Tuesday, May 12, 2015

"COS Admits It Cannot Defend the Convention Method of Amending the Constitution."

"We do not need a convention to change the Constitution - we need to observe the Constitution we already have. Furthermore, proposed Amendments so far presented by convention supporters would only degrade the Constitution!"


Anonymous said...

I am undecided about the Convention of States to rewrite the Constitution, because of my mistrust of the composition of the delegates who will be doing the amending or re-writing.
I could support SOME amendments, such as-
1. The Supreme court shall resolve desputes between the Sovereign States. The court shall not have the power to rule on any laws passed by the Sovereign States.
2. All citizens of the United States are entitled to legally own any and all arms of his or her choosing.
3. All members of Congress are subject to all laws of the United States and the laws of their respective States.
4. The members of the United States Senate shall be appointed, two from each State, by the legislature of each State.Each Senator may serve a maximum of twelve years. Each member of the House of Representatives shall serve a maximum of twelve years and be elected by the U.S. citizens residing in their State.
5. There shall be no taxes levied on income of any kind, and all taxes levied must be reauthorized every ten years by popular vote of the citizens.

Anonymous said...

The statist assholes don't follow the constitution now so what makes anyone believe they will follow it if it gets amended? The ONLY thing that will happen if idiots screw with the US Constitution is liberty will suffer and govt will usurp more power.

There isn't a person alive today who I would trust with screwing around with the constitution save for one or two people who actually have a clue about liberty (it ISN'T Levin) and the history which brought us our constitution and BoR.

Leave the damn thing alone and insist they follow the damn thing that we already have.

UncleBert said...

The Convention of States movement isn't about rewriting the constitution. It's about proposing amendments to limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal govt., imposing fiscal restraint, enacting term limits for federal officials (Congress and federal judges), and returning power to the states and to We the People.

Any amendments proposed by an Article V convention will still have to be ratified by 38 states. So, it's really about bypassing DC which is NEVER going to reform itself.

Carl Stevenson said...

This is just a ploy to open the constitutional to a rewrite by the collectivists.
Bracken describes exactly how it would pan out if we allow it in his "Enemies, Foreign and Domestic" trilogy.

Anonymous said...

Publius Huldah appears to me to be a dedicated person to her beliefs and deserves nothing but respect. However that doesn't mean she can't be wrong just
as anyone else including myself.

IMHO Article V was put into the constitution for a reason, allowing states to amend the constitution was seen as a way to bring an out of control federal government under control by the states.

I know the main argument against a convention of states is that evil will take control of such a convention and evil will win out but folks are we afraid to take on evil, whether it be in a convention or on a battlefield, are we afraid because we may be out numbered, isn't the whole premise of what the III% about is that we may be out number but we don't need a majority if we are right and willing to fight?

I will meet evil anywhere it appears and I believe that Article V was given to us as a weapon against evil by our forefathers to fight evil with.

When it comes to evil I will fight it with any weapon that I can lay my hands on!

Federalist 85;

...By the fifth article of the plan, the Congres will be obliged "on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the States [which at present amount to nine], to call a convention for proposing amendments, which shall be valid, to all intents and purposes, as part of the Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the States, or by conventions in three fourths thereof." The words of this article are peremptory. The Congress "shall call a convention." Nothing in this particular is left to the discretion of that body. And of consequence, all the declamation about the disinclination to a change vanishes in air. Nor however difficult it may be supposed to unite two thirds or three fourths of the State legislatures, in amendments which may affect local interests, can there be any room to apprehend any such difficulty in a union on points which are merely relative to the general liberty or security of the people. We may safely rely on the disposition of the State legislatures to erect barriers against the encroachments of the national authority.....

And folks this is why things are so screwed up today, we have not been utilizing article V therefore there are no barriers being erected to protect us from the tyranny now be practice inside the beltway!

The biggest problem today is it (convention of states) may take too long and we are too late.

Death before slavery!

Comrade X

FromBushAlaska said...

Nullification, Nullification, Nullification to all unconstitutional laws. States (so inclined like AK) need to nullify unconstitutional laws. A COS would be a disaster.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous- you need to do more research on what Publius Huldah said instead of dismissing her because you don't have enough knowledge to be comfortable with what you lack. I also enjoy listening to the KrisAnne Hall show. She presents her info from the historical perspective of the founding fathers. You really need to do more research if you believe an ArtV is the answer. James Madison was NOT a big fan of the ArtV so unless you think you're more educated in history and liberty than James Madison (unfortunately too many people today incorrectly believe they ARE, and that's absurd) then I suggest you expand your reading sources and learn a little more.

Anonymous said...

The amendments will never pass the required number of states..

This is a game being played by organizations and talk radio hosts for money and the power that comes from a rabble following. They know that this will play out very slowly, all the better for them.
Don't be pawns of these people.

Allen said...

I look at it this way...

an article V convention of the states would buy us 2 things we are desperately short of.

time, and transparency.

any proposed amendment would take years to get from the COS to the states for ratification. time to organize. time to prepare. time to train.

any masks that are still on would come off. the rabid socialists would go full throttle, and what they would be trying to get would be obvious for all. this will gain us recruits and allies.

if it works, great. if not...well, we will be more ready.

Anonymous said...

I met Publius Huldah at a Moore County, NC "Moore Tea Party" event last year and I have to concur with Mr. Eldridge: She is a stand-up, honest, smart, young 70-year-old lady. And she might actually be under 5' tall.

Last year, North Carolina Lt. Gov. Dan Forest hosted two COS events with Michael Farris as the main speaker. There were actually two events about two weeks apart I went to the one that was in Greensboro, NC.

I was one of the fortunate ones who got to ask a question. The room was overflowing (about 150-200) and nearly all approximately 10 questioners were clearly opposed to a COS.

I must say that, knowing the good work that his Homeschool Legal Defense Association has done, that I was quite disappointed by his demeanor. Rude and fast talking.

My question to Farris, though about a paragraph long and written down so I wouldn't stumble over my words, can be summed up thusly: "What if you are wrong? What if the regressives *do* take it over and we end up with FDR's atrocious Second Bill of Rights?"

The tone of his answer was more interesting than the content. Instead of his fast talking, he slowed down significantly. I don't think he had fielded that question before.

The audio of the entire event is posted here.

Q&A starts at about 1:11:45. My question was the fourth one and starts at about 1:34:55.

It's a total of 2:01:11.