• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Was the Constitutional Convention really a Coup?

Vadinho said:
There had never, ever been any nation in human history set up like ours, none..
Click to expand...

if I disagreed I will pay you $10,000. Bet??? Do you know what a strawman is?
 
Vadinho said:
My point was that what they considered big government was in relation to a monarchy or dictatorship, English royalty or Julius Caesar. .
Click to expand...

totally 100% wrong of course. If true they would not have been so afraid of the Constitution that was just barely ratified despite the tiny govt it created with only specific enumerated powers. The issue was not Ceasar versus Constitution but Constitution versus Articles of Confederation. Now do you understand?
 
Vadinho said:
We are all doing well because over time our government protected us from the powerful and each other..
Click to expand...

Liberals policies turned our inner cities into Chi-Raqs more dangerous than war zones. You call that doing well? 2 million in prison, 60,000 drug suicides? Communists like Obama Sanders Warren knocking at our door?? $20 trillion in debt is doing well
 
James972 said:
....Communists like Obama Sanders Warren knocking at our door?? $20 trillion in debt is doing well
Click to expand...

Do you actually know what a Communist or Communism is ?

How do you ever expect to be regarded seriously when you say things like this.
 
Rich2018 said:
Do you actually know what a Communist or Communism is ?

How do you ever expect to be regarded seriously when you say things like this.
Click to expand...
Obama had three communist parents and voted to the left of Bernie Sanders. What does that teach you. Sanders is an open communist who said in the last campaign right out of Karl Marx’ss playbook “it is silly to have 23 deodorant companies when children are going hungry. Do you think deodorant companies are the only companies that Sanders wants to control?
 
James972 said:
It mostly was it seems. The Articles had been a huge success at limiting central govt. They contained amendment procedures, to amend the Articles, but every time the liberals tried to use them to expand the power of the central govt they failed. That is when they finally gave up and went outside the ratification process and subversively called their own convention. Who showed up? Liberals who wanted to expand the power of central govt. As soon as the conservatives saw how dangerous the new Constitution was [ Jefferson and Madison, mostly] they formed the Republican Party in 1792 to fight against liberal big govt, and Republicans have been carrying on the battle ever since.
Click to expand...

That's not how it happened.

On June 19, 1786 at the Federal Hall building in New York City, at approximately 2 minutes before 6 O'Clock PM, Congress voted to hold a convention to create a new constitution, right before they left to go home for the evening.
 
Mircea said:
That's not how it happened.

On June 19, 1786 at the Federal Hall building in New York City, at approximately 2 minutes before 6 O'Clock PM, Congress voted to hold a convention to create a new constitution, right before they left to go home for the evening.
Click to expand...
n September 1786, at the Annapolis Convention, delegates from five states called for a Constitutional Convention in order to discuss possible improvements to the Articles of Confederation. The subsequent Constitutional Convention took place in Philadelphia.

keep in mind that only representatives from five states called for a constitutional convention most of the states opposed the idea .the government of the United States did not authorize the idea and to the extent that it was authorized it was only authorized to amend the articles of confederation not to propose on entirely new liberal govt. So now you can see that it really was a liberal coup d’état.
 
Last edited:
James972 said:
n September 1786, at the Annapolis Convention, delegates from five states called for a Constitutional Convention in order to discuss possible improvements to the Articles of Confederation. The subsequent Constitutional Convention took place in Philadelphia.

keep in mind that only representatives from five states called for a constitutional convention most of the states opposed the idea .the government of the United States did not authorize the idea and to the extent that it was authorized it was only authorized to amend the articles of confederation not to propose on entirely new liberal govt. So now you can see that it really was a liberal coup d’état.
Click to expand...

James,

September 11-14, 1786: A meeting is convened in Annapolis, Maryland, to discuss the economic instability of the country under the Articles of Confederation. Only five states come to the meeting, but there is a call for another meeting to take place in Philadelphia the following year with the express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation. So as you can see here, these five states did meet, but seeing how there was only five of them assembled they agreed to table it for another time. No coup here!!!!!!!

February 21, 1787: Congress gives official approval of the meeting to take place in Philadelphia on May 14, 1787, to revise the Articles of Confederation. As you can see here, it was the United States in Congress assembled that gave permission to revise the Articles of Confederation, no coup here !!!!!!!

