Posted on 08/23/2013 9:56:51 AM PDT by Kaslin
When Mark Levin decided to write his book "The Liberty Amendments" to advocate a convention to propose a series of amendments to the U.S. Constitution, he may not have realized how quickly and deeply his profound idea would resonate. But throughout the nation, people are inclining their ears.
The first obstacle Levin faced was the widespread misconception that he is calling for a constitutional convention that could be hijacked by enemies of our founding principles and converted into a forum to hammer the final nails into our constitutional republic by fundamentally and radically changing our founding document.
In fact, Levin's proposal couldn't be more at odds with that misperception. He is, first and foremost, a constitutionalist. His goal is neither to eradicate nor to substantially change the Framers' blueprint for government. It's to restore it with specific, defined amendments intended to re-establish the proper balance between the power of the government and the liberty of its citizens, with due emphasis on the latter.
Levin is not arrogantly presuming to improve on the ineffable work of the Framers in crafting "the most wonderful work ever struck off at a given time by the brain and purpose of man" but humbly calling on his fellow patriots to recognize that we have strayed from the principles they enshrined in the Constitution and join him in his effort to advance the necessary correctives.
The Framers didn't meet in Philadelphia in the 18th century with the burning desire to pass super-legislation to codify an ideological political agenda to establish fundamental rights in health care or education, and they certainly didn't want to guarantee, by law, certain economic outcomes.
They met ostensibly to amend the Articles of Confederation and ended up scrapping it entirely and replacing it with our Constitution.
They were determined to design a system of government that would maximize individual liberties. That would require establishing a government strong enough to protect citizens from domestic and foreign threats but no stronger than that, for they knew that historically, unchecked, tyrannical governments had been the enemies of freedom.
Their challenge was to find that optimal balance between the power of government and individual liberties, so they created a system that divides and diffuses power between the national and state governments (through a system of federalism) and between coequal, competing branches of the federal government (the separation of powers), which hold one another in check.
It was not the affirmative granting of rights that would establish liberties -- many meaningless constitutions have paid lip service to that endeavor -- but the imposition of defined, specific and enforceable limitations on the federal government.
We must not lose sight of the fact that their overarching concern was liberty, an idea that gets little attention today -- apart from conservatives, constitutionalists and tea party patriots.
What constitutionalists understand is that upholding the integrity of the Constitution and its designed system of limited government is essential to preserving our liberties, and usurpations of power by all three branches of government and by an out-of-control, unaccountable administrative bureaucracy have imperiled them. Constitutionalists abhor abuses of power by any and all branches, irrespective of the substantive political agenda being served by such usurpations.
When King Josiah found a copy of the Jewish law in the Temple, which was being restored in 621 B.C., he was mortified by the extent to which the nation had departed from its teachings. He called for rededication to the law and a revival of its presence in the lives of the people.
Mark Levin is a modern-day constitutional prophet whose purpose is not to revamp the Constitution. It is to revive it and refurbish it -- to restore the cracks in its foundation caused by lawless officials through the years who were more interested in guaranteeing outcomes than they were liberty.
The goal of every one of Mark's proposed amendments is to restore the delicate balances the Framers originally designed; it is to restate and revivify the system of limited government they established by replacing bricks in specific places in our constitutional foundation -- bricks that statists have forcibly dislodged over time.
The sagacious and prescient Framers knew that no matter how well they crafted the Constitution, no matter what kind of protections it included, it would always be vulnerable to the abuses of lawless men who simply refuse to honor its provisions. They also understood that experience would enlighten their successors as to possible pitfalls and weaknesses in the framework that could be breached by such scofflaws over time, so they provided specific methods for amending the Constitution to shore up those trouble spots -- always keeping in mind that preserving liberty was the greatest imperative.
Today's statists have no regard for the Constitution or rule of law and have severely weakened it in many places, and as a result, our liberty, our prosperity and our very nation are in decline and in grave jeopardy.
Mark Levin is calling on us to take corrective steps -- through a process anticipated and expressly sanctioned by the Framers, no less -- to restore our system and reinvigorate our liberties. Let's pray his effort becomes an inexorable movement that sweeps the nation like the Great Awakening.
Click on his book and scroll down about a third of the way.
BTW, he has been an activist since nineteen years of age, when he got elected to a school board seat. He's been twisting statist tails ever since.
It's a bunch of individual state conventions convened with the sole, constitutional, purpose of proposing amendments to the Constitution.
I'm unable to imagine a scenario in which these conventions could be hijacked in a manner that would result in the supplanting of the current Constitution.
Yes. Ratification of the amendments requires three-quarters of the states.
This can't be repeated enough. We'll face enough resistance from the bad guys. We don't need a circular firing squad on our side.
Amen.
We forget that progressive legislators and judges have been re-writing the Constitution for the last 100 years. It's time that we brought the subject out into the open.
I think blue-staters will go for congressional term limits as well.
That will get the ball rolling.
This is more suited to statutory law. Amendments deal more with basic principles.
Do we, or do we NOT have a malignant cancer in our nation?
I love your metaphor.. but radical surgery was needed 10/15 years ago.. maybe 20/30..
The Pox is upon us.. the flock(herd) is diseased.. culling is mandatory..
Whats needed is not a scalpel but a meat ax..
Failure to admit this (by cowards) will cost the entire HERD...
It is not just Obama but ALL the people brought into gov’t from the time of the Clintoon’s... ALL OF THEM..
YES; that includes Bush too.. including the stealth progressive Rove.. and even Gingrich..
Newt brags that he is a progressive.. the flock is diseased..
Ron Paul “the Barbarian”(i.e.Conan) might buy some time.. BUT..
America way too brain washed for Ron.. its not cancer BUT the POX..
You kinda “have it” but lack the correct diagnosis..
It’s THE POX.. grasshopper.. not cancer.. need different tactics..
I’ll consider looking into his latest payoff from whatever think tank bought by the pallet as soon as this constitutional “scholar,” lover of liberty and enemy of statists stops claiming the mantle of all those things long enough to apologize and admit he was totally and completely wrong for shilling for the patriot act, homeland security, TSA and all of the other crap that he mocked people for settling off warning bells about. Funny how his tune changes to whip up the rubes when the people holding his leash don’t have their guy in the white house. He’s a well paid fraud.
You are right that there are many Ruling Class culprits that need weeding. Sure, we weed out those who are vulnerable. And the weeding will get easier when they openly oppose Levin’s ideas.
Men no longer worried about elections, such as Rove and Bush, will be rendered irrelevant if the Convention is a success.
It’s law that had such things taken down. To reverse such a law, we need an amendment. It sets the tone. Let’s see who opposes it.
“I think blue-staters will go for congressional term limits as well.”
Right on!
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.