Mark’s Lost Dog & Cat Rescue Foundation
“Conservatism is the antidote to tyranny precisely because its principles are the founding principles.” --Mark Levin in Liberty and Tyranny
Welcome to “The Levin Lounge”… Step in and have a virtual FRink.
Posted on 08/29/2013 2:22:35 PM PDT by Fudd Fan
The Legacy Lives On! Mark’s Lost Dog & Cat Rescue Foundation “Conservatism is the antidote to tyranny precisely because its principles are the founding principles.” --Mark Levin in Liberty and Tyranny Welcome to “The Levin Lounge”… Step in and have a virtual FRink.
Welcome all, to the most FUN LIVE THREAD on FreeRepublic.com!
You can call Mark’s show: 1-877-381-3811
Mark explains it ALL… and boy do we NEED him!!
Levin Frinks List:
Did you hear the guy the other night who bought 40 copies of “The Liberty Amendments”?
THE GREAT-ONE *PING*
Now 3 hours!
If you want on (or off) the *PING* List, post on this thread or FReepMail me.
Mark Levin Show streaming links list.
http://radio.findanisp.com/radio-show.php?show=309
Mark’s Official stream:
http://www.marklevinshow.com/sectional.asp?id=32930
or
http://player.streamtheworld.com/_players/citadel/?sid=1057
updated streams—
WABC: http://wm-eon.vitalstreamcdn.com/live_eonwmss_vitalstream_com_abc-wabcam1
WMAL: http://player.streamtheworld.com/_players/citadel/?sid=1057
WCBC: http://64.72.123.82:9960/listen.pls
KABC: http://www.kabc.com/article.asp?ID=649447
From the great state of Illinois: http://cities929.com/index.php
and now from Melbourne, Florida— WMMB: http://www.wmmbam.com/pages/live1.html
Mark is now on live at www.sirius.com on Patriot 144 (after Hannity)!
http://www.sirius.com
On XM166, “America Right:”
http://www.xmradio.com/onxm/channelpage.xmc?ch=166
A great site for many streaming talkies:
http://www.talkstreamlive.com/?b=nowplaying&category=1
This one does all 3 hours:
http://www.am1100.tv/#
This station’s stream should be up.
http://www.1290kkar.com/
For those on dial-up, courtesy of FReeper hattend:
http://gateway.andohs.net/player/?sid=1057&nid=2920
FReeper smokingfrog suggests:
http://nyc01.egihosting.com/7544
If you can update any of the above links, please let FuddFan know.
Call the show… 1-877-381-3811
Be sure to catch Mark’s latest rant at http://www.wabcradio.com/rant
Fudd Fan does not guarantee any of the above links to work at any given time.
Nope, must have missed it. Good for him!
Here's how I'd do it:
Step 1. Remove all 535 members of the legislative branch. Take their aides and staff too.
Step 2. Same with members of the executive branch. (Be sure to leave Oprah and the Butler, though)
Step 3. Sorry, judicial branch, you're outta here too!!
Step 4. Change constitution to read legislative officials get 5 years, regardless of branch (Congress or Senate). No hopping, either. You can be a Senator or a Congressman, your choice.
Step 5. Executive branch gets 1 4-year term. Legislator can run for executive, or vice versa. Once.
The alternative is a 20 megaton bomb with 1600 Pennsylvania Ave as ground zero. A bit messy, however.
The first three steps were brought up 20 years ago under the name “Utah Option”. I don’t know how it got that name. The idea was that the Constitution would be amended to allow the legislatures of three-fourths of the states to invoke a no-confidence option that would permit a new federal government to be chosen under those three steps.
Some people will do anything to sell a book. Because I disagree with the subject matter, I’ll not list names here. I don’t think you should buy any book that encourages an Article V Convention. It is tempting with the relentless usurpation of authority in Washington DC to consider this. But instead of taking the advice of attorneys, talk show hosts, and others in the intelligentsia, why don’t you do your own research and go read The Constitution and The Federalist Papers. See what you can find out for yourself about such a convention.
I did and here is what I discovered:
First, there are no rules in The Constitution that will regulate such a convention. We only know that “Amendments” (yes, it is plural) will be considered. There is no means to regulate which “Amendments” will be considered. In other words, well-meaning people enter the Con-Con (Constitutional Convention) believing that only their amendments will be brought up for consideration, but extremist groups from either side could bring others as well. There will be nothing to prevent this as there are no written rules in The Constitution.
Second, who will be the delegates? Will they be political leaders? That won’t work! They are already in office and we don’t like them. Will they be leaders from our favorite special interest groups? I know who my favorites are, and I’m certain the ACLU, the Communist Party USA, labor unions, and other groups have their delegates in mind as well.
But who gets to pick them? There is no mention of the delegate selection process written in The Constitution. Will these delegates be selected by Congress? Great, that’s what we need! I’m sure Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and John Boehner will do us proud. [insert note of sarcasm here] Perhaps each state should select their own delegates, but how many should they select? Does each state get one vote, as was the case in the original Constitutional Convention? Or should it be delegated by population, in which case, the larger states will have all the votes and smaller states will be irrelevant?
Once these delegates perform their duties at the convention, they will never have to run for re-election. This is a short term and one time job. Therefore, there is no accountability for these delegates. They could go and vote however they chose to vote, being completely disengaged from those they profess to represent.
Now, let’s just say we have these delegates together to pass “Amendments” on topics known but to God. According to our Constitution, when an Amendment is considered by Congress, it must pass through both houses before it can even leave the building to be considered by the several states. Either one of the two houses (made up of members who enjoy being re-elected a great deal and would do just about anything to make sure they are, including voting like the majority of their constituents tell them) can stop it if there are not enough votes. We the people can call our legislators and make this happen – we have on many occasions! Will we be able to do this in a single-chambered Con-Con? Anything they will vote on is done before we will know about it.
According to The Constitution, in order to ratify a Constitutional Amendment that has been passed by both houses of Congress, 38 of the 50 states must vote to approve it. In other words, it can still be stopped if it is a bad law. Since a Con-Con is not regulated, what is to prevent it from reducing this Article V requirement? We the people may very well have turned over all of our authority to nefarious powers. These delegates at a Con-Con are worse than Congress!
This is not an exhaustive list of problems with a Con-Con, but it will provide enough information for the better students among you to get started with your research. Don’t take my word for it. Do your own homework! Here are links.
~Temerity Dowell
http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/2013/08/27/schlafly-is-article-v-in-our-future/?subscriber=1
http://constitutionus.com/
Good evening, FF!
Saving the Constitution from ‘Liberal Destruction’
http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/politics/2013/August/Saving-the-Constitution-from-Liberal-Destruction/
Hidy Ho Neighbor
Thanks to Levinite and FReeper cleveland gop for transcription
just dawned on me why Obarry sent the bust back to England
someone holler’d from down the hall...” hey Mr President, you wanna send the bust back to England ? “
Obama, bein a queer, thought they meant tits and said “ Hell yes”
oooooh, I need a translator again.
S o
H appy
I t’s
T hursday
how deeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Al Not So Sharpton said it at the MLK rally yesterday.
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.