The Constitution and the Federalist (Part 2) (post #5)

James Madison's Federalist Essays - The Federalist No. 10 (1787 - 1788)
    The passage that I chose from this essay is as follows: "The instability, injustice, and confusion introduced into the public councils, have, in truth, been the mortal diseases under which popular governments have everywhere perished; as they continue to be the favorite and fruitful topics from which the adversaries to liberty derive their most specious declamations."
    In this passage, Madison is stating that previous, and certainly current, governments will fail inevitably due to the structure within the government.  The instability, injustice and confusion that have been injected into our government systems have been the major downfall of most.  These imperfections are used by those who wish to see the government fail as fuel.  They use the weaknesses that they know exist to turn a government against itself.  These, Madison states, are the diseases that spread amongst those who are against "liberty for all".
   In my opinion, Madison has a valid and proven point.  Think about how a disease, an infectious disease, affects a population as a whole.  It works from the inside, spreading its ugly side effects to those surrounding and eventually can, and has, demolished populations.  Madison is saying that without stability and justice, a government will undoubtedly fail as our adversaries would wish.  It is up to the government as a whole to try to fight against what will cause it to perish.  Unfortunately, when the public sees a weakness, it is often used as a negative force to get results that could not have been achieved previously.


Alexander Hamilton's Federalist Essays ' The Federalist No. 15
   The passage that I chose is as follows:  If, therefore, the measures of the Confederacy cannot be executed without the intervention of the particular administrations, there will be a little prospect of their being executed at all.  The rulers of the respective members, whether  they have a constitutional right to do it or not, will undertake to judge of the propriety of the measures themselves.  They will consider the conformity of the thing proposed or required to their immediate interests or aims; the momentary conveniences or inconveniences that would attend its adoption."  
   In this passage, Hamilton is discussing the way that laws are viewed and executed.  He is pointing out the clear separation of the Confederate states at this point.  Hamilton states that although each state knows the law and how it should be punishable, should it be disobeyed or broken, they will take it upon themselves to make whatever decision they deem necessary at the moment.  They will not conform to having to follow a chain of command or protocol because it may or may not be convenient for them at the given time.
   I feel like Hamilton is trying to say that each state, as an individual as well as a confederate state, as part of the constitution, should work harmoniously as one nation to execute the laws and follow that same protocol for punishment.  No one state should be deciding to do something other than what the other states agreed to as a nation.

   

The Constitution and the Federalist (Part 1) (post #4)

     I chose Art. III of the Declaration. "The said states hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defence, the security of their Liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or attacks made upon them, or any of them, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretence whatever."

    In my opinion, at the time that this was written, the general thought was that all states were to be independent as states, meaning, they had their own laws and autonomy.  The union of the states was for the purpose to defend each other should the need arise.  In other words, they could remain as they were, being independent but  would join during wars.  Eventually, all 50 states joined the United States and the agenda is as it was set out to be. 

     All of our states abide by a set of common law within their own state but still must abide by federal law, which is voted on by Congress members that each state votes (appoints) into office.  This union hasn't changed much with the exception of the common laws.

  
"Obama Pans GOP Supercommittee Idea ( from the "Roll Call" link) by Emily Pierce, October 8, 2013."
    
I don't really understand politics much, however, I do understand clearly why Obama wants to raise the credit limit on spending for the United States.  I don't necessarily agree with his decision, but I do hope that this issue is resolved quickly.  His statement regarding default makes more sense than any GOP official could understand.  Think about you as a borrower and how one late payment can drastically and negatively affect your credit worthiness.  This is the same issue that Obama is trying to raise awareness on.  I don't know if his solution will work but I hope that an agreement can be made for the government to continue to function.

The American Revolution - Post #3

The passage that I chose from The Declaration of Independence is as follows:  "That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." The passage that I chose from Thomas Paine is as follows: "Man has no property in man; neither has any generation a property in the generations to follow." (Paine, Rights of Man-Part One, 1791)

I chose both of ese passages because they are both similar in my opinion.  The Declaration is stating that the governments that will protect man's rights are within man itself.  In other words, it is stating that without a Man, there is no government.  Man has the ultimate power when it comes to governing because other men give them that so called power.

Paine's passage is stating that although the government is run by men, at no man has the right to tell anoer what he may and may not do.  I honestly believe that Thomas Paine was directly referring to this passage in the Declaration.

Paine mentions "Every age and generation must be as free to act for itself, in all cases, as the ages and generation which preceded it"

I interpret the Declaration passage as stating that the government and he men that sit in it should follow in their forefathers footsteps and allow the government standards to remain the same, never change and continue as it has been.  Paine's reading says e opposite, in my opinion.  I feel as though he is stating that although we should allow the government to rule, we should also allow for growth and change with the generation that it is present in.

Both of ese passages relate to the class because in me we learn how the political system worked before our generation.  Many things have changed that would not have been allowed in the generations preceding ours solely because of the government's ability to adapt to the needs and wants of the people who are voting.

Trans-National America

     I found that this article had me reeled in from the very first paragraph.  The entry that caught my attention goes as follows: "America is a unique sociological fabric, and it bespeaks poverty of imagination not to be thrilled at the incalculable potentialities of so novel a union of men.  To seek no other goal than the weary old nationalism, belligerent, exclusive, inbreeding, the poison of which we are witnessing now in Europe, is to make patriotism a hollow sham, and to declare that, in spite of our boastings, America must ever be a follower and not a leader of nations."

     I had to read this passage a few times to try to wrap my mind around what I thought Bourne was trying to say.  I concluded that he is stating that the "melting pot" that is supposed to be America is a sham.  It is nothing more than a fantasy and unattainable.  He is stating that although America is socially unique, the actual idea of Americanization is not possible.  All of the people that have come to America have basically conformed to what they are told is the "American standard", a cookie-cutter version of their true selves. 

     I'm not sure that Bourne was trying to say that this idea of a melting pot should be let go and that America should just deal with the fact that this American ideal does not exist.  If America is to be a true melting pot of cultures, why are these "immigrants" asked to change their views, values, religion, and culture to fit in with the "right" way to be an American?  He is suggesting that perhaps this will never work out the way it was sought out to work.

      I liked this passage because it highlights the fact that the Anglo-Saxon mold just does not fit every single family or individual that comes to America.  No one should be asked to change for a system that ultimately does not work.  I think this relates to this class because it shows that political views and cultural views are pushed upon people just so that we can say that we have Americanized those who have migrated to America.

Stacey Andino