Skip to comments.Michael Farris and the John Birch Society Square off in Oklahoma (Article V)
Posted on 03/17/2014 1:12:43 PM PDT by Jacquerie
If youre interested in the Convention of States Project and enjoy a good, old-fashioned debate, youre in for a treat.
Convention of States Project director Michael Farris will join Oklahoma State Senator Rob Standridge on March 19 and 20 to debate leaders of the Oklahoma John Birch Society on the efficacy of calling a Convention of States to stop the abuses of Washington, D.C.
Questions have been swirling around the Convention of States issue, and Michael and Rob look forward to answering many of them. A Convention of States is our best chance to stop the overreach of the federal government, and they want to explain why all arguments to the contrary fall short.
It promises to be an excellent, informative debate, and we encourage you to attend if you live in the Oklahoma City area. If you arent able to attend, no problem. Youll have the opportunity to watch a recording of the debate, which well post on our website.
Details are below:
DEBATE #1: On March 19 at 12 p.m., Michael Farris and Rob Standridge will debate Oklahoma John Birch Society leader Bob Donohoo.
WHERE: Olivet Baptist Church, 1201 Northwest 10th St. Oklahoma City, OK.
DEBATE #2: On March 20 at 7 p.m., Farris and Standridge will debate Donohoo and Charlie Meadows, President and Founder of the Oklahoma Conservative Political Action Committee and long-time John Birch Society member.
WHERE: Assembly of God Church, 2500 E Lindsey St. Norman, OK.
Seating is limited at both venues, so come early to save yourself a good seat!
We look forward to seeing you there.
Hey let’s invite the Birchers to draft the language
of a state nullification amendment
so it can be presented at the Article V convention...
Please ping if you do find it posted, anywhere. Will love seeing Mr Farris clean some clocks!
They’re working on this in the AZ legislature.... hope it goes through!
I still don’t “get” this. The whole crux of the issue is our elected leaders are ignoring much of the Constitution. So we want to write more amendments to the Constitution for our leaders to ignore?
Are you suggesting that the current Senator would somehow ignore that and insist on staying on in the Senate?
What if term-limits amendments pass? Would a Representative or Senator refuse to vacate once the term limit is passed?
Is that what you mean when you ask about ignoring more amendments?
I suspect that RINOs are trying to exploit low-information patriots, who probably haven't read Article V, by rattling the "Convention of States" saber as a dog-and-pony show.
Patriots really need to elect Constitution-respecting conservatives to Congress in November who will do some long-overdue impeaching.
Well, I am not advocating either. The COS is utilizing a Constitutional mechanism, previously unused, to propose amendments that completely bypass the federal govt, and empowers the states. Yes, some states are marxist leftist hellholes. I live in one. But, again short of submission/war, there ARE states that can get things right, and just the momentum and spirit of a COS can start shaking things up to limit the federal overreach. The beauty of a COS is that people (aka, marxists) are not the participants, but states are.
Understood. But they do pretty much exactly what they want, ignoring the Constitution you want to amend. My concern is more about the First and Second Amendments that they’re already ignoring.
I’ve also seen analyses that indicate once a convention is called, what’s to keep the states from sending delegates who want to do more than just consider new amendments? What’s to keep them from voting on whether to repeal the First Amendment and/or the Second Amendment? Nothing.
The bottom line is things are already bad enough, and given the demographics of our nation nowadays, I have zero faith that the convention will be comprised of just patriots. A runaway convention would be an unmitigated disaster. The Left’s wet dream.
I mean, there’s a reason that scumbag Soros thinks this is a great idea.
State law, backed up with felony penalties for violating their commissions.
Mike debating the JB folks will be like St. Augustine debating Faustus.
Mike grew up in the heart of JB land in Eastern Washington.
Raised in the Tri-Cities, then college in Spokane, where he started his law practice.
What ever amendments were proposed by an Article V Convention of States would still have to be ratified by 38 states.
Do you seriously believe that 38 states would vote to repeal the 1st or 2nd amendment?
New York? California? Basically the northeast, north and left coast? See my point?
Article V convention called...
States send delegates... delegates debate and propose amendments... CONVENTION votes on amendments to send to states...
38 states to ratify...
It’s quite possible that NO offending amendments would even make it out of the Convention...
So TRUE BLUE states can send their delegations. Fantastic. They can be part of the debate and propose whatever they want... convention won’t allow it out... AND IF IT DOES< still need 38 states to ratify...
And delegates will be under STATE LAWS to govern their behaviors...
Let's talk about what a "runaway convention" really is.
1. Is it a convention that attempts to write a brand new Constitution, such as when the Articles of Confederation were replaced with our current Constitution?
This cannot happen. It is not 1787, and there already is a Constitution in force. The only output of the convention would be proposed amendments.
2. Is it a convention where all sorts of odd amendments are proposed?
Perhaps. More likely, the result would be that an oddball delegation from a state that was sent with instructions to disrupt would be ejected by the rest of the body. Any amendment proposals would have to be voted on, and it would be unfortunate if some really odd proposed amendments actually passed the convention. Then, they would still need 38 states to ratify an oddball amendment.
3. Is it a convention with such an arcane set of parliamentary rules that nothing ever gets voted on, essentially turning the convention into one large filibuster?
Would some states try to bog down the process so that nothing ever comes of it, and the convention degenerates into a waste of time to the point where the states recall their delegations and give up? I would hope that the states have enough people with high motives that they would send responsible, good-faith actors to such an historic event.
How MANY STATE HOUSES are in Repub control? How many states have PART-TIME legislators who live in the community? How many of these legislators are taking the SAME beating you and I are?
My rep here has a small business and his revenue is down 50%... You think he’s pi$$ed at DC? He’s all for an Article V Convention!
Patriots need to take advantage of all opportunities to resolve problems. But I don't foresee a convention before Nov. 4 of this year. So let's not lose opportunity provided by election while patriots also plan for convention.