Trump: - When will we fight back?

[Mesaclone]

Ah,  using the MSM as your information source?  How,  exactly,  would the left take over a Convention Verizon?

I'm curious what you have to say.

@Mesaclone

Frankly, I use the MSM for  very little, so no idea what you're referring to here.

A article 5 convention would have to accept amendment proposals from any and all of the states...and perhaps directly from citizens as well. Any proposal would require approval from 3/4ths of the states...so anything limiting government growth or moving forward conservative ideas would face an insurmountable barrier. That won't matter of course, because you'll never get 2/3 of both Houses of congress or 2/3rds of the states to agree to even have such a convention.


Worse, the constitutions allows each state to have their own convention...but does not delineate who makes up the body of said conventions. That's a dangerous loophole and my fear would be that liberal courts would get involved in "apportioning" who the attendees/voters at the state conventions would be. Once that happens, any sort of garbage could emerge from such a convention...the plus side being, that garbage would also fail to pass attaining support from 3/4ths of the states. In other words, its an exercise in futility that would create little more than rancor and conflict within the nation.


Its a pipe dream, to be frank. We need to employ our energies on things that CAN be accompished, rather than chimeras like an Article 5 convention.

[Smokin Joe]

If you actually did trim the federal government down like you imagine you will, the need for an Article V convention would largely disappear.  However, historical evidence and human nature indicate that this is something impossible to do from the inside as you are planning to try.  Nope, an Article V convention is likely the only way the federal government will ever be reined in.

I will maintain that altering or adding to the document already ignored will not fix the primary problem: that the Federal Government is in defiance of the rule of law to begin with.
Until the Constitution is seen as that which delineates the powers and duties of the Federal Government and limits those powers and duties to that which is authorized therein, the problem will remain, whether there are amendments or additions or not.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Frankly, I use the MSM for  very little, so no idea what you're referring to here.

A article 5 convention would have to accept amendment proposals from any and all of the states...and perhaps directly from citizens as well. Any proposal would require approval from 3/4ths of the states...so anything limiting government growth or moving forward conservative ideas would face an insurmountable barrier. That won't matter of course, because you'll never get 2/3 of both Houses of congress or 2/3rds of the states to agree to even have such a convention.


Worse, the constitutions allows each state to have their own convention...but does not delineate who makes up the body of said conventions. That's a dangerous loophole and my fear would be that liberal courts would get involved in "apportioning" who the attendees/voters at the state conventions would be. Once that happens, any sort of garbage could emerge from such a convention...the plus side being, that garbage would also fail to pass attaining support from 3/4ths of the states. In other words, its an exercise in futility that would create little more than rancor and conflict within the nation.


Its a pipe dream, to be frank. We need to employ our energies on things that CAN be accompished, rather than chimeras like an Article 5 convention.

Agree with all this. Plus if the convention happens and the left manages to flip a bunch of state houses (it has happened), they will use this as a perfect opportunity to get rid of the EC, which they 've wanted to do since forever.

[Sanguine]

I thought we had already dispelled many of these misconceptions?

So, @Weird Tolkienish Figure and @Mesaclone , what do you suggest we do?  Our current trajectory is acceptable to you?

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

I thought we had already dispelled many of these misconceptions?

So, @Weird Tolkienish Figure and @Mesaclone , what do you suggest we do?  Our current trajectory is acceptable to you?

We need to elect better people which means we need better voters. And that is a function of education IMO.

[Doug Loss]

Frankly, I use the MSM for  very little, so no idea what you're referring to here.

A article 5 convention would have to accept amendment proposals from any and all of the states...and perhaps directly from citizens as well. Any proposal would require approval from 3/4ths of the states...so anything limiting government growth or moving forward conservative ideas would face an insurmountable barrier. That won't matter of course, because you'll never get 2/3 of both Houses of congress or 2/3rds of the states to agree to even have such a convention.


Worse, the constitutions allows each state to have their own convention...but does not delineate who makes up the body of said conventions. That's a dangerous loophole and my fear would be that liberal courts would get involved in "apportioning" who the attendees/voters at the state conventions would be. Once that happens, any sort of garbage could emerge from such a convention...the plus side being, that garbage would also fail to pass attaining support from 3/4ths of the states. In other words, its an exercise in futility that would create little more than rancor and conflict within the nation.


