Ron Paul On Constitutional Convention
Reply directly from Rep.Ron Paul relating to a Constitutional Convention, and/or other ways to achieve an amendment:
Dear Friend:
Thank you for expressing your concern that attempting to roll back the dangerous expansion of government power through constitutional amendment will bring about a constitutional convention. You are indeed correct that a modern constitutional convention, given today's political climate, would be dangerous to liberty by leaving us open to sudden, sweeping change in our government.
I must point out, however, that initiating or passing an amendment is not calling for a constitutional convention, is not an invitation to do so, and is not nearly as dangerous. During the amendment process, we are not any more open to the dangers of a convention than at any other time. We have seen twenty-seven amendments to the Constitution without a convention being called. Amendments are the constitutional and safe way to change our form of government because the particular and limited issue addressed by an amendment requires a long, involved process to change the Constitution for very limited and specific ends. With each proposed amendment there is ample time to point out any apparent threats to liberty and warn our fellow citizens.
Contrast this to the current situation where almost anything can become law if a mere, momentary majority in Congress and the current president agrees. The amendment process is the proper, constitutional way to change our government's power, rather than by arbitrary lawmaking or regulatory rulemaking. Thank you again for your vigilance and dedication to liberty.
Sincerely,
Ron Paul
I cannot guarantee the integrity of the text of this letter if it was not sent to you directly from my Congressional Email Account: rep.paul@mail.house.gov. If you have any questions about the validity of this message, please email me at: rep.paul@mail.house.gov or call my Washington, DC office at: (202) 225-2831.
======================
End the Fed (Hardcover) by Ron Paul
2009
2009
http://americanistbookstore.com/books/end-the-fed-by-ron-paul/
 |
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002NUWVBQ?ie=UTF8&seller=A1AVPSERX4QF0E&sn=jperna12
========
The Revolution: A Manifesto (Hardcover) by Ron Paul 2008
============
The Revolution: A Manifesto (paperback) by Ron Paul 2009
http://americanistbookstore.com/books/the-revolution-a-manifesto-by-ron-paul1/
========
MORE INFORMATION:
The Danger of a Constitutional Convention
The real question about Constitutional Convention is this:
Do we need to give the power to write a new constitution to the very people who have been ignoring, usurping, and trying to destroy the constitution that we have now?
"The framers of the U.S. constitution have simply been too shrewd for us. They have outwitted us. They designed separate institutions that cannot be unified by mechanical linkages, frail bridges, tinkering. If we are to ‘turn the Founders upside down’ — we must directly confront the constitutional structure they erected." (a quote from "The Power to Lead," by James McGregor Burns, 1984, one of many promoting one world government.)
The video below is made specifically for state legislators, by a state legislator.
Constitutional Convention is explained.
Beware Article V
Beware Article V (part 1 of 4)
Beware Article V (part 2 of 4)
Beware Article V (part 3 of 4)
A Constitutional Convention is not a procedure for making a small change.
A Constitutional Convention is not a procedure for enforcing an existing law.
A Constitutional Convention is a procedure for giving us an ENTIRELY NEW Constitution.
THERE IS NO WAY TO "LIMIT" a Constitutional Convention TO ONE ISSUE.
If you want one amendment, then you present an amendment.
You do not put the ENTIRE Constitution at risk for one amendment.
The only reason that Constitutional Convention is being promoted as the solution TO JUST ONE problem, is that the hidden agenda would be considered to be outrageous.
If government ignores the constitution and usurps power now, what would we have if they could write a new constitution?
THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a Constitutional Convention "for a balanced budget". THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a Constitutional Convention "to return power to the states."
THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a Constitutional Convention "to stop illegal aliens."
THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a Constitutional Convention "to restore the right to keep and bear arms".
THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a Constitutional Convention "to limit terms".
THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a Constitutional Convention "to repeal ObamaCare".
THERE IS only one kind of Constitutional Convention.
THE only kind of Constitutional Convention; that can be convened is
a Constitutional Convention to write a new Constitution.
A Constitutional Convention is a legislative body;
which operates ABOVE the limitations of the Constitution.
This makes it more powerful, and MORE DANGEROUS, than any other legislative body.
This is not an opinion, but it if a fact of law.
A Constitutional Convention is a means of DESTROYING the American Republic. A Constitutional Convention is opening a "Pandora's box" for RADICAL change. Once the "genie is out of the bottle" no one can control it.
