Convention of the States

[t_host1]

 Mark Levin is booking for a rules adjustment and re-alignments of the USAs’ constitutional republic.
 http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/mark-levins-liberty-amendments-premieres-no-1-amazons


Is this a right wing – libertarian attempt to over through the Obama government, an insurrection? 

What, who initiates this?

Can it become a position for the 2014 election, especially for the governor’s?

Is an author, a book of what for and how come’s, a beginning for this?

Has there ever been any other individual or group attempt to mass a contingent for this purpose?

Even though an event of such is a legal recourse, if authority is diminished now creating the reasons for, what authority upholds the renewal of or new amendments ratified?

Would this event at a minimum, be worthwhile for the cultivation of civil governance?

The opposition will be; anti-governing, separatist type’s, settled arguments/status quo types’ or more than 50% of the active voting public?

This is uncharted territory and we are not there yet or the beast will dissolve such an attempt?

A List/part of the rule update:


--Imposing a 12-year limit on serving in Congress.
 --Returning the election of U.S. senators to state legislatures.
 --Requiring Congress to balance the budget and limiting federal spending to 17.5 percent of GDP. -Limiting federal taxation to 15 percent of an individual's or a corporation's earnings.
 --Empowering a special congressional committee to veto regulations issued by federal bureaucracies.
--Prohibiting Congress from compelling anyone to participate in commerce (such as forcing them to buy health insurance).
 --Requiring Congress to publish the final text of any proposed legislation at least 30 days before holding a final vote on it.
 --Requiring individuals to present a state-issued photo ID that establishes their identity and citizenship before they are allowed to register or vote.
 --Putting tax day and election day back to back.

[badgate]

Page not found

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

There's a cat I normally post on the mod board for stuff like this that I'm not allowed to post here...

[ElectionsGuy]

He's right, you know. This isn't eliminating government, this is fixing government. Our federal government has way too much power, and the states have less power than they used to. Anyone with a brain can figure that out. Problem is progressives want even more power to the executive branch and the federal government to control taxing, health care, etc. And their winning...

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

Yep.  Broken page.

I'm not sure how many people would be interested in attending a tinfoil hat convention, though.  But if it keeps Levin and company able to put food on the table, and helps protect their God status among wingnuts, more power to them, right?

[t_host1]

Page not found

hum... I've have up

I found this page with this search "mark levin new book august 13" on bing.

[Paul Kemp]

Page not found

Blame Clapper.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

[badgate]

I totally thought this was Carl Levin

[ElectionsGuy]

Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

?

[pbrower2a]

 Mark Levin is booking for a rules adjustment and re-alignments of the USAs’ constitutional republic.
 http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/mark-levins-liberty-amendments-premieres-no-1-amazons


Is this a right wing – libertarian attempt to over through the Obama government, an insurrection? 

What, who initiates this?

Can it become a position for the 2014 election, especially for the governor’s?

Is an author, a book of what for and how come’s, a beginning for this?

Has there ever been any other individual or group attempt to mass a contingent for this purpose?

Even though an event of such is a legal recourse, if authority is diminished now creating the reasons for, what authority upholds the renewal of or new amendments ratified?

Would this event at a minimum, be worthwhile for the cultivation of civil governance?

The opposition will be; anti-governing, separatist type’s, settled arguments/status quo types’ or more than 50% of the active voting public?

This is uncharted territory and we are not there yet or the beast will dissolve such an attempt?

A List/part of the rule update:


--Imposing a 12-year limit on serving in Congress.
 --Returning the election of U.S. senators to state legislatures.
 --Requiring Congress to balance the budget and limiting federal spending to 17.5 percent of GDP. -Limiting federal taxation to 15 percent of an individual's or a corporation's earnings.
 --Empowering a special congressional committee to veto regulations issued by federal bureaucracies.
--Prohibiting Congress from compelling anyone to participate in commerce (such as forcing them to buy health insurance).
 --Requiring Congress to publish the final text of any proposed legislation at least 30 days before holding a final vote on it.
 --Requiring individuals to present a state-issued photo ID that establishes their identity and citizenship before they are allowed to register or vote.
 --Putting tax day and election day back to back.

