Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

As SCOTUS decision on Obamacare sinks in, momentum grows for Convention of States
conventionofstates.com ^ | 6/26/15

Posted on 06/26/2015 2:15:23 PM PDT by cotton1706

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-111 next last

1 posted on 06/26/2015 2:15:23 PM PDT by cotton1706
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Jacquerie; Publius

ping


2 posted on 06/26/2015 2:15:40 PM PDT by cotton1706
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

3 posted on 06/26/2015 2:17:43 PM PDT by BenLurkin (The above is not a statement of fact. It is either satire or opinion. Or both.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

I’m curious - what will we do when SCOTUS twists the new amendments to mean whatever they want them to mean?


4 posted on 06/26/2015 2:18:00 PM PDT by dware (Yeah, so? What are we going to do about it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

This decision on gay marriage may actually help us get the states we need for this...

...not that I support what they did... just looking for the silver lining.


5 posted on 06/26/2015 2:18:10 PM PDT by Safrguns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

I wonder if the convention of states could also fire specific justices for cause???


6 posted on 06/26/2015 2:19:03 PM PDT by Safrguns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

So the solution to Marxists not reading the constitution is to let the Marxists write a new constitution?


7 posted on 06/26/2015 2:20:06 PM PDT by thorvaldr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

We will break up just like the Soviet Union.


8 posted on 06/26/2015 2:20:13 PM PDT by gaijin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706
What would U.S. law be like without the Bill of Rights? Had a convention of the states not taken place in 1789, the Bill of rights would not exist.

The Bill of Rights has profoundly screwed up Americans' understanding of their Constitution. Because of it, people think rights are granted by the government. Even though it specifically says otherwise, the very existence of the BoR is a stab at the fundamental idea that the Constitution binds the government - it does NOT grant ANY rights to the People.

9 posted on 06/26/2015 2:23:42 PM PDT by Talisker (One who commands, must obey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Safrguns

Thank you for trying to be positive.

2016 is all we have right now.


10 posted on 06/26/2015 2:25:54 PM PDT by skinndogNN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: skinndogNN

2016 Make or Break


11 posted on 06/26/2015 2:27:14 PM PDT by two23 (Ignore the media. It isn't propaganda if we don't listen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: skinndogNN
2016 is all we have right now.

I still remember 16 years ago, when 2000 was the most important election of our time, and if we just got Dubya elected, along with an R House & Senate (which we did), all would be better. Lol.

12 posted on 06/26/2015 2:28:20 PM PDT by dware (Yeah, so? What are we going to do about it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: gaijin

That would be a good thing. Large countries always serve their citizens poorly.


13 posted on 06/26/2015 2:28:35 PM PDT by freedomfiter2 (Lex rex)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

Thanks for posting this.

On the same subjected I posted this yesterday:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3304160/posts

Please be aware that a ‘marriage amendment’ won’t be enough. Our Article V amendment must be broad and specific to cover all the abuses of the federal government.

Ideally one or at most two amendments should cover the whole problem. It takes only one amendment to get across the finish line and then others can follow but I don’t think much more will be needed. See the link above for more detail and information.


14 posted on 06/26/2015 2:29:39 PM PDT by Hostage (ARTICLE V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thorvaldr; cotton1706

> “So the solution to Marxists not reading the constitution is to let the Marxists write a new constitution?”

Can you explain with some detail and intelligence how they would do that? Or are you just heckling.

I know that the Constitution cannot be rewritten by the hard core left ....

but I just want to see what you have to say. I predict you will spew a lot of bullsh*t but let’s see what you got.


15 posted on 06/26/2015 2:33:39 PM PDT by Hostage (ARTICLE V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Hostage

“I know that the Constitution cannot be rewritten by the hard core left ....”
Why do you know that? Our current political parties are the problem. What is the process that keeps our current political parties from participating in the convention?


16 posted on 06/26/2015 2:39:43 PM PDT by thorvaldr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

The convention will just make things worse.


17 posted on 06/26/2015 2:45:29 PM PDT by Wilderness Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

It is too late to get organized and have a convention of the states. We must concentrate on the Presidency, keep the Senate and kick the anti Republicans out of the House. Bonehead must go.


18 posted on 06/26/2015 2:46:00 PM PDT by Logical me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hostage
Please be aware that a ‘marriage amendment’ won’t be enough. Our Article V amendment must be broad and specific to cover all the abuses of the federal government.

It would be foolish to try to formulate one amendment to cover all of the issues that need to be addressed. Not only would it be too complicated and difficult for most people to understand, it would increase the likelihood than nothing would be passed, or if it were to be passed and ratified, could easily be misinterpreted by the Supremes.

It would be much better to have a group of amendments, each covering a single discrete topic. An amendment limiting application of the Commerce clause to actual commerce between the states, and not just applying it to any activity that could possibly tangentially affect such commerce, would be a good one. Repealing the 17 amendment would be another good one. And one prohibiting SCOTUS from recognizing or creating any new "right" not specifically mentioned in the Constitution would be a good one as well.

19 posted on 06/26/2015 2:47:23 PM PDT by CA Conservative (Texan by birth, Californian by circumstance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: thorvaldr

I asked you first! You’re the one that implied the ‘Marxists’ would rewrite the Constitution using Article V.

And just like I predicted YOU GOT NOTHING to back it up and no explanation for how it could ever happen.


20 posted on 06/26/2015 2:47:41 PM PDT by Hostage (ARTICLE V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-111 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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