SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: David C. Burns who wrote (531)8/22/1998 11:20:00 PM
From: Earl Risch  Respond to of 67261
 
It was this kind of
single minded focus on a particular zealous use of
parts of the Constitution that scared the bejesus
out of people and resulted in the Bill of Rights as a
counter.


David,

The Constitution enumerates the powers that the federal government has. From Libertarianism by David Boaz "The Constitution...was truly revolutionary in its establishment of a government of delegated, enumerated, and thus limited powers." "When a Bill of Rights was first proposed, many of the Framers responded that one was not needed because the enumerated powers were so limited that government would be unable to infringe on individual rights." "Eventually it was decided to add a bill of rights, in Madison's words, 'for greater caution'".

Along with the 9th and 10th amendments, these documents all support each other in asserting the limitations of the powers of the federal government.

My point is that what the framers of the constitution were concerned about was not overzealous use of parts of the Constitution, but rather ignoring of the limiting nature of the Constitution, (Exactly what our big government has been doing for at least the last 60 years).

IMO the Bill of Rights was in no way added to counter the Constitution, but to make sure that people understood the limiting nature of this document.

Regards, ER

PS What part(s) of the Constitution would scare the bejesus out of anyone?