Not that I think that it will ever happen…but the thought is intriguing to me. (I’ve recently started studying the whole topic).
As I said in another thread; nothing short of one will fix our system (if that’s even possible…)…and running after the promises of individuals and Parties is a futile exercise.
What did the Founder’s say?
What makes it virtually “impossible” to have one convened?
Let’s give this some good “PWI” discussion.
Mufasa
Two 10 mg. tablets/day , taken with food.
This is so not going to be funny if the Mods change the thread title.
[quote]Otep wrote:
Two 10 mg. tablets/day , taken with food.
This is so not going to be funny if the Mods change the thread title.[/quote]
Beat me to it.
Haha…thanks, Mods!
Mufasa
By the way…
We may not need/want one. (Like I said…I’m still studying the issue).
So…the discussion can be “for” and/or “against”.
Mufasa
Maybe we just need 2 separate countries? conservatives in one and libs in the other. then everyone can get what the want in a government.
what is wrong with our system? don’t dismiss this question with hand waving. what would you change?
I’ll start with:
Deficit Spending
Waste
“All-or-None” Bill passing, which leads to Waste/Pork
Waste
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
What makes it virtually “impossible” to have one convened?
Mufasa[/quote]
The amount of money, and the military necessary to either over throw the government or at least defend your new country from the US Government. The Founding Father’s knew they needed this and many of the signers of the Declaration of Independence gave up everything for the war effort. Several gave up all the money they had to the new country. Many of which died bankrupt because they did everything for their freedom. The question is are we willing to give up our freedom for the cause. If we win we will regain freedom, but if we loose our freedom is gone.
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
I’ll start with:
Deficit Spending
Waste
“All-or-None” Bill passing, which leads to Waste/Pork
Waste
Mufasa
[/quote]
I don’t get what you’re getting at with number 3… a bill can be changed in any way you want prior to a vote on the floor, then again during reconciliation. Elements can be added or removed. It’s the irresponsible behavior of congresspeople that allows unrelated crap to left in.
Are you advocating the line-item veto?
I think that’s a terrible idea. I think the executive in this country (the office, not a particular person) has become WAY TOO powerful already. A line-item veto means we’re basically being governed by an elected emperor who can function within what the SC defines as the confines of the Constitution.
[quote]thefederalist wrote:
what is wrong with our system? don’t dismiss this question with hand waving. what would you change?[/quote]
YOU
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
The amount of money, and the military necessary to either over throw the government or at least defend your new country from the US Government. The Founding Father’s knew they needed this and many of the signers of the Declaration of Independence gave up everything for the war effort. Several gave up all the money they had to the new country. Many of which died bankrupt because they did everything for their freedom. The question is are we willing to give up our freedom for the cause. If we win we will regain freedom, but if we loose our freedom is gone.[/quote]
Or you could avail yourself of Article V of the Constitution and, you know, call one to order.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
The amount of money, and the military necessary to either over throw the government or at least defend your new country from the US Government. The Founding Father’s knew they needed this and many of the signers of the Declaration of Independence gave up everything for the war effort. Several gave up all the money they had to the new country. Many of which died bankrupt because they did everything for their freedom. The question is are we willing to give up our freedom for the cause. If we win we will regain freedom, but if we loose our freedom is gone.[/quote]
Or you could avail yourself of Article V of the Constitution and, you know, call one to order.[/quote]
I was looking at Article V, but it seems like 2/3 of the states could hold a convention and amend the constitution. It does not have to be Congress that can do this. So the states can over rule the Federal Government if they so choose. For example if 2/3 of the states choose to say same sex marriage is wrong then the Federal Government would have to approve it. Another example is 2/3 of the states state that the Federal Government has to throw out all illegal aliens then the Federal Government would have to do it. I guess the examples could be seen as questions and not so much statements.