Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: RandFan

Who is “Joseph Ford Cotto”, and why is what he thinks important??


3 posted on 01/07/2023 2:19:40 PM PST by Repeal The 17th (Get out of the matrix and get a real life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Repeal The 17th
He wrote some books or something.

He also made videos titled “An Eye for an Eye and Combating Christian Nationalism” (posted on the Atheists for Liberty Youtube channel), which seems a waste of time to combat something that does not exist (like the DOJ does these days).

Another ridiculous tweet of his states the following:
Many non-lefties claim that, if only America “gets back to the Constitution,” all shall be well. These folks seem not to realize that everything they dislike transpired under the Con, which allows itself to be endlessly reinterpreted. Hence, its words have no permanent meaning.
Nice pack of lies. Everything that “non lefties”, as he says, “dislike”, happened not because of reinterpreting the Constitution but by blatantly ignoring it.
18 posted on 01/07/2023 2:29:34 PM PST by Olog-hai ("No Republican, no matter how liberal, is going to woo a Democratic vote." -- Ronald Reagan, 1960)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Repeal The 17th; MileHi

Just a conservative on twitter. I thought it was an interesting debate as I remember Levin wrote a book on it and really is pushing for one whereas organizations like the Birchers are steadfastly against it.


22 posted on 01/07/2023 2:33:04 PM PST by RandFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Repeal The 17th
Author, adventurer, student of history, photographer, chevalier, baron, and doctoral candidate, among other things. So says he. 🙂

I think the post is more about what he said, than it is about who said it. For the poster wanted to know what other Freepers thought about a Convention of the States.

Activist and lawyer Phyllis Schlafly was totally against it. Since the Constitution mentions it but never really set any rules on how they are to function, makes for a lot of pitfalls. Almost seems like they added it as an extra layer of protection, but couldn't quite figure out how that protection really might work, and instead left it for others to hash out. An afterthought if you will that someone suggested and thus it was added.

I have flip flopped on it, when someone says there is nothing to worry about, though I have been most not in favor of it, because there are just so many unknowns about it. Besides that, if we can't work within the Constitutional framework, then it becomes even less likely to be a solution, and more like a Pandora's box that might unleash more harm than good.

28 posted on 01/07/2023 2:47:17 PM PST by Robert DeLong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson