30 December 2015
DANGEROUS: Marco Rubio Says The First Thing He'll Do As President Is Amend The U.S. Constitution:
"One of the things I'm going to do on my first day in office: I will announce that I am a supporter, and as president I will put the weight of the presidency behind a constitutional convention of the states so we can pass term limits on members of Congress and the Supreme Court so we can pass a balanced budget amendment," Mr. Rubio said in Iowa. ... "
Alinsky Tactics Are Being Used To Manipulate America Into Supporting Article V Convention:
https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/category/constitutional-convention/
Article V:
https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/article-v/
Con Con/Article V:
http://www.eagleforum.org/topics/concon.html
31 December 2015
Impeachment Resolution Introduced At The RNC:
Replies
Pay VERY close attention here people before you get suckered in one way or another.
What Marco Rubio is apparently proposing here is NOT an Article V Convention of States.
Under the Levin plan for an Article V convention only those very specific articles as written and submitted can be voted on. And those specific items being voted on must remain consistent across at least 34 States(2/3rd). There can be NO alterations or amendments to the text from one State to another.
ALSO: This is the important part,,,,, Once those proposed amendments have been written and distributed to all the States the Federal Government (Congress) can NOT alter, edit, or amend anything. Congress has NO say in what the amendments say or do. They are effectivle cut out of the process.
The Levin plan is a Convention of States, and it is specifically designed to prevent any additional alterations or amendments. It is designed (intended) specifically to PREVENT anyone from just simply "OPEN UP the Constitution and make changes according to what ever they can muster support for.
This Rubio plan would do exactly that,,,,,, It would open up the Constitution and make it vulnerable to all sorts of changes.
BAD idea.
Old Rooster~
I must admit, I did not check out the Iowa Debates session, but if Marco Rubio did in fact stipulate "Constitutional Convention", I do not see anyway that he would be able to control any part of the Con Convention. Especially if he did in fact say that he would 'put the weight of the presidency behind a Constitutional Convention'. What caught my attention in this article was the (alleged) statement: "I will announce that I am a supporter". The inference being that they are already in 'cahoots' of planning a ConCon, and no one would get a word in edge wise.
Term limits on the Congress or Supreme Court would (should) come from a vote of the people not the Executive Office -- at least I believe that to be true ... but then enters the dangerous part ... a run away convention.
Actually, such an act would not be completely different from the imposition of a Presidential Executive Order or worse, an Executive Action. Frankly, if we can't take care of, defend the Constitution we already have, we certainly don't need a new one [that we will not follow either].
You are right, in any event thereof, it is a BAD idea.
Morning Star / Old Rooster -
I fully ! concur, agree, support your arguments against ! any ! ConCon. The backroom, 'caucus' push for a ConCon is a maneuver by the backroom power brokers already controlling the greatest majority [if not 90%] of Congress - both House & Senate. We've already experienced the 'disappearance' of the 13th Amendment since the mid to late 1800's. In my opinion, it is the special interest power groups; coroporate controllers of Congress; the special interest / anti-Constitution & Muslims of this POTUS Administration & his czar controlled departments > all of which are pushing for a ConCon.
States' rights are now practically at the allowance of POTUS & his czars. This despite that individual & separate jurists, in the minority, have tried to turn aside a near despotic enforcement of arbitrary fiats. It is the states which ought to hold refernda & specific ballot questions. BUT ! it is then to force the elected state representatives to vote & enact legislation reflecting their constituents - now a near political fantasy at all ! The state panels supporting a ConCon are unequivocally controlled by POTUS and his administration.
A ConCon would obviate any need for executive orders. The ConCon would be controlled & choreographed from the outset by leftist Liberal, by Marxist-Socialist, by increasingly powered special interest groups; and by powerful & directing corporate controls.
Any candidate promising a ConCon is begotten already by their powerful controllers.