Exclusive Content > News

David Horowitz prefers name calling over debate on dangers of Article V Convention

(1/6) > >>

johnwk:
.

SEE: David Horowitz: Why Conservatives Need to Amend the Constitution Now

Mr. Horowitz begins his article by writing:

”What do the John Birch Society, Eagle Forum, Common Cause and Planned Parenthood have in common? They all oppose the states’ use of Article V of our Constitution to impose and enforce constitutional limits on Washington.” 

Mr. Horowitz goes on to write:”While it is no surprise that Marxist-leaning groups would fight, tooth and nail, to resist any plan for breaking the federal government’s virtual monopoly on policy-making, all conservatives agree that this monopoly is a perversion of our federal system. But, sadly, the Left’s propaganda and junk history have brainwashed some conservatives into opposing the states’ use of constitutional power to check federal overreach.”

Indeed, in Mr. Horowitz’s view, that conservatives who oppose the call for a convention under Article V have been “brainwashed” by, “the Left’s propaganda and junk history”, is absurd and disingenuous to say the least.  In fact, conservatives who oppose the call base their reasoning on historical facts and unanswered questions which Mr. Horowitz should address rather than insulting these patriotic Americans and portray the opponents of an Article V convention as sympathizing with “Marxist-leaning groups” and “the radical Left”.

Hey, Mr. Horowitz, how about addressing a few of the unanswered questions and dangers of calling a “convention of states”, which I might add is found nowhere in the text of the Constitution?  The Constitution merely declares that Congress shall “call a Convention for proposing Amendments” if the required number of State Legislatures make application. 

In the meantime Mr. Horowitz, let me suggest you study Here Be Dragons: Dangers Of A Constitutional Convention and then address the dangers and unanswered questions instead of adolescent name calling.


JWK



”The deception of the appeal for a "convention of states" lies first of all in the name of the project. If you open your pocket Constitution, it's easy to see that the convention authorized by Article V would not be a "convention of states" in any sense of the word.” __ Phyllis Schlafly, 5/24/2016

endicom:

I'm in the 'Here Be Dragons' camp. We could constrain such a convention like we've been able to constrain all other abuses against us.

johnwk:

--- Quote from: endicom on April 20, 2018, 12:40:24 pm ---I'm in the 'Here Be Dragons' camp. We could constrain such a convention like we've been able to constrain all other abuses against us.

--- End quote ---

Aside from all the unanswered questions which arise should the required number of states make application to Congress to call a convention, I have always thought the very federal and state statists who are ignoring our Constitution's provisions and causing our sufferings, would be in total charge of rewriting its provisions and the ratification process ushering in their doings.  Seems to me, calling a convention would allow the statists to rewrite and make constitutional the current provisions of our Constitution they now ignore. 


JWK


 Chief Justice, Warren Burger, stated in 1988, “I have also repeatedly given my opinion that there is no effective way to limit or muzzle the actions of a Constitutional Convention. The Convention could make its own rules and set its own agenda. Congress might try to limit the Convention to one amendment or to one issue, but there is no way to assure that the Convention would obey. After a Convention is convened, it will be too late to stop the Convention if we don’t like the agenda. The meeting in 1787 ignored the limit placed by the Confederation Congress ‘for the sole and express purpose.’ “

INVAR:
The current government and the courts routinely ignore, dismiss, circumvent and abolish the current Constitution, of which a growing majority of people in the country say needs to be abolished or fundamentally changed anyway.

Adding new amendments is not going to restrain an already lawless and corrupt system from complying with new rules designed to limit them when they routinely ignore and circumvent the existing ones that limit them.

XenaLee:

--- Quote from: endicom on April 20, 2018, 12:40:24 pm ---I'm in the 'Here Be Dragons' camp. We could constrain such a convention like we've been able to constrain all other abuses against us.

--- End quote ---

No sarc tag?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page