Posted on 09/10/2019 12:04:07 PM PDT by MarvinStinson
On Sunday, House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-SC) appeared on MSNBC to talk about the 1994 crime bill. During the conversation, Clyburn made a shocking admission: he doesn't believe the Bill of Rights would pass if it was brought forth today.
"You know what, I really believe sincerely that the climate we're in today, if the Bill of Rights the first 10 Amendments of the United States Constitution, were put before the public today, I'm not too sure we'd hold onto the Bill of Rights," Clyburn said. "Especially when I see what people are doing with the Second Amendment. No telling what they'd do with the First Amendment."
"You really believe that?" host David Gura asked. "That’s a startling statement. You believe that?”
“Absolutely,” Clyburn replied. “There would be a strong support against the Bill of Rights. Go through the Bill of Rights and I’ll tell you I run into people every day who would like to see so much of those guarantees uprooted.”
What Clyburn said should be a clarion call to conservatives.
But this thought process isn't new.
The left has always worked to undermine our rights. They just have younger, more outspoken people openly admitting they want to do it. They're no longer hiding their agenda.
I wonder if he would say the same thing about the 13th Amendment?
.
And that is why they are constitutional ammendments. They are to limit your power.
More name calling and the obligatory “if you are afraid of the government....” and “you could never win a war against the government”.
To which I responded, “I’m not afraid; I’m armed!” And then I reminded them that a whole bunch of rice eating idiots in Vietnam kicked the U.S. Government’s butt (not the military’s butt, but the U.S. Government’s butt)...then I asked them why couldn’t well armed, freedom-minded Americans?
It’s a wonderful thing when your enemy exposes his true feelings for all to see.
Yeah, like buying AR15s for sixty years, and other semi-autos for one hundred and twenty.
Kids these days!
You clearly have no understanding of a COS. The COS only proposes amendments. They then must be ratified by the states. If the statists have the votes they can make any changes they want with or without a COS. Convention of states is the last peaceful option to save the republic and we are running out of time if its not too late already.
We desperatley need to call a convention asap. Please get up to speed before making comments on the COS.
Thanks. I forgot to mention that S.C.’s open primary system guarantees Democrats’nominating the Republican of their choice, which is currently Flimsey Tinkerbelle Grahamnesty.
This statement is inexcusably ignorant. A convention cannot change anything. It’s only function is to propose amendments which then must be ratified by three fourths of the states. It is no easier to change the bill of rights with a COS then if congress proposes the changes themselves. Amendments to the Constitution must be ratified by the states no matter how they are proposed.
-PJ
I think it’s safe to say Majority Whip James Clyburn would NOT vote for the Constitution OR the Bill of Rights.
If Clyburn had his way we’d be living in some corrupt totalitarian hellhole - similar to large democrat run cities.
Don’t these disgraceful panderer’s take oaths to defend our Constitution and the Bill of Rights within?
If you are unable to ENTHUSIASTICALLY support the Bill of Rights, you need to permanently leave the United States and move to one of the many socialist paradise nations scattered around the world today.
The Bill of Rights was written by individuals a whole lot smarter then the fools we keep electing.
We’ve got the same thing out here in California.
And true to form, when this open primary concept was introduced on the ballot out here, the Republicans didn’t utter so much as a whimper.
I’m very sick of the uniparty.
He’s right! All the Democrats and many Republicans are commies!
Hoping one day to control you and everything you do
“This statement is inexcusably ignorant. A convention cannot change anything. It’s only function is to propose amendments which then must be ratified by three fourths of the states. It is no easier to change the bill of rights with a COS then if congress proposes the changes themselves. Amendments to the Constitution must be ratified by the states no matter how they are proposed.”
HOWEVER, what you’re not realizing is that if there is a COS, then the major wrangling that there will ever be over changing the Constitution (and if so, how) will be THERE. There will be one or more amendments put out to the states (and maybe it’ll be several amendments, packaged together like the BOR were), and it’ll be take it or leave it. The pressure to “take it” will be IMMENSE, mainly because of all of the work and compromise built into the COS, but also because of the “do something!” impulse, and also because those attending the COS will be the most prestigious politicians in the country, who will throw all of their weight behind approval. Plus, especially if there are provisions that the Leftists want, the entire weight of the media will be behind it. I can almost guarantee that one or more key opposition figures will be assassinated, as those in favor of the changes will look at this as their best opportunity EVER to grab that big brass ring. Freight trains barreling down the tracks at high speed are hard to stop.
The proposed changes which have been approved by many states (not sure the exact number) are very limited in scope. You are worried about something that is just not an issue. Even if your worst case were to happen at a convention there is no way it gets ratified in 3/4 of the states. Ask yourself why the dems did not go after the 2nd amendment when they controlled everything with Obama?
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.