On Sept. 17, 1787, the U.S. Constitution was signed. Friday is Constitution Day.
President Obama campaigned on "change." America is realizing that the "change" we're seeing isn't the change we asked for and what the liberal elitists on the left really mean by "change" is "socialism." Call a spade a spade and look at the results of what we've gotten in the last 18 months. Things which two years ago were unthinkable are now reality. The previously unspeakable is now blatantly put forward with everything except an, "I dare you to stop me" challenge.
Taxpayers are finally fed-up with career-politicians' and their unconstitutional programs. They have been eagerly willing to consider any proposed solution. A popular proposal is to limit congressional terms. But what this nominal solution doesn't address are the underlying fundamental breaches of Constitutional authority. These breaches are why we need an Article V Constitutional Convention.
Term limits would require an amendment to the Constitution. What self-serving congressman would vote for an amendment to boot himself out of office? The only other means of changing the Constitution is through an Article V Constitutional Convention (aka "Con-Con").
The Constitution of the United States of America is the supreme law of the United States. The Constitution is the framework for the organization of the United States government and for the relationship of the federal government with the states, citizens, and all people within the United States.
The Constitution was adopted on September 17, 1787, by the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and ratified by conventions in each U.S. state in the name of "The People". The Constitution has been amended twenty-seven times; the first ten amendments are known as the Bill of Rights.
The Constitution holds a central place in United States law and political culture. The handwritten original document penned by Jacob Shallus is on display at the National Archives and Records Administration in Washington, D.C.
The framers of the Constitution were aware that changes would be necessary if the Constitution was to endure as the nation grew. However, they were also conscious that such change should not be easy, lest it permit ill-conceived and hastily passed amendments. On the other hand, they also wanted to ensure that a rigid requirement of unanimity would not block action desired by the vast majority of the population. Their solution was a two-step process for proposing and ratifying new amendments.
Amending the Constitution is a two-part process: amendments must be proposed then ratified. Amendments can be proposed one of two ways. To date, all amendments, whether ratified or not, have been proposed by a two-thirds vote in each house of Congress. Over 10,000 constitutional amendments have been introduced in Congress since 1789; during the last several decades, between 100 and 200 have been offered in a typical congressional year. Most of these ideas never leave Congressional committee, and far fewer get proposed by the Congress for ratification.
Alternatively, if two-thirds of the state legislatures demand one, Congress must call for a constitutional convention, which would have the power to propose amendments. As no such convention has been called, it is unclear how one would work in practice. In two instances—reapportionment in the 1960s and a balanced federal budget during the 1970s and 1980s—attempts to use this process have come extremely close to triggering a constitutional convention. The apportionment debate of the 1960s fell only one state short of the required number of states.
There has only been one legitimate Con-Con in our history. In 1787, the Articles of Confederation went into convention for amending. The delegates, having no limits to their latitude to impose "change," deleted and re-wrote the document. Fortunately, those delegates were God-fearing men who had just defeated the British at great personal sacrifice.
The Philadelphia Convention of 1787 (also known as the Federal Convention or the Constitutional Convention) was a landmark in American and world history. Both its handiwork, the Constitution of the United States, and its example of a people's representatives using reason and experience to decide how to govern themselves had profound influence on subsequent experiments in government.
The convention met in the State House (now called Independence Hall) in Philadelphia from May 25 to September 17, 1787. Fifty-five delegates from twelve of the thirteen states (Rhode Island did not send delegates) took part in its deliberations.
Our present Constitution emerged by divine providence. America became a light on a hill, radiating strength, peace, prosperity, health, hope and countless miraculous technological advances to an oppressed world.
Article V provides: If two-thirds of state legislatures (34) pass Con-Con resolutions, one must be called. Eminent constitutional-scholars, past and present, have warned that once a Con-Con is triggered, there is no limiting it to specific amendments or stopping it. The delegates will have complete authority to ignore proposed amendments and make whatever "changes" they will -- even to scrap and replace our Constitution. But I find that this is actually misinformation about the inability to limit a Con-Con which in fact can be tightly structured so as to not open a proverbial can of worms.
(You can view "Beware Article V" on YouTube, a video with warnings by supposed constitutional-scholars, all of which conveniently ignore what I've described above as the two-step process for the proposal and then subsequent ratification.)
There is an ill-concieved notion being perpetuated that "the people" will somehow be unable to define who will be the delegates and the implied threats completely undermine the brilliance of what was created to deal with the very issues we now face. Those opposed to a Con-Con would have you resist this Constitutional provision out of fear that the Liberal media, special interest groups, lobbyists for multi-national corporations, international banking interests, socialists of every stripe will covet the opportunity to remake our Constitution in their own image. They also will reference veiled threats to a supposed "waiting in the wings is The New States Constitution, drafted with the Soviet Constitution and the U.N. Charter as templates."
A group of people have finally come to the conclusion that a Constitutional Convention is needed to address the undermining of the United States Constitution. It specifically safeguards against deleting or changing the original Constitution, but adds an amendment which will clarify ambiguities which have arisen as a result of judicial activism and misinterpretation of the original intent of the Constitution. It is a fascinating document and with the high level of involvement in conservative issues through the Tea Party, truly conservative Republicans, Independents, and other concerned individuals – this may be the way to bring our Country back to the ideals with which it was founded. I am going to sign this and forward to my state attorney general. In order to be successful, this process will require hundreds of thousands of people to make their determined stand, act on the paperwork and proceed to get this underway while the hearts and consciences of the American people are stirred up.
Please print the information from the link below and mail it to your own state’s Attorney General. I understand that this is going to be heavily marketed and promoted, so don’t be surprised if there are political attacks against this idea. Common sense will prevail and stay radically focused on the facts.
In order to adequately defend your position, you have to know why you believe what you believe and be able to (peacefully) argue your position in a compelling and fact-base manner.
This gives us the opportunity to do something positive and it will help counteract the fear and frustration which many people have felt as they have watched the deep failures of our leaders over many decades of intentional disruption of our country’s Constitution, its laws, its culture, and its values. It is time to do what we can to Take Back America.
Constitutional Restoration Act
That's exactly what I needed to hear, as I have obviously listened too closely to information which is disingenuous at best, and malicious at worst. I will do what I can to help promote this process. I have sent the link out to a long list of family, friends and acquaintances. What more can we do to help?
ReplyDelete