Hey...I'm trying to figure out

[Boca]

why it's of no interest to anyone in this alley that for the first time in American history a Constitutional Convention has been called for by 34 states?

I can certainly understand why dems and libs would choose to ignore this historical event since it has happened while their illegitimate president has been reigning and reflects on them as well.

But really now...for the first time in American history, so many have found that so few are screwing them with lies, lies, more lies, and other lies, that Article 5 is the prescribed method of the citizenry seeking redress and no one here wants to talk about it?.

Shocking..

The most important political development in 200 years was triggered last week, when the state legislature of Michigan became the 34 th state to demand a “Constitutional Convention” in the United States.

 

[Saladin2]

Constitutional Convention=Right Wing non sense and fear mongering

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

FYI, sane people ignore those who refer to Obama as an "illegitimate president."

 

[Saladin2]

FYI, sane people ignore those who refer to Obama as an "illegitimate president."

Maybe all kinds of fat anti-government ass-holes like Bundy are demanding a convention...LOL

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

Maybe all kinds of fat anti-government ass-holes like Bundy are demanding a convention...LOL

They will all show up with teabag-festooned colonial tricorn hats.

;-)

 

[Saladin2]

They will all show up with teabag-festooned colonial tricorn hats.

;-)

No doubt there is lots this guy is trying to "figure out"

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

No doubt there is lots this guy is trying to "figure out"

Reminds me of how Pugs have been babbling for years about a balanced budget constitutional amendment, instead of just proposing balanced budgets.

;-)

 

[Dawg]

Maybe all kinds of fat anti-government ass-holes like Bundy are demanding a convention...LOL

"fat"...what did ya refer to Teddy K as..........Slim..........sally allah

 

[Saladin2]

"fat"...what did ya refer to Teddy K as..........Slim..........sally allah

Ted Kennedy passed away a few years ago...Try to keep up Hill Billy

 

[LanceFreeman]

Holding a Constitutional Convention is fraught with danger, IMO. The danger is that those who wish to deprive us of what liberties that remain will take the opportunity to do so at the convention, using the excuse that most of those clauses in the present Constitution are not pertinent to the way we live our lives today; that they are outdated. How many times have we heard that from members of Mr. Obama's gang in Washington? Chances are the Constitution, as it now stands, will be gutted, and what will emerge will be a document that represents a shadow of its former self. It will contain a bunch of high-sounding words to fool the American people, but the basic liberties that had been enshrined within the Constitution will be gone.

I will remind all that our Constitution is a unique document in the world, not to be taken lightly. I suspect people who wish to tamper with it, on the premise that it is an outdated document which needs updating. Marxist forces are on the ascendant in America, and so do not think, for one minute, that Marxists in government (masquerading as Progressives) will let this opportunity to totally usurp the Constitution pass them by. Reject all attempts at a Constitutional Convention.

 

[LanceFreeman]

---

 

[Figjam]

...there are a lot of people who are trying to figure this out. It seems it is not as easy-peezy as saying 34-States want this thing. Since some wanted it back in the 90's then withdrew, some resubmitted - now scholars are debating how many States are actually in this thing.

...I agree with LF - be careful what you wish for, you may just get it...

 

[Constitutional Sheepdog]

why it's of no interest to anyone in this alley that for the first time in American history a Constitutional Convention has been called for by 34 states?

I can certainly understand why dems and libs would choose to ignore this historical event since it has happened while their illegitimate president has been reigning and reflects on them as well.

But really now...for the first time in American history, so many have found that so few are screwing them with lies, lies, more lies, and other lies, that Article 5 is the prescribed method of the citizenry seeking redress and no one here wants to talk about it?.

Shocking..

Good to hear

 

[Constitutional Sheepdog]

Holding a Constitutional Convention is fraught with danger, IMO. The danger is that those who wish to deprive us of what liberties that remain will take the opportunity to do so at the convention, using the excuse that most of those clauses in the present Constitution are not pertinent to the way we live our lives today; that they are outdated. How many times have we heard that from members of Mr. Obama's gang in Washington? Chances are the Constitution, as it now stands, will be gutted, and what will emerge will be a document that represents a shadow of its former self. It will contain a bunch of high-sounding words to fool the American people, but the basic liberties that had been enshrined within the Constitution will be gone.