Its a pipe dream, to be frank. We need to employ our energies on things that CAN be accompished, rather than chimeras like an Article 5 convention.

First, you're wrong about Congress having to agree to have such a convention.  If 2/3s of the state legislatures call for one, Congress must convene one.  It's mandatory.

Second, what you're saying about each state having its own convention makes no sense.  There will be one national Article V convention.  Each state legislature can decide to send whatever delegates it wishes.  State conventions?  You're making that up.  I have to think that you really don't know anything about this subject.

[Doug Loss]

I thought we had already dispelled many of these misconceptions?

So, @Weird Tolkienish Figure and @Mesaclone , what do you suggest we do?  Our current trajectory is acceptable to you?

We have, Sanguine.  They just refuse to accept it.

[Sanguine]

We have, Sanguine.  They just refuse to accept it.

And, I'm baffled as to why.  Fear of the unknown?  Accepting of what the MSM has told us on this subject?  What?

@Weird Tolkienish Figure and @Mesaclone

[Sanguine]

We need to elect better people which means we need better voters. And that is a function of education IMO.

We know that. 

Several points:  it took God 40 years to bring the Israelites out of their slave mentality and able to cross into the promised land.  I estimate it would take us quite a bit longer.   

Secondly, why would people who blame others for their situation in life and are supported by the work of others, suddenly start to vote for fiscal and personal responsibility?  Do you really believe you can educate people into that? 

And, thirdly, I've seen people on this board who want the government to solve problems and keep on doing what they've been doing ("We can't get rid of 0bamacare!").  If "conservatives" think that way, who's going to do the educating? 

[Frank Cannon]

We need to elect better people which means we need better voters. And that is a function of education IMO.

Can you tell me when there were better voters? You have some bizarre Pollyanna ideal that there was a time when everything was as copacetic as a princess castle in a snow globe.   

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

And, I'm baffled as to why.  Fear of the unknown?  Accepting of what the MSM has told us on this subject?  What?

@Weird Tolkienish Figure and @Mesaclone

To me, the status quo isn't as bad as people say it is. Lots of screaming mimi's and chicken little's in the conservative movement. I know that's not a popular opinion.

[Sanguine]

To me, the status quo isn't as bad as people say it is. Lots of screaming mimi's and chicken little's in the conservative movement. I know that's not a popular opinion.

I don't worry about popular; I worry about fact-based. 

I'm guessing you're not that old, and haven't been around long enough to see the erosion of rights and responsibilities in conjunction with the rise of an all-intrusive federal government. 

Aside from that is the issue of our overwhelming and un-repayable debt.  You're not concerned about that?  Don't feel like it's something that will dramatically impact your life?

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

I don't worry about popular; I worry about fact-based. 

I'm guessing you're not that old, and haven't been around long enough to see the erosion of rights and responsibilities in conjunction with the rise of an all-intrusive federal government. 

Aside from that is the issue of our overwhelming and un-repayable debt.  You're not concerned about that?  Don't feel like it's something that will dramatically impact your life?

Yes the debt is pretty bad I will admit. We'll have to outgrow it with GDP growth during the Trump years. Not sure how a CC will help the debt though... through a BB amendment? Not sure if I think that is a good idea. I think sometimes a BB isn't desirable, like during a downturn.

[Cripplecreek]

We need to elect better people which means we need better voters. And that is a function of education IMO.

Well I'm not impressed with the voters we have that's for sure.

Most don't know the difference between progressivism and conservatism which makes them susceptible to every snake oil peddler to pass through town with a promise to fix all our social ills.

To me there is no more conservative act than to desire that government forget we exist.

[truth_seeker]

Trump won, in part, because he did NOT claim to be a "conservative," which has not been a particularly glowing-winning label with many voters.

I realize this displeases many "true conservative" obsessed litmus test junkies.

[HonestJohn]

Speisa has been know to run fake stories.

One that pops into mind was their "Saudi imam issues fatwa allowing husbands to eat their wives in extremis".

Which was made up, whole cloth.

[Doug Loss]

Trump won, in part, because he did NOT claim to be a "conservative," which has not been a particularly glowing-winning label with many voters.

I realize this displeases many "true conservative" obsessed litmus test junkies.