The last time that we had a Constitutional Convention was in 1787,
when we got the Constitution that we now have.
That Constitutional Convention was convened to make some small changes in the Articles of Confederation. Instead we got a new Constitution.
We were LUCKY that time.
Those who were at that Constitutional Convention were the leaders of a freedom movement;
which had just defeated a tyranny.
Our problem has NOTHING to do with the constitution.
Our problem has to do with the IGNORING OF THE constitution.
Those who ignore the constitution would like nothing better than to make their usurpation legal, by throwing out the constitution, at a Constitutional Convention.
It was ILLEGAL usurpation that has enabled an "elite" class to hijack our nation.
It is that "elite" class; who want to con foolish people into destroying the constitution.
The constitution is the best document for the protection of freedom,
that has ever been written.
We only need to adhere to it.
YES, The Founding Fathers saw a possibility of a situation,
where a need might arise for COMPLETELY SCRAPING THE CONSTITUTION.
That is not what has happened TODAY.
The only thing that has happened is that there is now a kabal of would be tyrants;
who are getting tired of OCCASIONALLY having to adhere to the constitution.
These would be tyrants would like to con enough ignorant people into letting them DESTROY THE CONSTITUTION, so that they can usher in totalitarianism.
Having a Constitutional Convention would be like letting your worst enemy
give you a heart and lung transplant, and a castration,
as a cure for hiccups.
Having a Constitutional Convention would be like burning the house down
as a means of accomplishing pest control.
Article V of The Constitution lays out the only two ways to change The Constitution:
1. The Amendment process: A specific, and clearly defined, change that is limited to what is written in the amendment.
2. The Constitutional Convention: A process to scrap the entire constitution and replace it with something else. ANY type of amendment can be considered.
Here is a clear statement of the difference between the effect of The Amendment process and calling for a Constitutional Convention:
"If you have the best automobile in the world, you don't throw it away if the carburetor is not working. You fix it," he said. "The same is true of the Constitution. That's what the amendment process is all about."
U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren E. Burger,
Boston Globe, August 21, 1987
We understand that there are those who want to destroy the American constitution. We also understand that it would be foolish for those thugs to admit that it is their goal to destroy the American constitution. It would be much more clever if those thugs were to claim that they only wanted to make a few small changes. Of course, if it was true that they only wanted to make a few small changes, then they would not need a Constitutional Convention. They would simply propose those amendments.
Imagine this scenario:
You wake up in the middle of the night to a noise in your living room.
You grab your gun, and you find two thugs loading bags full of valuables.
You hold the gun at the ready.
One of the thugs says:
"Now that is a really fine gun. But you really need to clean it. Why not hand it over to me, and I will clean it for you."
The other thug says
"Oh there is nothing to worry about. If you do not like the way he uses the gun then of course you can insist that he give it back!"
You would say "How stupid do you think I am?"
When we see someone asking us to hand over the gun of a constitutional convention, we must conclude that he is one of two things:
1. He is an unbelievably stupid fool
OR
2. He is a thug, with an ulterior motive, who thinks that the WE are unbelievably stupid.
There is a limit to the amount of time for which it is possible to assume that this is an unbelievably stupid suggestion, being made because of mere stupidity. Eventually it will become clear that we are dealing with a thug, with an ulterior motive, who thinks that the WE are unbelievably stupid.
IT WILL BE JUST AS EASY to ignore a new constitution as it is to ignore the one that we have now.
IT just will NOT BE NECESSARY to ignore a new constitution,
since it will say what the New World Order wants it to say.
The problem is not what the constitution SAYS.
The problem is what OUR GOVERNMENT DOES.
We need to change what OUR GOVERNMENT DOES.
We do not need to change what the constitution SAYS.
Constitutional Journal: A Correspondent's Report from the Convention of 1787 (Hardcover) by Jeffrey St. John (Author), Warren E. Burger (Foreword)
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0915463423?ie=UTF8&seller=A1AVPSERX4QF0E&sn=jperna12
We Hold These Truths: A Reverent Review of the U. S. Constitution 1993 Revised Edition (Paperback) by Congressman Lawrence P. McDonald
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001EEF7JK?ie=UTF8&seller=A1AVPSERX4QF0E&sn=jperna12
============
The Revolution: A Manifesto (paperback) by Ron Paul 2009
http://americanistbookstore.com/books/the-revolution-a-manifesto-by-ron-paul1/
========
MORE INFORMATION:
The Danger of a Constitutional Convention
The real question about Constitutional Convention is this:
Do we need to give the power to write a new constitution to the very people who have been ignoring, usurping, and trying to destroy the constitution that we have now?
