About a month ago radio talk show host and author Mark Levin brought out his latest book proposing for the states to call for a Constitutional Convention to adopt what he is calling his liberty amendments. At least one of his amendments, the repeal of the 17th amendment, would be valuable with the rest of them having some appeal but not likely to solve the problems we face today. Remember, our problems today are not because of flaws in our Constitution and Bill of Rights, but rather our people don't demand their elected officials govern according to our founding documents. In addition, almost all amendments beyond our original documents have created problems toward good government rather than improved things. Why would we think these new amendments would improve things or even be obeyed if the original documents aren't followed?


With all that said, regardless of how valuable Levin's amendments might be, the real problem is with his idea of using article V (5) for the states to call for another Constitutional Convention to bring about more amendments. If successful, it will be the first time a con-con will be convened since the one in Philadelphia in the late 1700's. In Levin's book, as well as his appearance on the Sean Hanity TV show, he claims to have discovered a safe guard against a run-away convention that might drastically change our Constitution and remove many of the safe guards necessary for good government and thwarting of tyranny. His "newly found" safeguard is that any amendments proposed as a result of a con-con would require a 75% super majority of the states to ratify the changes.
First off, I am not buying his story of this newly found safeguard as the advocates of calling for a con-con have brought up that issue over and over again for decades in their efforts to call for a con-con. However, what really surprises me is that Levin has a reputation of being a thorough historian and researcher. But in this case, accurate history would tell us that his safeguard is worthless.
Following our war of Independence, the union of 13 sovereign states were governed by our first constitution known as the Articles of Confederation. There were some valid problems that existed and thus the convening of what we call today, our Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia. All of the states with the exception of Rode Island sent delegates to the con-con with strict to very strict parameters as to what might be considered. At least they had a safeguard in place as the Articles required all 13 states to ratify any changes.
By day 2 of our Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, the delegates put drapes over the windows and swore to an oath of secrecy not to reveal the proceedings to the public. The press wasn't allowed. It later became apparent from some of the delegates that others had no intention of following the restrictions placed upon them by their own states. Rather than correct the problems in the Articles, the threw that document out and created a whole new government. But remember, we had the safeguard of requiring all the states to ratify any changes. However, the new Constitution only required, pay close attention, 9 of the states to ratify any changes, so what happened to the safeguard? It disappeared, just like our current safeguard might also disappear.
Bottom line, our state lawmakers could call for a con-con, but they would have little control over how the delegates would be chosen and no control over the con-con itself once it was convened. Ask yourself this, if we in Oklahoma, arguably the reddest of all red states, got really really lucky and sent a good delegation to the con-con, what is the likely hood that our delegates would not be drowned out by the overwhelming numbers of progressive delegates for the vast majority of the other states?
Calling for a con-con, while constitutional, is a really bad idea with the current condition and make up of the citizens of today in the various states. Even Madison, the author of Article V, after seeing the difficulties in ratifying the Constitution out of Philadelphia, suggested we should never convene another, at least in times of great division. Hume, do we have any divisions among us today?
Charlie Meadows



Views: 779

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Constitutional Convention is an extremely dangerous event, especially when you do not have the votes to carry the day. Even if there is a great division, there is too much unknown about the event, the voters, and just what might be revised. I feel if Congress will not do their job, their records need to be published in their Districts and responsible candidates discovered to take their place. A lot of work and now would almost be too late to get started for 2014 which should be a tipping point for the remainder of bho's term and direction for a revised USA.

There is NO way this would work today, with the self serving RATS we have in power.......



Yes.agreed what we need most.is those who have taken the OATH to uphold.the current.Constitution and laws.be enforced.to do so.or.be.charged with failure to do their sworn DUTY . PERIOD!

NO CON CON, for all of the above. Plus the stupidity of our current government. Plus the number of commies in government. Plus the muzzies in government. Plus the corrupt media that lies daily. Plus the stupidity of our current citizens. Plus the non-virtuous-ness of all. Remember, we as a country let this happen.

He is NOT calling for a CON-CON! He is calling for a convention of the States to propose Amendments to the Constitution - 2/3 of the States, with ratification by 3/4 of the States to follow. A CON-CON is to propose changes to the Constitution itself. Why don't you read the book?

Read the book or if you did you better read it again. He is not talking about a con con. At least he is putting forth an idea that might work. It is a long shot and an alternative to a bloody revolt that would lack the leadership of our founding fathers. There will never be a revolt in this country unless we have a total collapse of the economy and lacking that we might as well get behind Levins idea and give it a shot. But first read the book and for some read it a few times before tearing it down.

Tks 2 the MUSLIM in the White House and the IDIOTS in OUR Congress that we elected, the only solution I can see is replacing the IDIOTS we elected with People who will follow the OATH they take!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What we really need to do is go back to the original Constitution and the give the politicians 200 years to screw it up again.

I agree a con con is a bad idea. It will back fire and we could loose the Constitution.

The way I understand it, is, that any Constitutional Convention can and will change everything we stand for and no telling what EVIL will come in, and a Constitutional Convention can change America into anything the NWO wants. If levin and anyone else is calling for this to happen while America is in such turmoil, then there is absolutely no doubt that he and people like him are commies and following a NWO agenda. NO Constitutional Convention! We have a constitution that they are not abiding by. First, get rid of ALL of congress and implement the constitution we have and get rid of all the commies, NOW, and then after a 100 years of reconstruction and TRUE patriots are voted into office and all the scum commies hung, then set down and have a discussion of whether or not to have it. levin is trying to trick everyone like he has always been doing. Actually the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CONSTITUTION is fine the way it is and laws can be added by a new true blue American congress, that ensure this evil going on now, NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN.


I agree 100%



Old Rooster created this Ning Network.

This effort is focused on sacrifice to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic.

Fox News

Tech Notes

Thousands of Deadly Islamic Terror Attacks Since 9/11


1. Click on State Groups tab at the top of the page.
2. Find your State Flag
3. Click on Flag.
4. Look for link to join Your State Group near the top of the State Groups page.
5. Click on it.

Follow the Prompts

How to post "live" URL in posts at PFA............. Adding URLs in blog posts that are not "live" is a waste of everyone's time.....
Here's how....if anyone has better guidance send to me.....
First........type your text entry into the post block to include typing or paste the URL you want us to view........when finished with the text, highlight and copy the URL in the text.......then click the "add hyperlink" tool in the B, I, U box just above the text entry, after clicking, a window will open asking for the URL...paste the URL in the box and click "OK". You have now made the URL "live"...........it shows some code before the post is published, it goes away when you "publish post".......


© 2020   Created by Old Rooster.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service