Posted on 08/06/2014 10:14:40 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
An Article V convention seems to be the only way to stop Ubama. If we don't stop him soon...
No worries, I am so fed up with the people who piss their little diapers over thinking it is a Con-Con. I have more respect for people who think it won’t change anything than those who don;t understand article V at all.
I think CoS should be used to put in term limits and other restrictions on federal powers a tool, not a solution in itself to start the process of kickiing corruption out of the potomac swamp.
For instance we desperately need term limits on the judiciary and also a process for the states to appeal judiciary decisions. Right now we have place the Judiciary branch as the “all seeing arbiter” and “last word” on the law when in fact they are not, we are.
Any Article V proposed amnedment needs to be clear and concise in it’s limiting of fed-gov complex. That is because we cannot word it vaguely and then have the supreme court “interpret” it away from the original intent of the Amendment.
If we pass a “Balanced Budget” amendment no doubt it would be ineffective because of the accounting tricks that can be played. However, if we make the IRS and Federal Budgeting Process answerable to the States and the people, it would have a bigger impact on limiting the federal power. Basically we need to pit the States against the Fed-Gov complex not in total warfare, but as gentlemen antagonists....
Right now a lot of the states are the pets of the federal government complex. The states need to start getting their power back....
Ping.
Almost all that remains of the constitution is the structure of the government it created, the institutions of congress, prez, courts, even year elections, six year senate terms. The soft clauses are largely gone, ignored or rewritten, like Article I Section 8, and the Bill of Rights.
Mark Levin's amendments would federalize the government to a level the Anti-Federalists of 1787 would appreciate.
I suppose talking about it is good for ratings, though.
What I like about Article V is that the states are equal. Doesn’t matter how many Democrat voters your state has, you have the same say.
[ They will take it to a judge, the judge will call it unconstitutional, the state governments will do what they do now when their sovereignty is checked: Nothing. Or, they’ll nullify the fed’s ruling. Which they could do now. If they’re not willing now, why do we think they’ll be willing then?
Can that happen? Yes. It will happen if this process continues. For my part, I don’t see why my God given liberty should depend on 38 states agreeing I should have it. ]
Article V needs to be tried, even if it fails, before a cold/hot CWII starts if only for the reason of exhausting all alternatives so the states have the high moral ground this around....
I’m not saying don’t try. I’m saying expect the left to try to hijack the process, and be ready to counter it. Don’t walk into it thinking of playing by parliamentarian Marquis de Queensbury Rules, only to be K-O-ed from behind by a sap held by a judge or other hidden traitor or traitors.
Because that WILL happen, if we walk into expecting a controllable legal process.
Rush inching one step closer to telling us its time to PANIC
We don’t have many options left, and time is running out.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it...
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Because the People, organized into sovereign states, established a constitutional federal government intended to secure the rights of the people from an overbearing government. When the government reaches beyond its constitutional limits, it is up to the states to protect the rights of its people by changing the nature of the government.
They aren't "agreeing that you should have it," they are agreeing on the best way to protect it for you.
-PJ
[ Mark Levin’s amendments would federalize the government to a level the Anti-Federalists of 1787 would appreciate. ]
The only thing Mark’s amendments are missing are a provision to automatically sunset laws after a certain period of time. I would love to force congress to spend over half it’s time renewing old laws and ocassionally throwing out old laws because they couldn’t agree to re-new them. If congress is spending a lion’s share lf time having to re-new/re-view old laws they would have less time to screw with us by passing new laws...
I think that we’ll see, at some point, a nullification of federal authority. It will probably come at a point when the economy has totally failed and there are rolling blackouts or worse. When Uncle Sam can’t pay meaningful salaries to his muscle (fed agents, national guard, etc etc) they will not be very gung ho to arrest good old boys in Alabama or Wyoming. Eventually I think we’ll see some regionalism, with only lip service given to Washington D.C.
That won’t all happen in a vacuum, with such a weakened America, we will have almost no force to project outside, and the bad actors will be running riot from China to Chile.
The backdrop will be hard days indeed, and the “silver lining” of no more federal intrusion will be cold comfort.
[ Rush inching one step closer to telling us its time to PANIC ]
The last 4 years of Rush have been very telling, 4 years ago would you even consider Rush even saying “I will let you know when it is time to panic”...
Things won't get that drastic until unrest hits and people cannot go about their day to day business.
If Ubama snoops on some Tea Party People, does that prevent the person next to you in Traffic from going to work? No
It's what has been called the Normalcy Bias, as long as things continue to work relative smoothly, The Electricity keeps flowing, the Stores are stocked and you can put gas in your car (even if those prices get higher and higher) Ubama can get away with ANTYING!
HOWEVER, the moment any of those things are taken away, (for more than 72 hours, that is the magic number) Then you will see things unravel.
Ubama, Van Jones et al think they can control that Chaos, but they will be consumed by that Blaze too.
Put constitutionally explicit expiration dates on all constitutional delegations of power to the federal government, possible renewal of a given power uniquely up to the states.
Abolish political party support of the federal government. After all, does it really take political parties to decide policy for the US Mail Service (the Constitution's Clause 7 of Section 8 of Article I)? The purpose of political parties is for crooks to fight each other for control of the constitutionally nonexistant powers of the federal government.
Amend to the Constitution Justice John's Marshall's official clarification of Congress's limited power to lay taxes.
“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
And speaking of taxes, repeal the ill-conceived 16th & 17th Amendments to the Constitution.
Give the states the power to recall or impeach federal lawmakers, executives and justices.
If it's not reauthorized by a Congressional vote, it dies.
I really need to fire up a copy of VISIO and make a Constutitonal amendmen Flow chart that shows that an article V State amendment proposal is not scary as some want us to think it is.
Here we go again... Obama doesn’t follow the constitution now. The remedy for a lawless President is impeachment not this idiotic fake wet dream.
But it is precisely constitutional.
It is of the constitution.
A judge can call anything whatever he wants, but a judge only has as much power as he is given but others, so give him none.
A judge is a single person, nothing more.
I think it is worth trying the last possible civil solution before...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.