[Sgt_Schultze]

A convention would throw open the Constitution to major overhaul. New rights to education, medical care, affordable housing, living wages, clean environment and abortion would be embraced by all those who see such things as rights. A convention would be a feast to the left. I vote NO to a convention. Could our current crop of representatives be relied upon to write a document as enduring as the current Constitution? If the answer is no, how could you expect them to improve upon it?

[Support Free Republic]

---

God Bless America! God Bless This Man!
	Keep Our Republic Free Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD AND SAY THANKS TO JIM ROBINSON! It is in the breaking news sidebar!

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Convening a constitutional convention would wind up swapping the perfectly good constitution we now have with the Communist Manifesto.

It would be three ring circus where the self-proclaimed victims who screamed the loudest would get the most goodies.

[randog]

Recognizing that Congress might grow remote and isolated from the public will, the Constitution provides ways around Congress in amending the Constitution. Two-thirds of the legislatures of the several states may call a constitutional convention.

Why motivation would state legislators, many who aspire to become congressmen and senators, have to de-feather their future beds?

[Greybird]

There are two methods of adopting an amendment, but only one has ever been used: the legislatures of three-quarters of the states approve the amendment.

The 21st Amendment, which repealed federal alcohol Prohibition (the 18th Amendment) and permitted its being done by the states, was proposed to and adopted by "conventions in the several states," not by the legislatures. The author should have known this. (The chances for ratification were seen as far more likely by using a relatively more populist path.) It makes one wonder about his other constitutional arguments.

[El Gato]

The resort to extra-legal means will only empower the Left,

Extra-legal does not imply extra Constitutional. Many "laws" are themselves "unconstitutional. Nowhere in the Constitution are the courts given the power to "interpret" the Constitution, nor base any decisions on constitutionality of laws on anything other than the Constitution itself. They are not to use previous decisions if those decision conflicted with the plain meaning of the Constitution, nor with actions of courts or legislatures in other countries. They do both all the time of course.

So who is it that is acting "extra-legally". There is nothing wrong with the Constitution, save perhaps the 16th and 17th amendments (along with the 18th, but that one was repealed) passed just under 100 years ago. One Congress could, if the will could be found, repeal those two amendments and there is little doubt the states would ratify the repealing amendment (or amendments). Surely the examples of Clinton, Schummer, Fienstein, Boxer and others argue eloquently against popular election of Senators, and besides, how much worse could the state legislatures do anyway?

[GeronL]

If you want to limit liberal spending, an amendment would do that. A Convention will allow the leftists to overhaul the Constitution and make it into a Marxist documents

[Unknowing]

To paraphrase Franklin, we have a Republic, if we can keep it. Let's keep it!

So, Denver is right up there with Des Moines and Little Rock -- how about that.

[Clinging Bitterly]

Didn't read the article, but I don't think modifying the constitution is needed. The uncomplicated, plainly worded document we have now seems fine to me. It's hard to imagine a mass revision done in more modern legalese being any clearer.

The problems would remain - the activist/statist judiciary imagining hidden intentions, and the electorate letting them get away with it.

[Consort]

The catchphrase is: "It's the Liberal Judges, stupid."

[The South Texan]

No way! You could kiss your gun rights goodbye as well as relgious freedom. If the liberals got a hold of our constitution, the end result would make Stalin, Kruschev and Lenin smile in their graves.

[Squantos]

NOT JUST NO BUT .....HELL NO !

Just what the seditious socialists want IMO. The Republic is on life support as we speak.....why let Dr Kervorkian Clintonistas like polidiots and their handlers pull the plug on what we have left ! Time to remove the bullshit that the socialists have dumped on real Americans versus playing to the hyphenated welfare addicted bottom feeders wails for more and more for nothing ! Restore the original documents intent vs a bastardized rewrite !

Damn........Just Damn !

[SevenDaysInMay]

Congress since before the 1803 Mawbry v Madison power grab has had the designated powers within our RATIFIED Constitution to reign in and punish unlawful judges and justices.

Congress won't.

Because the federal government since 1861 has run wild with powers wanted never consented to by the free citizens or sovereign states comprising this Republic, feds need no Constitutional Convention to rewrite anything except to codify current and planned unlawful usurpations.

Stripping our 2nd Amendment from our civil rights, as affirmed by our Constitution, so that the political and socialist conected elite, aka apparatchiks and nomenclatura, can feel safer as they rule us is beyond foolish and a written invitation to civil war.

If the 20th Century's some 100 million dead, under the boots of their own governments' JBTs and politicians, can teach We the People one thing, never disarm letting our RATIFIED Constitutional Republic fail the free peoples of our United States of America.

We the People must retire our consent to be governed by the likes of the Rhenquist SCOTUS and the hundreds of blackrobes intent on unlawfully usurping our RATIFIED Constitution, the only document from which they and politicians out of blackrobes derive any and all of their lawful authority and police powers of the State. We must vote out of high office professioinal socialists now turning fascists, as the benefits of corruptions paid hansomely during the reign of XXX-XX-42s.

The Islamic Terror War is focusing the minds of some Americans, but unlawful federal government officials of all stripes must be taken to task and unemployment lines- because they are outlaws acting under color of law, beyond the lawful powers specifically granted by our RATIFIED and only lawful Constitution.

"Compelling State interests" are no "controlling legal authority" unless so granted in our RATIFIED Constition. "Compelling State interests" are just roadsigns to Concord Bridge II.

[c-b 1]

The Left has been getting initiatives passed for years, by calling them Term Limits initiatives, which are a call for a Constitutional Convention. About 3 or 4 years ago these initiatives had been passed in enough states that we were two states short of having enough to call for a Constitutional Convention, 5 states have now recended the call.

Anyone who thinks a Constitutional Convention will solve our problems has not been paying attention. These folks have a constitution written just waiting for the opportunity to implement it. It is nearly word for word, the constitution of the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

[meadsjn]

The original US Constitution and the Bill of Rights are relatively easy to read and understand, especially when compared to some of the modern legalese. What would the founders do with a 13,000 page legislative bill? They would probably send it directly to the wood stove.

I have been baffled for years by the inability of politicians (of both parties), bureaucrats, educators, et.al., to understand the simple wording of the first ten amendments. I definitely would not trust any of them to rewrite any portion of the Constitution.

For those who wish to rewrite the Constitution, perhaps the old dunkin' stool routine would be a good qualifier. If they survive 12 minutes underwater, they obviously must be a witch, and therefore must hang. If they drown, well, we'll just have to wait until someone else wants to apply for the job.

[FixitGuy]

The damn liberals have worked around and subverted most of the Bill of Rights as it IS!

I shudder to think of how our country would look if they had a chance to rewrite them!

Ever Vigilant....

[CanisMajor2002]

If the legislature and the judiciary can't follow the Constitution as is, they sure as hell won't follow it when we make it longer and more complex.

We have to nail the Dems on their judicial obstruction. We have to make the case that the Leftists (they are NOT liberals in the classic sense of the word) sell government protection without accountability. They want us to trust that some governmental body knows more about what our lives need than we do.

[Hanging Chad]

If only "we" could get what "we" wanted, but, alas...