If you noticed my Expanding Our Reach thread you'll see that I'm trying to design a way to reach people who could be amenable to conservative values but who would automatically reject the "conservative" label.  Once you get people to accept those values it doesn't matter what you call them, so long as they act upon them.

[montanajoe]

I thought we had already dispelled many of these misconceptions?

So, @Weird Tolkienish Figure and @Mesaclone , what do you suggest we do?  Our current trajectory is acceptable to you?

I believe the Constitution was divinely inspired and written by men far more gifted than any politician we have today.  I cannot conceive of anyway our current crop of could improve on the original document. If the country cannot elect people who will follow the original document it seems illogical to me to assume the current crop of politicians would have the inclination or the intelligence to improve on the original.  Article V is a recipe  for disaster....

[Idaho_Cowboy]

And, I'm baffled as to why.  Fear of the unknown?  Accepting of what the MSM has told us on this subject?  What?

@Weird Tolkienish Figure and @Mesaclone

Some folks see the pay off vs. risk differently. Things may have to get much worse before people are willing to accept the risk.

On the other hand you have frog in the pot syndrome.

[truth_seeker]

If you noticed my Expanding Our Reach thread you'll see that I'm trying to design a way to reach people who could be amenable to conservative values but who would automatically reject the "conservative" label.  Once you get people to accept those values it doesn't matter what you call them, so long as they act upon them.

I think Donald Trump and his close associates are on more or less, the same path.

National security through strength, law and order, curbing illegal immigration, stopping terrorists' entry under the guise of "refugees," jobs-jobs, fall into categories which do not need the label "conservative," to gain support.

[sneakypete]

It's a tactic, at this point.   I believe he is castrating the mainstream media.  A direct conduit to the American People...unfiltered.

I love it.   

@DCPatriot

BINGO!

[sneakypete]

His Vulgarian streak is exactly why people like us are supporting him...and why we supported him throughout. Many of you seem to think the rest of us are blind to this crass/rude side of Trump, be assured we are not. It is the price of having someone with the bovine testicular fortitude to bring REAL change...not some semblance of rhetorical change, or worse, a facade of liberalism over a conservative countenance. So if you're upset by having your salad fork inside of your dinner fork...you're always going to be shocked by Trump's demeanor. That's a YOU problem, you should probably work on that. Most of us realize you don't bring Miss Manners to a street fight...and yes, breaking down these liberal entrenchments will absolutely require some gutter fighting.

Its not pretty, we'd love to use our salad forks in the proper order....but this isn't an episode of My Fair Lady or a Japanese Tea Ceremony, its the future of a planet and a nation. If my constitutional rights are in danger, I'm not going into the fight with anyone less than Vulgarian at my side. Some of you are shocked and dismayed by this side of Trump...I'm encouraged by it. And I rest secure in having two other branches of government to help keep the Vulgarian targeted where we need him and within the boundaries of the field of play.

So we DO understand the hesitancy of many of our fellow Republicans...most of us were hesitant at one point. But the time for squeamish elitism and self indulgent moral narcissism has passed, its time to get down in the mud and make fecal waste happen. So by all means hang on to your reservations, I can assure you I intend to hang on to my own for the next four years....but either get on board and help get this ship turned around before its hits a shoal, or join the spoiled liberals trying to hole the ship because they're not at the helm any more.

As to the original question...the fighting back part stars on January 21st.

@Mesaclone

BRAVO!

[Sanguine]

I believe the Constitution was divinely inspired and written by men far more gifted than any politician we have today.  I cannot conceive of anyway our current crop of could improve on the original document. If the country cannot elect people who will follow the original document it seems illogical to me to assume the current crop of politicians would have the inclination or the intelligence to improve on the original.  Article V is a recipe  for disaster....

So,  what do we DO?

[montanajoe]

So,  what do we DO?

Elect better people to government...

[LMAO]

Yes the debt is pretty bad I will admit. We'll have to outgrow it with GDP growth during the Trump years. Not sure how a CC will help the debt though... through a BB amendment? Not sure if I think that is a good idea. I think sometimes a BB isn't desirable, like during a downturn.

Unless Congress and the President are willing to make the painful but needed cuts in spending, growth won't do it.

It's either cuts in spending or currency devaluation