As far as the Bill of Rights go, I agree, the Constitution would have never have been ratified without them. The argument put forth by the Federalist was that the powers given to the central government are spelled out in this document, and that this central government would not expand powers not assigned to it, that virtues and honorable men of character would lead this country duly elected by the people. The anti-federalist kind of went, sure, right, let's put these in anyway.
 
Terryj said:
James,

September 11-14, 1786: A meeting is convened in Annapolis, Maryland, to discuss the economic instability of the country under the Articles of Confederation. Only five states come to the meeting, but there is a call for another meeting to take place in Philadelphia the following year with the express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation. So as you can see here, these five states did meet, but seeing how there was only five of them assembled they agreed to table it for another time. No coup here!!!!!!!
.
Click to expand...

it was much like a coup since it was a lie about pretending to revise Articles and since it was outside amendment procedures within Articles.
 
Terryj said:
February 21, 1787: Congress gives official approval of the meeting to take place in Philadelphia on May 14, 1787, to revise the Articles of Confederation. As you can see here, it was the United States in Congress assembled that gave permission to revise the Articles of Confederation, no coup here !!!!!!!
Click to expand...

much like a coup since it was a lie, RI did not attend, and it ignored legal amendment procedures
 
Terryj said:
As far as the Bill of Rights go, I agree, the Constitution would have never have been ratified without them. The argument put forth by the Federalist was that the powers given to the central government are spelled out in this document, and that this central government would not expand powers not assigned to it, that virtues and honorable men of character would lead this country duly elected by the people. The anti-federalist kind of went, sure, right, let's put these in anyway.
Click to expand...

so then total coup since it was passed on Federalists lies that became apparent right after after ratification.
 
James972 said:
but those were trivial problems!! Most people opposed Constitution because it did not protect freedom of the states or of individual. 200 years in we know they were right with communists like Obama, Sanders Warren MSNBC poised to take over federal govt. Do you understand?
Click to expand...

There weren't that many founding fathers opposing the Constitution.

"On the eve of the Constitutional Convention, Madison composed a memorandum for George Washington, head of the Virginia delegation, listing twelve principal "vices" of the Articles. The first eight itemized the generally accepted weaknesses of the national government (i.e., Congress), and the last four specified defects of the states' laws—their multiplicity, mutability, injustice, and impotence... Madison's "working agenda" spawned the Virginia Plan of Government that, with its emphasis on a strong national government in a federal system of checks and balances, provided the foundation of the U.S. Constitution. "
Defects of the Articles of Confederation, James Madison: Vices of the Political System of the United States, Primary Sources for Teachers, America in Class, National Humanities Center
Click to expand...

So if you want to tell us how Madison and Washington were both liberals and communists who wanted us to totally surrender our freedom to a libcommie central government, I don't think you have a leg to stand on.
 
ataraxia said:
There weren't that many founding fathers opposing the Constitution.

.
Click to expand...

it was barely ratified and even then only with the huge lie that that federal govt would be limited to the enumerated powers.
 
ataraxia said:
So if you want to tell us how Madison and Washington were both liberals and communists who wanted us to totally surrender our freedom to a libcommie central government, I don't think you have a leg to stand on.
Click to expand...

why don't you think I have a leg to stand on??
 
James972 said:
why don't you think I have a leg to stand on??
Click to expand...

Because you are saying Goerge Washington, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay were all communist libcommies. I mean, it's pretty funny. But it's no leg to stand on.:lamo

leg.jpg
 
Last edited:
James972 said:
totally 100% wrong of course. If true they would not have been so afraid of the Constitution that was just barely ratified despite the tiny govt it created with only specific enumerated powers. The issue was not Ceasar versus Constitution but Constitution versus Articles of Confederation. Now do you understand?
Click to expand...

My lord, look up what a classical education was like in 1790 and then come back when you are educated. They were all steeped in Greek and Roman history. The very name republic is from Rome.
 
James972 said:
it was barely ratified and even then only with the huge lie that that federal govt would be limited to the enumerated powers.
Click to expand...

