History - Federalist versus Anti-Federalist

History - Federalist versus Anti-Federalist The Constitution of the United States is a remarkable document that was put together by our Founding Fathers and several existing documents including the Articles of Confederation and the Declaration of Independence. While the Constitution has provided America with freedom and rights, there were critical issues, concerns and numerous debates. The government has gone through a number of changes in order to become the system that it is today and the Founding Fathers played a large role in drafting and ratifying a new constitution for the United Stated (Ketcham, 1981).In September of 1787 the Constitutional Convention meeting held in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania had finally came to a close after critical Federalist debates between had taken place in determining balancing power between State and Federal Governments.One of the most debated issues during the formation of the American government was how much power the federal government should have or how much liberty the states should have.T he Articles of Conferderation, ratified in 1781. ...Two Founding Fathers who represented opposing sides were Alexander Hamilton, who argued for a strong national government and James Madison and John Jay in the Federalist Papers. Now, Thomas Jefferson on the other hand was in favor of a weaker national government where more power instead rested with the states rather than the government. While Thomas Jefferson didnt hang around for the convention, he paid close attention to the ratification debates with Anti-Federalists, George Mason and Patrick Henry.Even though the Anti-Federalist had lost the ratification, they did come close to winning and their opinions represent an important contribution to the American political tradition (Ketcham, 1981). The Anti-Federalist lost the ratification because they did not present a clear and convincing explanation of the threats within the Constitutional plan that stood between the Articles of Confederation. The Anti-Federalist recognized the plan was powerless in fulfilling the...

3 Cases When Hyphenation Doesnt Help

3 Cases When Hyphenation Doesnt Help 3 Cases When Hyphenation Doesn’t Help 3 Cases When Hyphenation Doesn’t Help By Mark Nichol Writers are often confused by the complexity of hyphenation rules, mistakenly omitting them when their presence would help clarify meaning and inserting them when they’re superfluous. The decision about whether to use them can be further complicated in sentences in which it would be technically correct but aesthetically inadvisable to use them. Three examples, each followed by discussion and revision, demonstrate a few sentences in which recasting a sentence to avoid hyphens is preferable to using them. 1. They can lean toward easier-to-maintain, off-the-shelf server, network, and storage gear. Hyphenation of the phrasal adjectives â€Å"easier to maintain† and â€Å"off the shelf,† both of which modify the phrase â€Å"server, network, and storage gear† is correct, but the double dose of multiple hyphenation, complicated by the fact that the phrases modify a phrase rather than a single word, clutters the sentence. Relaxing the statement as shown here improves readability: â€Å"They can lean toward off-the-shelf server, network, and storage gear that is easier to maintain.† 2. The company’s conversation about buying a brand can evolve into a mergers and acquisitions (MA)-type dialogue. Identifying a term’s abbreviation within parentheses immediately after the first reference to the term when the abbreviation will be used in place of the term in subsequent references is standard procedure, but when the term is modified by a word attached to it with a hyphen, the intervening parenthesis is intrusive. Again, sentence relaxation is a simple solution: â€Å"The company’s conversation about buying a brand can evolve into a dialogue similar to that regarding mergers and acquisitions (MA).† (Also, technically, temporarily disregarding the parenthesis, an en dash should replace the hyphen in the original sentence to signal that type is being attached not just to acquisitions but to the entire phrase â€Å"mergers and acquisitions†: â€Å"The company’s conversation about buying a brand can evolve into a mergers and acquisitions–type dialogue.†) 3. The next step should be to evaluate the effectiveness of existing practices in customer information collection strategies. Technically, the string of nouns turned adjectives that combine to modify strategies should be hyphenated to signal their teamwork (â€Å"The next step should be to evaluate the effectiveness of existing practices in customer-information-collection strategies†), but that three-car train of adjectives can be avoided by relaxing the sentence: â€Å"The next step should be to evaluate the effectiveness of existing practices in strategies for collecting customer information.† Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Punctuation category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:50 Idioms About Legs, Feet, and Toes41 Words That Are Better Than GoodPhrasal Verbs and Phrasal Nouns