"The framers of the U.S. constitution have simply been too shrewd for us. They have outwitted us. They designed separate institutions that cannot be unified by mechanical linkages, frail bridges, tinkering. If we are to ‘turn the Founders upside down’ — we must directly confront the constitutional structure they erected." (a quote from "The Power to Lead," by James McGregor Burns, 1984, one of many promoting one world government.)
The video below is made specifically for state legislators, by a state legislator.
Constitutional Convention is explained.
Beware Article V
Beware Article V (part 1 of 4)
Beware Article V (part 2 of 4)
Beware Article V (part 3 of 4)
A Constitutional Convention is not a procedure for making a small change.
A Constitutional Convention is not a procedure for enforcing an existing law.
A Constitutional Convention is a procedure for giving us an ENTIRELY NEW Constitution.
THERE IS NO WAY TO "LIMIT" a Constitutional Convention TO ONE ISSUE.
If you want one amendment, then you present an amendment.
You do not put the ENTIRE Constitution at risk for one amendment.
The only reason that Constitutional Convention is being promoted as the solution TO JUST ONE problem, is that the hidden agenda would be considered to be outrageous.
If government ignores the constitution and usurps power now, what would we have if they could write a new constitution?
THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a Constitutional Convention "for a balanced budget". THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a Constitutional Convention "to return power to the states."
THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a Constitutional Convention "to stop illegal aliens."
THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a Constitutional Convention "to restore the right to keep and bear arms".
THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a Constitutional Convention "to limit terms".
THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a Constitutional Convention "to repeal ObamaCare".
THERE IS only one kind of Constitutional Convention.
THE only kind of Constitutional Convention; that can be convened is
a Constitutional Convention to write a new Constitution.
A Constitutional Convention is a legislative body;
which operates ABOVE the limitations of the Constitution.
This makes it more powerful, and MORE DANGEROUS, than any other legislative body.
This is not an opinion, but it if a fact of law.
A Constitutional Convention is a means of DESTROYING the American Republic. A Constitutional Convention is opening a "Pandora's box" for RADICAL change. Once the "genie is out of the bottle" no one can control it.
The last time that we had a Constitutional Convention was in 1787,
when we got the Constitution that we now have.
That Constitutional Convention was convened to make some small changes in the Articles of Confederation. Instead we got a new Constitution.
We were LUCKY that time.
Those who were at that Constitutional Convention were the leaders of a freedom movement;
which had just defeated a tyranny.
Our problem has NOTHING to do with the constitution.
Our problem has to do with the IGNORING OF THE constitution.
Those who ignore the constitution would like nothing better than to make their usurpation legal, by throwing out the constitution, at a Constitutional Convention.
It was ILLEGAL usurpation that has enabled an "elite" class to hijack our nation.
It is that "elite" class; who want to con foolish people into destroying the constitution.
The constitution is the best document for the protection of freedom,
that has ever been written.
We only need to adhere to it.
YES, The Founding Fathers saw a possibility of a situation,
where a need might arise for COMPLETELY SCRAPING THE CONSTITUTION.
That is not what has happened TODAY.
The only thing that has happened is that there is now a kabal of would be tyrants;
who are getting tired of OCCASIONALLY having to adhere to the constitution.
These would be tyrants would like to con enough ignorant people into letting them DESTROY THE CONSTITUTION, so that they can usher in totalitarianism.
Having a Constitutional Convention would be like letting your worst enemy
give you a heart and lung transplant, and a castration,
as a cure for hiccups.
Having a Constitutional Convention would be like burning the house down
as a means of accomplishing pest control.
Article V of The Constitution lays out the only two ways to change The Constitution:
1. The Amendment process: A specific, and clearly defined, change that is limited to what is written in the amendment.
2. The Constitutional Convention: A process to scrap the entire constitution and replace it with something else. ANY type of amendment can be considered.
Here is a clear statement of the difference between the effect of The Amendment process and calling for a Constitutional Convention:
"If you have the best automobile in the world, you don't throw it away if the carburetor is not working. You fix it," he said. "The same is true of the Constitution. That's what the amendment process is all about."