I will remind all that our Constitution is a unique document in the world, not to be taken lightly. I suspect people who wish to tamper with it, on the premise that it is an outdated document which needs updating. Marxist forces are on the ascendant in America, and so do not think, for one minute, that Marxists in government (masquerading as Progressives) will let this opportunity to totally usurp the Constitution pass them by. Reject all attempts at a Constitutional Convention.

How is a Constitutional convention a danger? Which is more dangerous a small minority of people gathering together to decide on bills that will become law that will effect my life vs a large majority of people bringing the minority of people back in control?

 

[LanceFreeman]

How is a Constitutional convention a danger? Which is more dangerous a small minority of people gathering together to decide on bills that will become law that will effect my life vs a large majority of people bringing the minority of people back in control?

I'd be very careful in assuming that a large majority of people will be getting together to bring a minority under control. The people at the convention will be a small group sent there to represent the majority, just like the small group in Washington that you so mistrust. In fact, some of those same people in Washington may even be part of the representative group sent to the convention. I remain skeptical. Btw, let me know if what what I described for the convention will not be the case, and why you think its make-up will be different. I could be wrong, but I suspect that what will happen will be close to what I described.

 

[Constitutional Sheepdog]

I'd be very careful in assuming that a large majority of people will be getting together to bring a minority under control. The people at the convention will be a small group sent there to represent the majority, just like the small group in Washington that you so mistrust. In fact, some of those same people in Washington may even be part of the representative group sent to the convention. I remain skeptical. Btw, let me know if what what I described for the convention will not be the case, and why you think its make-up will be different. I could be wrong, but I suspect that what will happen will be close to what I described.

The minority I speak of is those in congress and the senate the convention will have more people involved than just a handful of people. It will be addressed by the people of each state.

 

[LanceFreeman]

why it's of no interest to anyone in this alley that for the first time in American history a Constitutional Convention has been called for by 34 states?
I can certainly understand why dems and libs would choose to ignore this historical event since it has happened while their illegitimate president has been reigning and reflects on them as well.
But really now...for the first time in American history, so many have found that so few are screwing them with lies, lies, more lies, and other lies, that Article 5 is the prescribed method of the citizenry seeking redress and no one here wants to talk about it?. Shocking..

You bring up a good point, Boca. Your comment is an indictment (did I spell this right) of the level of responsibility displayed by the people who participate on these forums. It stinks. There are so many of them participating, yet all they want to do is bash each other on the head for being either a 'Dem' or a 'Pub'. They completely ignore pertinent issues that will affect their lives--and their childrens' lives to come. Instead, the forums are mired in trivial pursuits, and God help you if you introduce anything that is actually pertinent to their well-being....they don't want to hear it.

The danger to this country, and inversely, a boon to the growing police state tyranny that is destroying the American spirit, is their mindless dedication to the 2-party system, regardless of what this corrupt system has done to impoverish and enslave them over the decades.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why there is no new blood coming onto the forums, and why some good posters leave, never to return.

 

[LanceFreeman]

The minority I speak of is those in congress and the senate the convention will have more people involved than just a handful of people. It will be addressed by the people of each state.

Can you expand on how it will be addressed by the people of each state? Will the convention just address a few articles that the people at large have agreed (in advance, by referendum) they want changed--without screwing around with other articles? How will the people guarantee that fiddling around with other clauses will not take place once the convention gets underway? Who will be watching the procedures on behalf of the people, giving us a blow-by-blow narrative of what is taking place, and who is doing what? Don't get me wrong; I just need to be convinced.

 

[Constitutional Sheepdog]

Can you expand on how it will be addressed by the people of each state? Will the convention just address a few articles that the people at large have agreed (in advance, by referendum) they want changed--without screwing around with other articles? How will the people guarantee that fiddling around with other clauses will not take place once the convention gets underway? Who will be watching the procedures on behalf of the people, giving us a blow-by-blow narrative of what is taking place, and who is doing what? Don't get me wrong; I just need to be convinced.

I'm not here to convince you or anyone else on why we need a Constitutional Convention. If you can't see it no discussion is going to make you see it. I am not trying to be mean spirited but it is what it is.

 

[LanceFreeman]

I'm not here to convince you or anyone else on why we need a Constitutional Convention. If you can't see it no discussion is going to make you see it. I am not trying to be mean spirited but it is what it is.

Well, CS, if you do have information that can shed light on this proposed convention, why not let us have it? Is it that much of a chore? Isn't it what this discussion is about? Why assume that no one else can see what you see?