I’m behind this. The president is a dictator, the congress have abrogated their constitutional duties in favor of corporate pay offs, and the judicial branch has sold out their principles for Washington cocktail party invitations. What more do we have to lose by trying this? Damn them all, full speed ahead!
When rthe president of the U.S. issues executive orders in place of signing laws passed by congress, this is a very natural reaction. It’s sad, but the media is mostly to blame because instead of getting in Obamas face and demanding adherence to the rule of law, they have instead gone silent because they support his goals. The precedent is so very dangerous.
” “If we ever got [to a convention], this would create a constitutional crisis unlike anything we’ve seen in our lifetimes.””
I’m wondering if they quoted this leftist as an example to future politicos of HOW STUPID something you say can be. In this case we follow the rules of the Constitution to have a Constitution Convention and that is classified as a “Constitutional Crisis”?
Probably the biggest issue will be the makeup of the constitutional convention. The simplest would be one representative from each state. But that won't fly with many population-heavy states.
This conservative happens to love gridlock. To me, the less the government does, the better.
We are always one law away from perfection.
The criminals in DC don’t follow the law now. One more will change their behavior? Not.
I think there’s a lot of danger in a Constitutional Convention. Once it starts who is to say what happens. The left will cheat, lie, misdirect and try desperately to stack the thing. Adios 1st and 2nd Amendment maybe.
All a balanced budget amendment will do is pave the way for higher taxes. The Dems get in control and they will just raise taxes to cover the additional spending so the budget is balanced.
The only amendment I really need to see is the one that says that all laws passed by congress shall apply equally to themselves—no exceptions, no special considerations.
I have decidedly mixed feelings about this. The country is very closely divided along ideological grounds. The idea that this will be a conservative convention fixing all of our problems is probably not realistic. A constitutional convention is potentially dangerous. Calling a convention with no idea what will happen or what it might do could be disastrous.
Which is EXACTLY what we need. Time to get rid of these scumbags once and for all. By whatever means.
Horseshit. Congress has nothing to do with any of these issues. All Congress has a say in the the time and place. That’s it.
Article V ping. This is about an Amendments Convention dedicated to a balanced budget amendment, not Mark Levin’s proposed amendments. There are bits of misinformation and invalid assumptions in the article.
Bad idea. Really bad idea.
I’m for the Liberty Amendments, as well as a balanced budget amendment (with tax limitation), and a few other pro-freedom amendments. Let’s amend away teh progressives’ ability to do anything they want.
This might sound like a good idea, but the powers that be are never going to let anyone else write a new Constitution.
-—and one that could, some opponents predict, lead to complete political chaos. -—
As if a group of nine judges who make law based on penumbras isn’t chaos. Or a president who uses the Constitution for toilet paper.
Whatever amendments are proposed by the convention have to be ratified by the states, just like amendments proposed by Congress. Sheesh.
The first proposal should be congressional term limits.
You know that libs and “moderates” will turn up as well, correct?
Changing the laws is a fool's errand until we actually get back to being closer to a government of laws, not men.