The Federalist Papers helped convince hold outs. I suggest you read a book not written by Bill Orielly or Mark Levin.
 
ataraxia said:
Because you are saying Goerge Washington, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay were all communist libcommies. I mean, it's pretty funny. But it's no leg to stand on.:lamo
Click to expand...


so then why do think Madison and Jefferson immediately formed the Republican faction when they thought factions were very harmful??? Let me me guess. You have no idea??
 
Vadinho said:
My lord, look up what a classical education was like in 1790 and then come back when you are educated. They were all steeped in Greek and Roman history. The very name republic is from Rome.
Click to expand...

and your point is?? Do you have any idea??
 
Vadinho said:
The Federalist Papers helped convince hold outs. I suggest you read a book not written by Bill Orielly or Mark Levin.
Click to expand...

what about reading Jefferson and Madison to see why they immediately formed a huge Republican faction to fight for limited govt even when they thought factions were very dangerous!!
 
James972 said:
what about reading Jefferson and Madison to see why they immediately formed a huge Republican faction to fight for limited govt even when they thought factions were very dangerous!!
Click to expand...

There was a reason for Jefferson and Madison to combined forces to combat what they thought was a huge over reach of government, and rightfully so. Adams (a Federalist) and congress had passed the Alien and Sedition Act in which Jefferson, who opposed a "strong" federal government, thought was unconstitutional and pushed for the repeal of the act, stating that is violated the 1st amendment. In all, there were 26 people prosecuted under this act for speaking out against the government, what is interesting is that the large majority of the opposed the Adams administration.
 
Terryj said:
There was a reason for Jefferson and Madison to combined forces to combat what they thought was a huge over reach of government, and rightfully so. Adams (a Federalist) and congress had passed the Alien and Sedition Act in which Jefferson, who opposed a "strong" federal government, thought was unconstitutional and pushed for the repeal of the act, stating that is violated the 1st amendment. In all, there were 26 people prosecuted under this act for speaking out against the government, what is interesting is that the large majority of the opposed the Adams administration.
Click to expand...


Well that's a very good point but Madison and Jefferson founded the Republican Party in 1792 to oppose Washington Adam and Hamiltons big liberal Federalist govt. Alien and Sedition was not until 1798 when Federalists were putting Republican newspaper publishers in jail for supporting limited govt.
 
James972 said:
Well that's a very good point but Madison and Jefferson founded the Republican Party in 1792 to oppose Washington Adam and Hamiltons big liberal Federalist govt. Alien and Sedition was not until 1798 when Federalists were putting Republican newspaper publishers in jail for supporting limited govt.
Click to expand...

Well, Jefferson didn't found the Republican party, the first Republican POTUS was Lincoln. Jefferson's party was called the Democratic Republic party, it wasn't much different than the Federalist party and Jefferson didn't do a whole lot while in office. I think the most important thing he did was to abolish the whiskey tax and attacked the Barbary pirates without asking permission from Congress. Adams was elected to President in 1796 and took office in 1797 and in 1798 they passed the Alien and Sedition Act, and Yes, most of those that were tried and jailed under this act were Republican newspaper owners. The strange thing about Jefferson was, he strongly opposed the Federalist agenda of big government, but he didn't do anything while in office to oppose the Federalist agenda. Jefferson stated in his first inaugural address, "We are all republicans, we are all federalists." Kind of makes you wonder just what side of the fence he was on.
 
James972 said:
totally absurd of course Ratification debate was not about whether we would have monarchy here but a about if new govt would be slightly bigger than Articles provided. Federalists had to blatantly lie to get it passed. And as soon it it was passed they became monarchical. Jefferson and Madison then started the Second American Revolution against the Federalists liberal big govt.
Click to expand...

What the...first of all, the meetings were privately held so they could debate without having every single idea or comment subject to public scrutiny. These were men of giant intellects and they were debating humanity, law, history, philosophy and hope. To insinuate that this was some kind of secret meeting to create a sinister government is absurd. Secondly, the only form of government on the planet at the time was a monarchy. Examples of other forms had to take them back to Rome or Athens. What history books are you using to form your opinions?
 
Terryj said:
Jefferson's party was called the Democratic Republic party, it wasn't much different than the Federalist party.
Click to expand...


1) I'll bet you $10,000 it was called Republican Party in 18th Century not Democratic party. Bet?
2) parties were 100% opposite( freedom v govt). Jefferson hated Hamilton
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom