|
Post by avordvet on Aug 22, 2013 16:39:38 GMT -5
Tom Coburn calls for a national Constitutional ConventionBy CHARLIE SPIERING, AUGUST 22, 2013 AT 1:20 PM Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., explained to a town hall of his constituents that he wanted to call a national Constitutional Convention after reading Mark Levin’s new book, The Liberty Amendments. “I used to have a great fear of constitutional conventions,” Coburn said according to the Tulsa World. “I have a great fear now of not having one.” washingtonexaminer.com/tom-coburn-calls-for-a-national-constitutional-convention/article/2534588
|
|
|
Post by watchful on Aug 22, 2013 17:06:00 GMT -5
I want to state that if we think we have a problem trying to enjoy our freedoms now wait till we allow the duly elected Neo-Cons and Lib-Tards to start messing with our constitution. What we need is a mandate to our Congress to stop passing and voting on nonsensical acts and statutes that violate the Constitution we already have. We need to start calling State level Peoples Common Law Grand Juries to try those Congressmen and women who violate the Constitution by voting for laws that violate our constitution. The title of that offense is called Treason. Instead of changing what we have not followed for the past 150 years, lets start enforcing it. I can not think of any way we the people could ever believe anything that came out of a Constitutional Convention in this day and age.
|
|
|
Post by avordvet on Aug 22, 2013 18:35:59 GMT -5
Yeah I'm not a big fan of holding a constitutional convention with a bunch of Marxists in power and leftists & islamists infiltrating the government at every level.
|
|
|
Post by brocktownsend on Aug 22, 2013 22:08:48 GMT -5
No way, Jose.
|
|
|
Post by midnightrider on Aug 23, 2013 8:17:14 GMT -5
Although I have not read Levins book, I understood he called for a convention of the states. Isn't this different than a constitutional convention? (Providing enough could agree)The States would take back there the authority they were supposed to have and not just accepting what the Fed allowed them to have. At least this is the impression I was under.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Downing on Aug 23, 2013 10:16:00 GMT -5
Levin’s idea is that there can be no run away convention because no matter which way an amendment is proposed it must be ratified by three fourths of the states before they become law. It is his preposition that today all three branches of the government so totally ignore the constitution that this would show all three that the people want to return to the Constitution and even if not ratifies such a convention would serve notice to those in power that the people want their power back where it belongs. In the hands of the states and ultimately in the individual.
My opinion is that three fourths of the states could not come to any agreement what so ever. If they did and actually imposed further limits on the government then the people had better be well armed and be willing to make a stand because those who have gained ultimate power do not give it up easily. So once again back to the blood of patriots and tyrants I guess...
|
|
|
Post by walfred on Aug 23, 2013 22:37:13 GMT -5
|
|