Yep, here it comes.
They want you to believe it is safe. That a 'Limited Convention' is a thing... it is not. Lawmakers know that there is no legal mechanism for a 'Limited Convention'. Apparently Sharif Street is actually trying to warn people. Constitutional Conventions are UNLIMITED BY DESIGN. Go read Article V. No state legislature can place limits on a Constitutional Convention. The Constitution is the highest law of the land.
If a Constitutional Convention is successfully called it will be the end of Freedom.
If a Constitutional Convention is successfully called it will be the end of Freedom.
This is the key point that needs to be made in any and every conversation about a Constitutional Convention. The Constitution that comes out of it will almost certainly be radically different than the one we have now. (Even with its flaws.) If anything leads to a secession of states it will be this.
The real smoking gun is the fact that everything they say they want to do at a Constitutional Convention could be accomplished easier with a Amendment. If all they want are a few specific amendments then they should just propose a few amendments.
They say they want a specific change... but they ask for a blank check
The real smoking gun is the fact that everything they say they want to do at a Constitutional Convention could be accomplished easier with a Amendment. If all they want are a few specific amendments then they should just propose a few amendments.
They say they want a specific change... but they ask for a blank check
They couldn't be more obvious about it if they tried, and yet sheep will buy into the idea.
(post is archived)