The battle between Jefferson and Hamilton is of very great significance, and precisely because it represented a clash between two fundamentally contrasting systems of political principle.Details
Thomas Jefferson, third president of the United States of America, was an architect, a philosopher, a Deist and an impeccable prose stylist. His passionate appeal to dissolve ties with Englandâ€”the Declaration of Independenceâ€”led the early colonies to war and ultimately freedom. As president, he earned respect for his sound principles and industrious nature, though his private life has been subjected to intense scrutiny.Details
by Thomas E. Woods, The Freeman
Thinkers in the classical-liberal tradition, to the extent that they support a coercive state at all, speak routinely of the importance of keeping government strictly limited. To that end, the United States has a written Constitution, which enumerates the relatively brief list of tasks entrusted to the federal government and whose Tenth Amendment makes clear that any power not granted to the federal government resides in the states, the authors of the federal compact.
That is all well and good, but how does a theoretically limited government remain so? Some have argued that it is impossible to restrain a government over time. The framers of the Constitution, for their part, were well aware of the tendency for power to concentrate and expand. Thomas Jefferson spoke of the calamity that would result if all power were vested in the federal government.Details
by Brad Berner
Amendment XÂ The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Hypocrisy and politicians! There is nothing new in this love-match made by Cupidâ€™s arrow of self-interest, right? Wrong, in the current flurry of state legislatures passing or considering resolutions asserting state sovereignty, many politicians are doing the right thing for the wrong reasons.Details