U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren E. Burger,
Boston Globe, August 21, 1987
We understand that there are those who want to destroy the American constitution. We also understand that it would be foolish for those thugs to admit that it is their goal to destroy the American constitution. It would be much more clever if those thugs were to claim that they only wanted to make a few small changes. Of course, if it was true that they only wanted to make a few small changes, then they would not need a Constitutional Convention. They would simply propose those amendments.
Imagine this scenario:
You wake up in the middle of the night to a noise in your living room.
You grab your gun, and you find two thugs loading bags full of valuables.
You hold the gun at the ready.
One of the thugs says:
"Now that is a really fine gun. But you really need to clean it. Why not hand it over to me, and I will clean it for you."
The other thug says
"Oh there is nothing to worry about. If you do not like the way he uses the gun then of course you can insist that he give it back!"
You would say "How stupid do you think I am?"
When we see someone asking us to hand over the gun of a constitutional convention, we must conclude that he is one of two things:
1. He is an unbelievably stupid fool
OR
2. He is a thug, with an ulterior motive, who thinks that the WE are unbelievably stupid.
There is a limit to the amount of time for which it is possible to assume that this is an unbelievably stupid suggestion, being made because of mere stupidity. Eventually it will become clear that we are dealing with a thug, with an ulterior motive, who thinks that the WE are unbelievably stupid.
IT WILL BE JUST AS EASY to ignore a new constitution as it is to ignore the one that we have now.
IT just will NOT BE NECESSARY to ignore a new constitution,
since it will say what the New World Order wants it to say.
The problem is not what the constitution SAYS.
The problem is what OUR GOVERNMENT DOES.
We need to change what OUR GOVERNMENT DOES.
We do not need to change what the constitution SAYS.
Constitutional Journal: A Correspondent's Report from the Convention of 1787 (Hardcover) by Jeffrey St. John (Author), Warren E. Burger (Foreword)
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0915463423?ie=UTF8&seller=A1AVPSERX4QF0E&sn=jperna12
We Hold These Truths: A Reverent Review of the U. S. Constitution 1993 Revised Edition (Paperback) by Congressman Lawrence P. McDonald
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001EEF7JK?ie=UTF8&seller=A1AVPSERX4QF0E&sn=jperna12
The Danger of a Constitutional Convention
The real question about Constitutional Convention is this:
Do we need to give the power to write a new constitution to the very people who have been ignoring, usurping, and trying to destroy the constitution that we have now?
"The framers of the U.S. constitution have simply been too shrewd for us. They have outwitted us. They designed separate institutions that cannot be unified by mechanical linkages, frail bridges, tinkering. If we are to ‘turn the Founders upside down’ — we must directly confront the constitutional structure they erected." (a quote from "The Power to Lead," by James McGregor Burns, 1984, one of many promoting one world government.)
The video below is made specifically for state legislators, by a state legislator.
Constitutional Convention is explained.
Beware Article V
Beware Article V (part 1 of 4)
Beware Article V (part 2 of 4)
Beware Article V (part 3 of 4)
A Constitutional Convention is not a procedure for making a small change.
A Constitutional Convention is not a procedure for enforcing an existing law.
A Constitutional Convention is a procedure for giving us an ENTIRELY NEW Constitution.
THERE IS NO WAY TO "LIMIT" a Constitutional Convention TO ONE ISSUE.
If you want one amendment, then you present an amendment.
You do not put the ENTIRE Constitution at risk for one amendment.
The only reason that Constitutional Convention is being promoted as the solution TO JUST ONE problem, is that the hidden agenda would be considered to be outrageous.
If government ignores the constitution and usurps power now, what would we have if they could write a new constitution?
THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a Constitutional Convention "for a balanced budget". THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a Constitutional Convention "to return power to the states."
THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a Constitutional Convention "to stop illegal aliens."
THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a Constitutional Convention "to restore the right to keep and bear arms".
THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a Constitutional Convention "to limit terms".
THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a Constitutional Convention "to repeal ObamaCare".
THERE IS only one kind of Constitutional Convention.
THE only kind of Constitutional Convention; that can be convened is
a Constitutional Convention to write a new Constitution.
A Constitutional Convention is a legislative body;
which operates ABOVE the limitations of the Constitution.
This makes it more powerful, and MORE DANGEROUS, than any other legislative body.
This is not an opinion, but it if a fact of law.
A Constitutional Convention is a means of DESTROYING the American Republic. A Constitutional Convention is opening a "Pandora's box" for RADICAL change. Once the "genie is out of the bottle" no one can control it.
The last time that we had a Constitutional Convention was in 1787,
when we got the Constitution that we now have.
