Madison KNEW tihis would happen

[MissWaverly]

Federalist Paper 47

that where the WHOLE power of one department is exercised by the same hands which possess the WHOLE power of another department, the fundamental principles of a free constitution are subverted.

This would have been the case in the constitution examined by him, if the king, who is the sole executive magistrate, had possessed also the complete legislative power, or the supreme administration of justice...The magistrate in whom the whole executive power resides cannot of himself make a law, though he can put a negative on every law; nor administer justice in person, though he has the appointment of those who do administer it...

The entire legislature, again, can exercise no executive prerogative, though one of its branches constitutes the supreme executive magistracy, and another, on the impeachment of a third, can try and condemn all the subordinate officers in the executive department.

http://federalistpapers.com/federalist47.html

[Captain Hilts]

1. He knew that people often were corrupt for power or money. nt

[MissWaverly]

2. the interesting thing

is that you hear all the time that the founders were in favor of a strong executive, that
is not the case, they were still smarting from King George and power struggles that ensued
as they tried to set up the federal government.

[Captain Hilts]

3. Yes. GW was against a really strong executive.

And Madison strongly believed in a strong federal government because he knew that the states, being smaller, were too easily corrupted.

But you know all that.

Hear the one about how to remember which 'Founding father' is which?
John: Hamilton
Paul: Jefferson
George: George W
Ringo: Benjamin Franklin

[MissWaverly]

4. got a real laugh about Ringo = Ben Franklin

He was rather a flamboyant character for his day. I am glad that Madison was so dedicated,
we have to go back to examine critically these documents if we are to find our way back to the rule of law.

:-)

[Captain Hilts]

5. I lived in Moscow in 1993. I'll NEVER take Rule of Law for granted ....

again.

A friend of mine keeps asking me why I don't like Jefferson more. I tell her that I think he'd be fun at a party, but I'm going home with Madison. His theories are more relevent to our day.

[MissWaverly]

6. Jefferson breathed life into US with the Declaration

but Madison built the framework of our government with the constitution and the federalist
papers, you are right, I remember during Watergate that Sen. Sam Ervin said that for every
law, he never asked what a good man could do with it but what a bad man could do with it.
That's what we need to focus on; what's to be done about the unitary executive idea and
signing statements. I sympathizes, I have arranged travel for my boss to former soviet
satellite countries. Rules, like if you get sick in their country, you must realize that
you cannot get medical care there and you must prove that you do not have AIDS before you
may enter or you can taken no US currency that is newer than 5 years old.

[Gold Metal Flake]

7. Working the margins.

Companies embrace regulation, because it defines what is legal and what is not expressly illegal. If you can define how muchj you can polute, then you can polute yer ass off up to that limit. Once you reach that limit, you can buy polution credits to extend your waste abilities.

How the fuckers work the margins is important. That is why you need honest people making bthe laws. People who are hip to how the crooks operate.

This shit works the same in racing. The history of NASCAR is how to build according to what is NOT in the rules.

[MissWaverly]

8. exactly clear boundaries must be made

otherwise people will do not anything if it's not a significant penalty, look at mine safety,
what would you rather do throw out the rule book or wait till there's a disaster and then
pay a minimal fine.

[Gold Metal Flake]

9. It's not a question.

My problem with regulation is the criminals are making the rules now, and making rules that benefit themselves, not We The People and not nature at large. But I'm not saying anything you aren't already aware of.

[MissWaverly]

10. How do we accomplish this

How do we the people fight corruption in government. How do we get the government to serve
the people. The ABA is calling for Congress to sue over the signing statements so that it
can go to courts. Is this going to be met with serious attention or a derisive snicker.

[Hosnon]

11. Shoot I never hear that. Traditionally, the U.S. feared the executive and

the French feared the judiciary...which is why their judicial branch is so constrained.