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 April 16th, 2018, 06:19 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 1,798
David Horowitz prefers name calling over debate on dangers of Article V Convention

.

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
johnwk is offline  
Old April 17th, 2018, 04:14 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 1,798
beware of those who call for a convention of states

.


From what I have observed over the years, the most vocal advocates of calling this convention, especially those who have access to media outlets, constantly insult those who oppose calling a convention and refuse to engage in a dialogue concerning the various unanswered questions and dangers attached to the idea. All they do is engage in name calling and make insulting remarks about those who question the call for a constitutional convention.


Keep in mind the same crowd that gave us the United Nation's Charter, the Sixteenth Amendment, the Federal Reserve paper money system, the World Trade Organization, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and more recently the NAFTA, have been behind the call for a convention to rewrite our Constitution. One of its principle advocates was Rexford Guy Tugwell, one of the three original members of President Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal “brains trust,” and he authored The Constitution of the New States of America which seems to be the goal of the globalists behind the movement.


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 April 17th, 2018, 10:00 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: California
Posts: 18,051
So, in your view, forcing this government to abide by the Constitution, adhere to the separation of powers, and restricting the Court to being interpreter of the Constitution, etc., is not worthy of discussion? Or, am I misreading your intent?
caconservative is online now  
Old April 17th, 2018, 01:05 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 1,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by caconservative View Post
So, in your view, forcing this government to abide by the Constitution, adhere to the separation of powers, and restricting the Court to being interpreter of the Constitution, etc., is not worthy of discussion? Or, am I misreading your intent?
A discussion of that list is always worthy. But a discussion is not what an Article 5 convention is about. An Article V Convention is a desire by some to allow our existing Constitution to be re-written by our existing federal and state statists who now ignore our current Constitution's provisions, and who would be in total charge of altering its provisions and the ratification process ushering in their doings.

I agree with James Madison’s warning and reasons against calling a convention 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


JWK
johnwk is offline  
Old April 23rd, 2018, 04:31 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 1,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by caconservative View Post
So, in your view, forcing this government to abide by the Constitution, adhere to the separation of powers, and restricting the Court to being interpreter of the Constitution, etc., is not worthy of discussion? Or, am I misreading your intent?
Did you miss my answer to your above question? Just curious.


JWK
johnwk is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Current Events

Tags
article, calling, convention, convention of states, dangers, david, david horowitz, debate, horowitz, prefers



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Daniel Horowitz author at Conservative Review calls for a Convention of States johnwk Current Events 0 April 15th, 2018 07:42 PM
Walter Williams questions Mark Levin’s desire for an Article V Convention johnwk Current Events 9 March 5th, 2018 04:43 AM
HRC 2022 & the Article V Convention Alipes Current Events 124 June 4th, 2017 07:33 AM
Mitt Romney Article - Debate RidinHighSpeeds Politicians 0 April 15th, 2007 12:22 PM
The Dangers of Bread (a Correlation to the Dangers of Abortion) winston53660 Abortion 1 March 14th, 2007 08:24 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



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