WallBuilders
Posted by RickBulow1974 9 years, 11 months ago to Politics
David Barton supports an Article V Convention for proposing Amendments
- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
I'm not worried about a runaway convention as some are but rather a stalled convention. One that does nothing thus maintaining the status Quo. All it takes is o17 states to block anything and everything. The inter-state wrangling would be vile and ugly played out on the screens of the nations TVs and computers.
I'm ready for that spectacle, but is the nation? It has grown intellectually soft and doesn't really understand what it takes to be a real honest to G-d functioning republic/.
There is no other way to accomplish this.
There's nothing they could do that could pose a greater risk to our nation than to continue to do NOTHING about our debt.
We have to try.
http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/84...
Mandating a "Balanced Budget" implies to ME that 'all the government then needs to do is raise any and all taxes high enough to FUND WHATEVER they'd like to spend the money on."
If you think there's a potential danger of falling down THAT rat-hole, as I think there is, please reconsider and look for an alternative 'solution' to that 'problem.'
Thanks!
They could not actually fund what they currently spend.
As for it being sooo much money - well, at least we'll keep the pain on our generation where it belongs.
What other solution do you see? A great deal of back and forth went on in my previous post. And I try to keep an open mind. But I saw no other answer presented that convinced me.
"Grow out of it" still requires balancing the budget - it just makes it easier to do.
"Monetize" the debt just means adding 18T dollars to a $3T money supply - what could go wrong with that? (Not that it hasn't already been tried by practically every failing government just before their precipitous fall.)
What solution do you propose PL?
Close all the loopholes and simplify the tax code... Never happen, because getting rid of them would require action from the same folks that put them in in the first place!
Flat/Fair/Whatever tax rates? .... never happen. Too many people in the US (and elsewhere in the world) think that what they're getting for "free" has no cost to anyone else, even themselves! Puppies never vote to be pulled away from their mom's teats.
And basically, when 95+% of people polled say they hate Congress, but 90+% of Congress keeps getting re-elected, there's a fundamental flaw there, and it's not with Congress, politics or any other group BUT THE VOTERS. Which circles back to... the voters keep re-electing representatives in Congress who do things the voters don't approve of, and the voters are too absolutely stupid to see the connection.
If I knew of any FEASIBLE, WORKABLE solutions, I'd have written that book long ago.
I wish I knew how to break that do-loop. I think it may need to start with how kids are educated about economics and such, but then again, most of them get 'educated' by liberal teachers in grade schools and ultra-liberal professors at 'the best colleges.'
Too many loops to break, and the machinery has been in operation long enough to brainwash multiple generations. Fuck FDR!
The proponents of such a Convention have researched at great length the history of attempts at convening a convention as well the history of amendments that have been added. They make many great and valid points but are guilty of at least one misleading assertion. They have tried to maintain the position that a Convention of States is different than a Constitutional Convention. Tortured rational ignores the very fact that they are the same thing once convened under Article V. That the Convention of States is an Article V Convention to amend the Constitution is evidenced by the very fact that the COS people are seeking the necessary applications from 34 states as called for by Article V. There is no difference.
A simple reading of Article V reveals the fact that there is no provision for either Congress or the State Legislatures to exert influence over the Convention once convened. An absolutely valid point made by the proponents is that the subsequent ratification process has a formidably high threshold. However, note this same threshold gave us the 16th and 17th amendments.
The dithering over whether the original Convention of 1787 is an example of what could happen to an Article V Convention is irrelevant as the current Article V provisions did not exist yet in 1787. Whether or not a modern Convention called for the first time by the second provision - that of petition from at least 34 States to Congress - could turn into a runaway convention - has not been tested, ever. But referring back to the point that Article V provides for no oversight by either Congress or the State Legislatures should give one pause.
Mark Levin likes to assert that such a Convention would be driven by conservatives and constitutionalists. Oh? Take a look at why the likes of George Soros and his well funded gang of Wolf Pacs and Young Turks are also pressing for such a Convention.
Opponents of an Article V Convention make a good point in that the level of political awareness and education was substantially different in the Founding Era than todays Age of Cognitive Dissonance. Along these lines they prefer the process of Nullification - another Constitutional Doctrine from the Founding Era - as the effective means of reining in the federal government. A mode that has been successful both in past and recent history - without the potential tampering with the Constitution.
Unless there's a new amendment that says something like "any member of Congress who directly violates __________ shall be tried for treason and put in prison for no less than 15 years"... that might make them listen
Those parasite professional politicians are far more likely to vote themselves another raise despite the nation being beaucoup trillions in debt (treason) than ever passing an amendment like that.
Self-restraint is for the little people AKA "We The People."
I wish I knew how to get professional removed from the forefont of the word "politician."
Asking them to pass a term limit law is the same as that violation of the Constitution suggestion.
It would not be viewed as self-serving.
The best from them lately in my mind is some doofus from Georgia that said that if they don't quit putting the people on one side of the island (I forget which one) , pretty soon it will tip over.
I remember that tipsy doofus too. It says a lot about his enabling voters.