as william riker, back in the 1980's did a book called the tragedy of rhetoric in which he actually -- before the stuff was readily available, william riker tried to identify the core statement of the controversy and numerate or framed the rhetorical structure of the debate. a way to think about rhetoric. i think we need that kind of theory. the reliance on -- i do not think it identifies a row problem that has to be -- and then finally, to concluding points. a compelling theory of for historical originalism could assume that beyond the task of importing meaning to any constitutional provision, interpreters need to understand that to deal with the american constitutionalist tradition and some broader sense -- what i want to say here is it is not the best formulated idea but it goes back to what i said earlier, that the american constitution interpretation is not merely this. it has a collective history of its own. it is a story that embraces different levels of government, different departments, and a wide array of issues. to break it down to a cross focus inquiry it seems to be an ad

political scientist william riker, back in the 1980's, did a book called "the tragedy of rhetoric" in which he actually -- before the stuff was readily available, riker tried to identify the core statement of the federalist controversy and tried to enumerate them to frame a rhetorical structure of the debate. to think ofory political rhetoric. i think we need that kind of theory. the reliance on modern linguistics, which i do not think is key to reconstructing the political debate, identifies a real significant problem. finally, two concluding points. a compelling theory of historical originalism could assume that beyond the task of imparting meeting to individual constitutional provisions interpreters need to understand , that to deal with the american constitutionalist tradition, in some broader sense -- as i read this, it is not the best formulated idea -- but it goes back to what i said earlier. that the american constitution interpretation does not exist only as clauses. it has a collective history of its own. it is a story that embraces different levels of government, different