Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Current Events

Current Events Current Events Forum - Latest political news and events


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old February 26th, 2018, 07:45 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 1,888
Walter Williams questions Mark Levinís desire for an Article V Convention

On Mark Levin’s first show on Fox News Channel, 2/25/18, “Life, Liberty and Levin”, Mr. Levin suggests to Walter Williams that we should convene a convention under Article V to deal with our present government which is moving toward a totalitarian system as noted by Mr. Williams __ LINK


In defending his desire for calling a convention, Mr. Levin notes that James Madison was in favor of the Convention of 1787, but he curiously neglects to acknowledge that James Madison later expressed his apprehensions of calling a convention under Article V which he did in a letter to George Tuberville dated November 2, 1788, months after New York and Virginia had ratified our existing Constitution and wanted a convention called under Article V in order to adopt a Bill of Rights.


In any event, in response to Mr. Levin’s desire to call a Convention under Article V, Mr. Williams, as did James Madison, expressed a fear that the people who would likely attend the convention will not be people line “Benjamin Franklin or George Mason”, it would more than likely be people like “Nancy Pelosi”, which is another way of telling Mark Levin the same thing Madison told George Lee Tuberville regarding a convention being called under Article V:


”… an election into it would be courted by the most violent partizans on both sides; it wd. probably consist of the most heterogeneous characters; would be the very focus of that flame which has already too much heated men of all parties; would no doubt contain individuals of insidious views, who under the mask of seeking alterations popular in some parts but inadmissible in other parts of the Union might have a dangerous opportunity of sapping the very foundations of the fabric.” See: From James Madison to George Lee Turberville, 2 November 1788



In answer to Mr. Williams’s belief that such a convention would draw people like Nancy Pelosi, Mr. Levin responded by saying the Nancy Pelosi types won't be in "Kansas".


So, how do we know the type of people who would be selected as delegates if a convention were called under Article V? To answer that question one only needs to recall what happened in New Hampshire in 1984 when a convention was called to revise its State Constitution. During this time a suit was filed in U.S. District Court, claiming the makeup of delegates violated the separation of powers doctrine of the of the United States Constitution. Of the 400 delegates 64 were attorneys, eight were judges, four were state senators, and 113 were state representatives and there were two legislative lobbyists….the very type of people who are now causing our misery!


As reported in the Union Leader, the suit went on to charge “there has been over 175 lawyers, judges, senators and representatives out of the total of 400 constitutional convention (delegates) elected, (who) are already holding a public office both in the legislature and judicial branches in violation of the separation of powers doctrine, and this count does not include wives and immediate family members who have been elected on their behalf.”


The bottom line is, Mark Levin’s assertion that Nancy Pelosi types won't be in "Kansas", is wishful thinking at best! At worst, you can bet your bottom dollar every snake on earth will be trying find, or buy their way into such a convention if one were to be called in order to make constitutional that which is now unconstitutional and the very cause of our existing sufferings . The fault is not in our existing Constitution. Rather, the fault is found in a failure to enforce its defined and limited powers.


Walter Williams, as usual, is once again spot on, just as Phyllis Schlafly, America’s conservative icon was, who likewise spoke out against the call for a convention under Article V, and for some of the same reasons as James Madison.



JWK



“He has erected a multitude of new offices (Washington‘s existing political plum job Empire) , and sent hither swarms of officers, to harass our people, and eat out their substance” ___Declaration of Independence

Last edited by johnwk; February 26th, 2018 at 07:57 PM.
johnwk is offline  
Old February 27th, 2018, 08:07 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
BubbaJones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Middle Tennessee
Posts: 7,336
Well shoot. Something we agree on. Any attempt to convene a constitutional convention at this time would be nothing more than all out war between the party extremists. George Soros and the Kocke bothers battling it out via their minions and stooges.
BubbaJones is offline  
Old February 27th, 2018, 10:36 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 1,888
Quote:
Originally Posted by BubbaJones View Post
Well shoot. Something we agree on. Any attempt to convene a constitutional convention at this time would be nothing more than all out war between the party extremists. George Soros and the Kocke bothers battling it out via their minions and stooges.

Especially because of the "extremists. And I agree. A constitutional convention could very well inspire rioting in the street not to mention an actual civil war! Sometimes I believe there are those who wish for rioting and a civil war, thinking such events could actually lead to Marshall Law and an end to self governance and an iron fisted, dictatorial type of government with current agitators at the helm.

JWK



At the close of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia on September 18, 1787, a Mrs. Powel anxiously awaited the results and as Benjamin Franklin emerged from the long task now finished asked him directly, `Well, Doctor, what have we got? A republic or a monarchy?' `A republic, if you can keep it,' responded Franklin.
johnwk is offline  
Old February 27th, 2018, 11:02 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: California
Posts: 18,322
The basic concept of the Constitution was to give a Federal government only those powers needed, and the sovereign states would retain the rest. The Federal government with the help of the Supreme Court have pretty much pissed on that concept. Federal power now far exceeds those of the sovereign states. That has to be rectified. And the best way to do it is with a convention of states.
caconservative is offline  
Old February 27th, 2018, 11:03 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
BubbaJones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Middle Tennessee
Posts: 7,336
Quote:
Originally Posted by caconservative View Post
The basic concept of the Constitution was to give a Federal government only those powers needed, and the sovereign states would retain the rest. The Federal government with the help of the Supreme Court have pretty much pissed on that concept. Federal power now far exceeds those of the sovereign states. That has to be rectified. And the best way to do it is with a convention of states.

And exactly WHAT should a new amendment say ??? Specifically what would it be addressing ??

I am a resident of the state of Tennessee. I am a CITIZEN of the United States. My most fundamental constitutional rights should not change because I crossed a river or step over some imaginary line on the ground.

