0
0

[–] antiplebbitor ago  (edited ago)

The Constitution doesn't grant itself anything - it explicitly states the very few powers of the national government (mint money, raise an army/navy, said army not exceeding two years' duration at once, et cetera) as well as including a few positive rights as per the Bill of Rights, which was tossed in to placate the positivists who apparently could not conceptualize negative liberty, as well as the anti-federalists.

As for the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, it reads, in whole, unaltered and unchanged from the original:

"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."

0
0

[–] Malek ago 

You strike me as one of those Freeman on the land type of people.

0
0

[–] antiplebbitor ago 

Ad hominem does nothing to improve your argumentation. And no, no I am not. But it is very important to understand the constraints of one's system of government... especially when that very same government refuses to acknowledge the proscribed limits of its powers. The national government's actual proscribed authority is far less than what it actually does.

Anything of value or interest to add? I only ask because this exchange is - and has been - beyond boring.