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 previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-111 next last
To: 5thGenTexan; 1010RD; AllAmericanGirl44; Amagi; aragorn; Art in Idaho; Arthur McGowan; ...

21 posted on 06/26/2015 2:49:05 PM PDT by Publius ("Who is John Galt?" by Billthedrill and Publius now available at Amazon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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

An Article 5 convention would not permit the writing of a new Constitution - it is only for the purpose of proposing amendments to the existing Constitution. Each of those amendments would still have to be ratified by 38 states.

22 posted on 06/26/2015 2:49:12 PM PDT by CA Conservative (Texan by birth, Californian by circumstance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative

You need to listen and learn a little before engaging whatever it is you have between your ears.

Start here:

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


23 posted on 06/26/2015 2:49:24 PM PDT by Hostage (ARTICLE V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative; thorvaldr

> “An Article 5 convention would not permit the writing of a new Constitution - it is only for the purpose of proposing amendments to the existing Constitution. Each of those amendments would still have to be ratified by 38 states.”

I have to give credit to CA Conservative, he got that spot on.


24 posted on 06/26/2015 2:51:28 PM PDT by Hostage (ARTICLE V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706; All
In the meantime, it's time to get on the ball and start demanding nullification from legislators in friendly states.

Nullification NOW

25 posted on 06/26/2015 2:51:48 PM PDT by Yashcheritsiy (It's time to repeal and replace the GOP)
[ 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.

Can't wait til SCOTUS twists and perverts them to mean whatever THEY want them to mean!

26 posted on 06/26/2015 2:52:19 PM PDT by dware (Yeah, so? What are we going to do about it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Hostage
You need to listen and learn a little before engaging whatever it is you have between your ears.

Sad that you feel a need to jump to insults. But nothing in the link (to your own vanity post, btw) addresses or negates my basic point in any way.

27 posted on 06/26/2015 2:52:51 PM PDT by CA Conservative (Texan by birth, Californian by circumstance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Hostage

Not this sh*t again. YES! Let the Marxists re-write the Constitution. I would foresee a slew of proposed amendments coming out of a convention, just like 12 issued from the First Congress. Just like then, whichever of them can muster ratification by 3/4 of the state legislatures become part of the Constitution, like 10 of the 12 became the Bill of Rights. If 3/4 of the states want Marxist amendments, I’m cool with that, but I don’t think that would happen. I mean really, all three branches rewrite the Constitution to fit their leftist and corporatist whims already, so what are you afraid of?


28 posted on 06/26/2015 2:53:53 PM PDT by j.havenfarm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

About the only good I can see coming out of these outrageous rulings is more support for Article V. Jefferson himself was worried about the Court of Supreme Whim . It's about time something was done to make sure that corrupted court no longer has the final word. To those who say "The Constitution is already good, just follow it", I say it's not the same as it was in 1789. It's been amended many times since and many of those additions have been toxic. Time to undue the damage.

29 posted on 06/26/2015 2:54:00 PM PDT by Nateman (If liberals are not screaming you are doing it wrong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hostage
Ideally one or at most two amendments should cover the whole problem.
LOL! If you want someone to jump on board with that, you might want to identify what "the whole problem" is.
30 posted on 06/26/2015 2:55:16 PM PDT by lewislynn ( Hillary = Obama in a pantsuit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706
Ted Cruz also mentioned it on Hannity today.

-PJ

31 posted on 06/26/2015 2:57:49 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too (If you are the Posterity of We the People, then you are a Natural Born Citizen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thorvaldr; Hostage

Name a people from any time in history who convened to enslave themselves.


32 posted on 06/26/2015 3:00:12 PM PDT by Jacquerie (Article V. If not now, when?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative

You don’t have a point. You have a recipe for disaster, a game plan for losing.

There’s no way you would read through that link so fast.

The electorate is not as important in the Article V process as are the elected state legislators; they call the shots.

Right now the leaders of the Article V movement are drafting procedures and amendments for legislators to review and support so that they don’t all show up for a meeting and engage in chaos. The Article V meeting aka Convention of States will be orderly and focused. They are not going to engage in a plethora of amendments period. They are going to officially record their votes to propose the pre-approved amendments and then it goes off to ratification.

One of the criterion for amendments is to select ones that cover the most ground.

Your idea of groups and groups of amendments is a non-starter - NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.


33 posted on 06/26/2015 3:00:46 PM PDT by Hostage (ARTICLE V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

There are so many factual inaccuracies in this article that I question whether it should have been posted ta all.


34 posted on 06/26/2015 3:00:49 PM PDT by Publius ("Who is John Galt?" by Billthedrill and Publius now available at Amazon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dware
I'm curious - if an amendment were passed that simply says the 17th amendment is hereby repealed, and original language fully restored, what would SCOTUS twist, given 120 years of state legislature selection of Senators? Be specific, don't say they just will and point to some other twist.

-PJ

35 posted on 06/26/2015 3:03:40 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too (If you are the Posterity of We the People, then you are a Natural Born Citizen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Wilderness Conservative
<>The convention will just make things worse.<>

Do you expect it to formally grant the lawmaking, treaty making, spending powers that congress has unconstitutionally punted to El Presidente?

36 posted on 06/26/2015 3:08:06 PM PDT by Jacquerie (Article V. If not now, when?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: dware
To make it easier for you, this is a 2003 thread of mine containing a proposed amendment repealing the 17th amendment, patterned after the 21st amendment.

Is it twistable?

-PJ

37 posted on 06/26/2015 3:09:06 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too (If you are the Posterity of We the People, then you are a Natural Born Citizen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Jacquerie
Name a people from any time in history who convened to enslave themselves.

Republicans in 2014???

38 posted on 06/26/2015 3:09:50 PM PDT by dware (Yeah, so? What are we going to do about it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative
An Article 5 convention would not permit the writing of a new Constitution - it is only for the purpose of proposing amendments to the existing Constitution.
Yea, that's how it get's rewritten. For example the 18th was repealed (rewritten) by the 21st.

They could propose new amendments to clarify the language of the first and or the 2nd.. I dare say that WILL be on the agenda of some.

39 posted on 06/26/2015 3:11:19 PM PDT by lewislynn ( Hillary = Obama in a pantsuit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too
Be specific, don't say they just will and point to some other twist.

If I can't point to the utter BS they have used TWICE to twist obolacare, then I'm afraid you aren't interested in true debate. Gruber himself said that states that didn't create exchanges wouldn't qualify for subsidies, the law itself is pretty damn clear, and others said it too (Kathleen Superdumba$$, IIRC).

The point is, I don't know how they will, but they will, just as they continue to do with obolacare and deviant marriage. It WILL happen. Common sense backs the historical data up.

40 posted on 06/26/2015 3:12:44 PM PDT by dware (Yeah, so? What are we going to do about it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 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