spend and legislate, was the point Madison made in dismissing the misconstruction of those same words in the Constitution by the Federalists.
__________________
"It's a good feeling to shoot a bad guy. Something you democrats would never understand. Americans are homesteaders, we want a safe home, keep the money we make, and shoot bad guys!"
----Denny Crane
