Comments on: Short(er) Version of My Constitution Day Post http://poliblogger.com/?p=8174 A rough draft of my thoughts... Mon, 08 May 2024 18:09:26 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1.2 by: A Knight’s Blog » Happy Constitution Day — Again http://poliblogger.com/?p=8174#comment-216344 Sat, 17 Sep 2024 19:01:05 +0000 http://poliblogger.com/?p=8174#comment-216344 [...] hole train rolling. . . . Steven Taylor continues to answer my previous post and examine (here and here) the problems “inherent in the system” of allowing Congress to use federal (taxpayer [...] […] hole train rolling. . . . Steven Taylor continues to answer my previous post and examine (here and here) the problems “inherent in the system” of allowing Congress to use federal (taxpayer […]

]]> by: Dr. Steven Taylor http://poliblogger.com/?p=8174#comment-216005 Sat, 17 Sep 2024 16:53:57 +0000 http://poliblogger.com/?p=8174#comment-216005 I figured the refs to Madison would get your attention ;) I honestly have no basis for determining what his response to the maneuver would have been. I figured the refs to Madison would get your attention ;)

I honestly have no basis for determining what his response to the maneuver would have been.

]]> by: Random Fate http://poliblogger.com/?p=8174#comment-215790 Sat, 17 Sep 2024 10:03:35 +0000 http://poliblogger.com/?p=8174#comment-215790 <strong>Constitutional irony</strong> Dr. Stephen Taylor discusses the irony of using aconstitutional methods to mandate teaching about the United States Constitution on Constitution Day. ... Constitutional irony

Dr. Stephen Taylor discusses the irony of using aconstitutional methods to mandate teaching about the United States Constitution on Constitution Day.

…

]]> by: Matthew http://poliblogger.com/?p=8174#comment-214607 Sat, 17 Sep 2024 00:46:11 +0000 http://poliblogger.com/?p=8174#comment-214607 Yeah, that was much clearer! However, I think I got it the first time, and it was how I understood it in my post at F&#38;V responding to your earlier one. OK, as long as we are in seance with Madison, what would he think of the very proces itself by which Byrd got this passed. Not the substance (a mandate on local schools, but the process: The idea of Constitution Day and its accmpanying mandate was not passed after open debate in Congress on the idea, but by a rider to an appropriations bill? I do not know at what point Congress started doing that (on all sorts of far more consequential matters), but I am pretty sure it was not a practice at the time the Federalist Papers were written. Yeah, that was much clearer! However, I think I got it the first time, and it was how I understood it in my post at F&V responding to your earlier one.

OK, as long as we are in seance with Madison, what would he think of the very proces itself by which Byrd got this passed. Not the substance (a mandate on local schools, but the process: The idea of Constitution Day and its accmpanying mandate was not passed after open debate in Congress on the idea, but by a rider to an appropriations bill?

I do not know at what point Congress started doing that (on all sorts of far more consequential matters), but I am pretty sure it was not a practice at the time the Federalist Papers were written.

]]> by: Scott Gosnell http://poliblogger.com/?p=8174#comment-214527 Fri, 16 Sep 2024 22:58:56 +0000 http://poliblogger.com/?p=8174#comment-214527 Ahh . . . you put it in the Traffic Jam. No fair. I suspect we actually agree on more than is apparent, with perhaps a disagreement based on emphasis. Regardless, I will respond in a post, probably tomorrow. Ahh . . . you put it in the Traffic Jam. No fair.

I suspect we actually agree on more than is apparent, with perhaps a disagreement based on emphasis. Regardless, I will respond in a post, probably tomorrow.

]]>