Last edited by BubbaJones; February 27th, 2018 at 11:06 AM.
BubbaJones is offline  
Old February 27th, 2018, 11:25 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: California
Posts: 18,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by BubbaJones View Post
And exactly WHAT should a new amendment say ??? Specifically what would it be addressing ??

I am a resident of the state of Tennessee. I am a CITIZEN of the United States. My most fundamental constitutional rights should not change because I crossed a river or step over some imaginary line on the ground.
A state is a state is...a country. Do you know of the that concept? It is the original concept that led to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
caconservative is offline  
Old February 27th, 2018, 11:49 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
BubbaJones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Middle Tennessee
Posts: 7,336
Quote:
Originally Posted by caconservative View Post
A state is a state is...a country. Do you know of the that concept? It is the original concept that led to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

I noticed you didn't answer my question there.
BubbaJones is offline  
Old February 28th, 2018, 05:49 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 1,888
One thing I noticed during Mr. Levin’s interview with Mr. Williams, LINK, Mark’s body language indicated he was furious when Mr. Williams expressed he was not too enthusiastic about calling a convention.


Mark’s body language, and use of the phrase “fear mongering”, also indicated great frustration when Mr. Williams correctly pointed out if such a convention were called, it would more than likely be controlled by the very type of people [Nancy Pelosi] who have, and are now causing our sufferings, and that includes Republicans and Democrats who now hold political power.

I think Mr. Levin ought to carefully consider Madison’s expressed fears if a convention were called under Article V. He should also take note of the reasons why Phyllis Schlafly battled against the calling of a convention up till the day of her death.


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.’ “
johnwk is offline  
Old March 2nd, 2018, 12:59 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 1,888
Mark Levinís blind spot on calling a convention: common sense and logic

.

In reviewing the following quote from a Hannity transcript, keep in mind Mr. Levin is one of the primary leaders advocating the call for a convention under Article V.


HANNITY:


’’Let me ask you, and follow up on that. Because lawmakers exempt themselves from ObamaCare. And the American people, if it is good for them, why isn't it good for them and their staffs?’’


LEVIN:


’’Because we have these governing masterminds, this professional ruling class. And when you look at the framers (audio gap), there was never supposed to be a professional ruling class. There was this thing called rotation in and out of office. That's why the senator served six years. Congressmen, two years. But they didn't have term limits back then because it never even occurred to them that you would have senators serving 36, 42 years, or members of the House, 20, 30, 40 years. It didn't even occur to them. They felt strongly in a citizen legislature.


And it is interesting. Thomas Jefferson who was not at the constitutional convention, one of the complaints he had about the Constitution, and he ended up supporting it, was this issue of rotation. He thought members of the House shouldn't serve more than one year. And interestingly just on that one subject, in most of the 1800s, members of the House served two years and that was it. Fifty percent of them there was turnover.’’




Note how Mr. Levin refers to those who now hold political power as “governing masterminds”, and a “professional ruling class.” Levin goes on to mention Thomas Jefferson’s support for a “rotation” of them [our “governing masterminds”, and a “professional ruling class.”]. Thomas Jefferson, in a letter, also referred to the delegates of the convention of 1787 as “demigods”. Why is all this important with regard to Levin promoting a convention?


To answer that question we need to be fully aware as to who would attend a convention under Article V if one were called? Who would be in charge of appointing a State’s Delegates? Would it not be the very “governing masterminds”, and a “professional ruling class” who Levin expresses a scorn for?


Considering our existing dangerous politically charged atmosphere, which in many cases has already erupted in numerous demonstrations resulting in property damage and mayhem, Madison’s fear of a convention under Article V is even more applicable to today’s circumstances than it was when he first expressed them:


”… an election into it would be courted by the most violent partizans on both sides; it wd. probably consist of the most heterogeneous characters; would be the very focus of that flame which has already too much heated men of all parties; would no doubt contain individuals of insidious views, who under the mask of seeking alterations popular in some parts but inadmissible in other parts of the Union might have a dangerous opportunity of sapping the very foundations of the fabric.” See: From James Madison to George Lee Turberville, 2 November 1788


JWK




Without a Fifth Column Media, Yellow Journalism and a corrupted FBI, Loretta Lynch, Hillary Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama, would be making license tags in a federal penitentiary

johnwk is offline  
Old March 5th, 2018, 04:43 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 1,888
Our Globalistís agenda: The Constitution of the New States of America

.

The desire for convening a convention is, among others, motivated by some notoriously evil characters, and they are very well funded, in addition to being around for many generations.


Among those attempting to convene a convention is our Global Governance Crowd who have been behind such things as the Sixteenth Amendment, Federal Reserve System, WTO, World Bank, the NAFTA, CAFTA, and other such institutions designed to sap the sovereignty and independence of the United States. And if by chance they get their way their changes to our system of government are found in The Constitution of the New States of America


JWK

ďI 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 donít like the agenda. The meeting in 1787 ignored the limit placed by the Confederation Congress Ďfor the sole and express purpose.í ď ___ Chief Justice, WarrenBurger, 1988,
johnwk is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Current Events

Tags
article, convention, desire, levinís, mark, questions, walter, williams



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mark Levin gets own show on Fox News TV johnwk Current Events 31 November 27th, 2017 01:02 PM
Mark Levin Speech Today Hattie Nuff Current Events 73 September 16th, 2015 06:03 AM
Mark Levin says it all....... azchurchmouse Conservatism 2 February 14th, 2014 08:17 AM
Why does Mark Levin always yell? theindependentmind Politicians 1 October 1st, 2012 06:10 PM
Mark Levin Tony Perkins Political Ideologies 65 January 21st, 2012 08:56 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.