In response to:

What Ron Paul Gets Wrong

DHE Wrote: Nov 17, 2012 9:22 AM
The problem with conventions is that they tend to take on a life of their of their own. Would you want to arrange that and find that 6 was a pro-choice amendment, 7 abolished the need for interstate commerce for the feds to legislate, and so on. I would agree with your 1-3, though what honest money means is probably a matter of interpretation, but not 4, with which we would really have no country at all. They basically tried that with the Articles and the Confederacy tried it too.Either we have a country or we don't.
Paulus Textor Wrote: Nov 17, 2012 10:39 AM
I believe your concerns are unfounded. Remember, the bar is set very, very HIGH for conventions: three-quarters of the states must approve any amendment. New York and California might try to raise a pro-choice amendment, but there is no way three-quarters of the states pass it.

Remember that low-population, conservative/libertarian states have exactly as much clout as high population, leftist states in a constitutional convention. Wyoming cancels out NY; Utah cancels out CA.

Congressman Ron Paul has just delivered his valedictory address in the House of Representatives. And he has told TV interviewers that the American Revolution was a wonderful example of secession. He's a much better OB/GYN, I'm sure, than he is a student of America's history. He could be cited for political malpractice.

If the Founding Fathers and the Patriots who fought and won the Revolution were seceding, why is it that none of them ever called it secession? They certainly had the word back then. They invoked the well-known right of revolution. They had read their John Locke and their Montesquieu,...