BEWARE: Mt. Vernon Assembly is working 24/7 to convene a constitutional convention!

1/23/14 | johnwk

[Jacquerie]

And so, the truth is, there was, what many call, a “runaway convention” which decided to draw up an entirely new Constitution and government, and it ignored the limitation of merely revising the Articles of Confederation as instructed.

There was going to be a federal convention in Philadelphia regardless of what congress did or did not do. Under the Articles of Confederation, Congress had no power over the convention.

Timeline:

1786.
November 23, Virginia authorizes election of delegates.
November 23, New Jersey elects delegates.
December 4, Virginia elects delegates.
December 30, Pennsylvania elects delegates.

1787.
January 6, North Carolina elects delegates.
January 17, New Hampshire elects delegates.
February 3, Delaware elects delegates.
February 10, Georgia elects delegates.
February 21, Congress calls for a federal convention.

There was nothing to prevent congress from proposing amendments, which it did, regarding taxes and trade a couple of times in the early 1780s.

Just as the federal convention of 1787 was extra-congressional, our future amendment convention of the states will also be extra-congressional. Unlike nullification, the state amendment convention will be constitutional.

[Jacquerie]

Do we really want to convene a convention to give those who now hold federal and state power the opportunity to make constitutional, that which is now un-constitutional?

The American police state isn't an abstraction. It is here. We have an Obama/Congress/Scotus approved police state dressed in constitutional drag. What do you intend to do about it?

[G Larry]

How can you possibly criticize Mike and then use a quote from Madison which addresses his sentiments regarding a “General Convention”?

” another general Convention as suggested by New York. I shall give them to you with great frankness …….3. If a General Convention were to take place for the avowed and sole purpose of revising the Constitution”

Just what agenda are you accusing Mike of proposing.
I know Mike's credentials, what are yours?

[Jacquerie]

The truth is, the convention ignored the agreed upon purpose for which the convention of 1787 was called which was to revise the Article of Confederation to make them adequate to the exigencies of the Union.

The convention debated the means to improve the confederation government. There was no way the states were going to grant adequate power to a single body of men. That was tyranny itself.

[Jacquerie]

If the America People do not rise up and defend their existing Constitution and the intentions and beliefs under which it was adopted, who is left to do so but the very people it was designed to control and regulate?

Huh?

[Jacquerie]

Your Madison quote is given without context. Anti-federalists continued to oppose the constitution after ratification, and hoped to remove the taxing and commerce powers. In response, Madison shepherded what became the bill of rights through the House of Reps.

[Jacquerie]

With much reluctance, Article V ping.

[JOHN W K]

Who do you think well resolve constitutional questions should a convention be convened? Would it not be our tyrannical Supreme Court?

JWK

[John Valentine]

The worst, dangerously uninformed, off-target and wrong-headed vanity post I have read on Free Republic in fifteen years. For shame.

[VanDeKoik]

“BEWARE: Mt. Vernon Assembly is working 24/7 to convene a constitutional convention!”

A convention for the purpose of proposing constitutional amendments is not a constitutional convention.

[JRandomFreeper]

Bump.

/johnny

[John Valentine]

The Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction of the conduct of such a Convention.

The Supremes might well try to weigh in, but the convention is under no obligation to pay them the slightest attention.

[JOHN W K]

What I quoted from Madison was just after our Constitution had been ratified and there was a persistence among a number of states for an Article V convention to adopt a bill of rights which had not yet been added to our Constitution. I believe most people would agree a bill of rights was very necessary! And during this time period George Washington recommended that Congress draw up a bill of rights and send it to the States for ratification to avoid another convention which he too believed was not a good idea. In response, James Madison took up the cause in the House and on March 4th 1789 Madison and Washington’s efforts paid off when 12 amendments were sent to the states for ratification.

JWK

Today’s corrupted politics is all about the Benjamins, and which political party's leadership can put their hand deeper into the productive working person’s pocket.

[plainshame]

You are correct!The courts can go pound sand along with the fed!

[Jacquerie]

As I asked earlier, what is your solution to turn back the police state?

[M Kehoe]

Bttt.

5.56mm

[JOHN W K]

I don't understand what you are attempting to say.

My agenda is to prevent putting our constitution up for grabs, and in the hands of the very people who now cause our sufferings.

JWK

Reaching across the aisle and bipartisanship is Washington Newspeak to subvert the Constitution and screw the American People.

[Jacquerie]

If the 1787 federal convention violated congressional instructions, if the convention went way beyond what you say it was authorized to do, why did congress pass the engrossed constitution on to the states for their consideration?

[Jacquerie]

An Article V amendment convention will be, as I said in post #2, an extra-congressional event. In fact, neither congress, nor the executive, nor the judiciary will be present.

It will be a strictly FEDERAL convention.