Does anyone have any residual doubt that a Constitutional Convention would allow all sorts of crazy ideas to pop up?

There was a good reason for direct popular election of US Senators -- and the Tea Party election of 2010 shows what sorts of politicians are possible in the Senate if some fad takes over a bunch of state legislatures. Cranky state legislatures (and many of our State legislatures are that) would appoint cranky pols to the US Senate.

Maybe elections could be limited to white male property owners. We would probably end up with government of the Wealthy, by the Wealthy, and for the Wealthy. Sure, the poor would survive -- as serfs. That's how things were in the Jim Crow South, and things weren't good for the poor white people of the South, either.

We need to go sane before we even contemplate radical reforms to our political system.

[t_host1]

 Mark Levin is booking for a rules adjustment and re-alignments of the USAs’ constitutional republic.
 http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/mark-levins-liberty-amendments-premieres-no-1-amazons


Is this a right wing – libertarian attempt to over through the Obama government, an insurrection? 

What, who initiates this?

Can it become a position for the 2014 election, especially for the governor’s?

Is an author, a book of what for and how come’s, a beginning for this?

Has there ever been any other individual or group attempt to mass a contingent for this purpose?

Even though an event of such is a legal recourse, if authority is diminished now creating the reasons for, what authority upholds the renewal of or new amendments ratified?

Would this event at a minimum, be worthwhile for the cultivation of civil governance?

The opposition will be; anti-governing, separatist type’s, settled arguments/status quo types’ or more than 50% of the active voting public?

This is uncharted territory and we are not there yet or the beast will dissolve such an attempt?

A List/part of the rule update:


--Imposing a 12-year limit on serving in Congress.
 --Returning the election of U.S. senators to state legislatures.
 --Requiring Congress to balance the budget and limiting federal spending to 17.5 percent of GDP. -Limiting federal taxation to 15 percent of an individual's or a corporation's earnings.
 --Empowering a special congressional committee to veto regulations issued by federal bureaucracies.
--Prohibiting Congress from compelling anyone to participate in commerce (such as forcing them to buy health insurance).
 --Requiring Congress to publish the final text of any proposed legislation at least 30 days before holding a final vote on it.
 --Requiring individuals to present a state-issued photo ID that establishes their identity and citizenship before they are allowed to register or vote.
 --Putting tax day and election day back to back.

Does anyone have any residual doubt that a Constitutional Convention would allow all sorts of crazy ideas to pop up?

There was a good reason for direct popular election of US Senators -- and the Tea Party election of 2010 shows what sorts of politicians are possible in the Senate if some fad takes over a bunch of state legislatures. Cranky state legislatures (and many of our State legislatures are that) would appoint cranky pols to the US Senate.

Maybe elections could be limited to white male property owners. We would probably end up with government of the Wealthy, by the Wealthy, and for the Wealthy. Sure, the poor would survive -- as serfs. That's how things were in the Jim Crow South, and things weren't good for the poor white people of the South, either.

We need to go sane before we even contemplate radical reforms to our political system.

?#10. Is the consensus of a state; lesser, an equal or greater than the consensus of global warming science?

?#11. In the context of 180 degrees out of phase, has sanity been affected?

?#12. What would be the reason for the US civilian population not being capable of civil governance?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Does anyone have any residual doubt that a Constitutional Convention would allow all sorts of crazy ideas to pop up?

There was a good reason for direct popular election of US Senators -- and the Tea Party election of 2010 shows what sorts of politicians are possible in the Senate if some fad takes over a bunch of state legislatures. Cranky state legislatures (and many of our State legislatures are that) would appoint cranky pols to the US Senate.

Maybe elections could be limited to white male property owners. We would probably end up with government of the Wealthy, by the Wealthy, and for the Wealthy. Sure, the poor would survive -- as serfs. That's how things were in the Jim Crow South, and things weren't good for the poor white people of the South, either.

We need to go sane before we even contemplate radical reforms to our political system.