That Constitutional Convention was convened to make some small changes in the Articles of Confederation. Instead we got a new Constitution.
We were LUCKY that time.
Those who were at that Constitutional Convention were the leaders of a freedom movement;
which had just defeated a tyranny.
Our problem has NOTHING to do with the constitution.
Our problem has to do with the IGNORING OF THE constitution.
Those who ignore the constitution would like nothing better than to make their usurpation legal, by throwing out the constitution, at a Constitutional Convention.
It was ILLEGAL usurpation that has enabled an "elite" class to hijack our nation.
It is that "elite" class; who want to con foolish people into destroying the constitution.
The constitution is the best document for the protection of freedom,
that has ever been written.
We only need to adhere to it.
YES, The Founding Fathers saw a possibility of a situation,
where a need might arise for COMPLETELY SCRAPING THE CONSTITUTION.
That is not what has happened TODAY.
That is not what has happened TODAY.
The only thing that has happened is that there is now a kabal of would be tyrants;
who are getting tired of OCCASIONALLY having to adhere to the constitution.
These would be tyrants would like to con enough ignorant people into letting them DESTROY THE CONSTITUTION, so that they can usher in totalitarianism.
Having a Constitutional Convention would be like letting your worst enemy
give you a heart and lung transplant, and a castration,
as a cure for hiccups.
Having a Constitutional Convention would be like burning the house down
as a means of accomplishing pest control.
Article V of The Constitution lays out the only two ways to change The Constitution:
1. The Amendment process: A specific, and clearly defined, change that is limited to what is written in the amendment.
2. The Constitutional Convention: A process to scrap the entire constitution and replace it with something else. ANY type of amendment can be considered.
Here is a clear statement of the difference between the effect of The Amendment process and calling for a Constitutional Convention:
"If you have the best automobile in the world, you don't throw it away if the carburetor is not working. You fix it," he said. "The same is true of the Constitution. That's what the amendment process is all about."
U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren E. Burger,
Boston Globe, August 21, 1987
We understand that there are those who want to destroy the American constitution. We also understand that it would be foolish for those thugs to admit that it is their goal to destroy the American constitution. It would be much more clever if those thugs were to claim that they only wanted to make a few small changes. Of course, if it was true that they only wanted to make a few small changes, then they would not need a Constitutional Convention. They would simply propose those amendments.
Imagine this scenario:
You wake up in the middle of the night to a noise in your living room.
You grab your gun, and you find two thugs loading bags full of valuables.
You hold the gun at the ready.
One of the thugs says:
"Now that is a really fine gun. But you really need to clean it. Why not hand it over to me, and I will clean it for you."
The other thug says
"Oh there is nothing to worry about. If you do not like the way he uses the gun then of course you can insist that he give it back!"
You would say "How stupid do you think I am?"
When we see someone asking us to hand over the gun of a constitutional convention, we must conclude that he is one of two things:
1. He is an unbelievably stupid fool
OR
2. He is a thug, with an ulterior motive, who thinks that the WE are unbelievably stupid.
There is a limit to the amount of time for which it is possible to assume that this is an unbelievably stupid suggestion, being made because of mere stupidity. Eventually it will become clear that we are dealing with a thug, with an ulterior motive, who thinks that the WE are unbelievably stupid.
IT WILL BE JUST AS EASY to ignore a new constitution as it is to ignore the one that we have now.
IT just will NOT BE NECESSARY to ignore a new constitution,
since it will say what the New World Order wants it to say.
The problem is not what the constitution SAYS.
The problem is what OUR GOVERNMENT DOES.
We need to change what OUR GOVERNMENT DOES.
We do not need to change what the constitution SAYS.
Constitutional Journal: A Correspondent's Report from the Convention of 1787 (Hardcover) by Jeffrey St. John (Author), Warren E. Burger (Foreword)
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0915463423?ie=UTF8&seller=A1AVPSERX4QF0E&sn=jperna12
We Hold These Truths: A Reverent Review of the U. S. Constitution 1993 Revised Edition (Paperback) by Congressman Lawrence P. McDonald
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001EEF7JK?ie=UTF8&seller=A1AVPSERX4QF0E&sn=jperna12
We Hold These Truths: A Reverent Review of the U. S. Constitution 1993 Revised Edition (Paperback) by Congressman Lawrence P. McDonald
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001EEF7JK?ie=UTF8&seller=A1AVPSERX4QF0E&sn=jperna12
|