Any amendments drafted by the convention would have to be ratified by 3/4ths of the states just like an amendment proposed by Congress.

I don't really support any of these, save maybe for the 30 day requirement on legislation and one or two others. I most certainly oppose term limits on the judges.

The problem was also that the State Legislatures were easily corruptable. There was a story I think it was Montana or Mississippi. It went that it was always cold in the legislature and that was because the windows were always opened so the special interests could toss bundles of money through them.

We have eliminated the problem impacting the Senate, but the problem itself is still there and by making them less important, we ensure that fewer and fewer people pay attention to them and hence the problem gets worse, the lower you go down the gov't. The problem is that by centralizing the authority you also render more difficult effecting change unless you got gobs of money behind you. 

[The Free North]

 Mark Levin is booking for a rules adjustment and re-alignments of the USAs’ constitutional republic.
 http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/mark-levins-liberty-amendments-premieres-no-1-amazons


Is this a right wing – libertarian attempt to over through the Obama government, an insurrection? 

What, who initiates this?

Can it become a position for the 2014 election, especially for the governor’s?

Is an author, a book of what for and how come’s, a beginning for this?

Has there ever been any other individual or group attempt to mass a contingent for this purpose?

Even though an event of such is a legal recourse, if authority is diminished now creating the reasons for, what authority upholds the renewal of or new amendments ratified?

Would this event at a minimum, be worthwhile for the cultivation of civil governance?

The opposition will be; anti-governing, separatist type’s, settled arguments/status quo types’ or more than 50% of the active voting public?

This is uncharted territory and we are not there yet or the beast will dissolve such an attempt?

A List/part of the rule update:


--Imposing a 12-year limit on serving in Congress.
 --Returning the election of U.S. senators to state legislatures.
 --Requiring Congress to balance the budget and limiting federal spending to 17.5 percent of GDP. -Limiting federal taxation to 15 percent of an individual's or a corporation's earnings.
 --Empowering a special congressional committee to veto regulations issued by federal bureaucracies.
--Prohibiting Congress from compelling anyone to participate in commerce (such as forcing them to buy health insurance).
 --Requiring Congress to publish the final text of any proposed legislation at least 30 days before holding a final vote on it.
 --Requiring individuals to present a state-issued photo ID that establishes their identity and citizenship before they are allowed to register or vote.
 --Putting tax day and election day back to back.

Term limit idea: Great, should be even shorter, IE 1 term max
No direct election of senators: Great idea, anyone with a brain and an understanding of our system supports this
-Required balanced budget, ideally I would like this, but its not going to happen so no
-Special committee, no thanks
-Good on the next point
-Sure
-No
-Lol no

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I fully support the notion of the Senators representing the states, but the state should be a reflection of the values and belief of the people contained therein. Therefore, I don't see how popular election of the Senators is detrimental to the functional purpose of the Senate.

Put it another way. A state legislature is suppose to represent the state, and if we are a electing Senators in each states that horrible and if the choice made by the state legislatures would be different, does that not concede that the state legislatures are not serving their purpose?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Does anyone have any residual doubt that a Constitutional Convention would allow all sorts of crazy ideas to pop up?

There was a good reason for direct popular election of US Senators -- and the Tea Party election of 2010 shows what sorts of politicians are possible in the Senate if some fad takes over a bunch of state legislatures. Cranky state legislatures (and many of our State legislatures are that) would appoint cranky pols to the US Senate.

Incidentally, it took the threat of calling a Constitution Convention to get the Congress to send the 17th Amendment to the States itself.  We were only two states away from having a convention called when they did so.

[SPC]

I fully support the notion of the Senators representing the states, but the state should be a reflection of the values and belief of the people contained therein. Therefore, I don't see how popular election of the Senators is detrimental to the functional purpose of the Senate.

Put it another way. A state legislature is suppose to represent the state, and if we are a electing Senators in each states that horrible and if the choice made by the state legislatures would be different, does that not concede that the state legislatures are not serving their purpose?

So if the people would choose different people to be ambassadors if they were subject to direct election rather than executive appointment/Senate confirmation, does that mean that the federal government is not serving its purpose?