Dr. Tom Coburn, the Senator from Oklahoma who’s also a doctor, has called for a Constitutional Convention. He told a town hall meeting in Muskogee, Oklahoma, that he recently became convinced that it was a good idea.
“I used to have a great fear of constitutional conventions,” Coburn said according to the Tulsa World. “I have a great fear now of not having one.”
That could be a great idea, except for one thing: the last Constitutional Convention had George Washington, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, Benjamin Franklin, and the like. One today would have …
Well, maybe that’s the trick. We need the right people. Who would you like to see at a Constitutional Convention? Someone from your state? Or is the whole proposal a bad idea?
The IMAO bloggers and all 20 of us IMAO commenters.
Ohio sends John Boehner. Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
I think we would be ahead of the game just sending the original guys again.
I guess the really smrrt politicians don’t know the difference between a constitutional convention and an amendments convention.
Some of us have been calling for an article 5 amendments convention for years. But one of the insiders writes a book, all of a sudden, we can think about it? Whats in it for these doucebags?
As long as we have an amendment that lets us launch democrats into the sun, I am on board
Dinosaurs with rocket launchers should be a right, as well as bacon. And shrubbery.
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
[added text]We really mean it, can’t you guys read plain English or do we have to put it into Spanish as well? Don’t make laws. Don’t abridge, let the people gather peaceably. How friggin’ hard is this?!?
Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
[Added text] People can own guns, get friggin’ over it already. By the way, check out the dictionary. Look up “infringed”.
Amendment III
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
[Added text] If we have to come back over this, just bury us again.
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
[added text]For chrissakes, we gotta explain this AGAIN? Did we lose the Cold War? Did they change the rest of the Constitution to read, “we the MORONS…”?
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
[added text] Once again, seems rather straight forward to us, are you guys pulling our leg on this?
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
[added text] When did they abandon reading comprehension in school? Seriously. You guys need us to come back and explain this all over again?
Amendment VII
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
[added text] Ok, maybe we can work this one up a little bit. Finally something to do! Shall we say that foreign jurisprudence is right out? Can we? I’m looking at you Ginsburg!
Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
[Added text] Silly us, not explaining the death penalty is neither cruel nor unusual. Our bad. Go ahead and fix it.
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
[added text] Yes, that means if it ain’t in there it’s the people’s. Capisce? THE PEOPLE RETAIN THE RIGHTS NOT THE GOVERNMENT. Schmucks!
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
[added text] Look, if we didn’t say the Government can do it, it can’t so don’t make it. Now go bake us some cookies.
Herman Cain please. i’m form CA, i’d send someone from here, but I don’t trust anyone else to not frolick it up and try some stupidity like requiring the .gov to pay for sex changes for prisoners…yeah, i’m looking at you PVT manning, bradley. no lady parts on the taxpayer’s dime!
The one problem with the states deciding on who to send is that the liberal states would probably waste years and years trying to make their state’s delegation look like their state and balance every group, race, victimization, etc, etc, etc.
I heard Mark Levine being interviewed this morning and he emphatically made the point that “Constitutional Convention” is NOT what he is proposing as there is no provision for such a thing in the Constitution. What he proposes is an Amendment Convention that IS allowed.
Even in an Amendment Convention I suppose one can still propose an amendment that will nullify a previous amendment, can’t they?
People I’d want as part of a constitutional convention? Not many of the current crop of politicians. Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Jim Demint, Mike Lee, and Mike Pence are the only ones that come to mind. I’d probably throw in Clarence Thomas and Scalia into the mix as well.
Then obviously, Frank J. should be included. And finally, myself, because I don’t trust anyone to make all the right decisions as much as I trust myself.
Folks, a Constitutional Convention is the WORST thing that could happen right now given the intellectual and ideological make-up of a majority of our population (they re-elected the Big O, remember?). A Consitutional Convention is NOT limited by law to deal strictly with the specific issues(s) for which it was called. ALL the cards are on the table. The Constitution literally could be re-written, the Bill of Rights could be scrapped. And given the rampant crony capitalism that runs the country right now, I fear a group of convention delegates stacked far in the favor of the Racist-in-Chief and the Clintons. What kind of brand-new Constitution do you think that crowd would come up with? Resist it.
Nobody pays any attention to the current Constitution. Why would a new one make any difference?
@12: Well, as Frank hints at: hangings.
I think that was more than just a hint.
Have you ever been elected to public office at the federal, state, county or local level? DISQUALIFIED.
Have you ever run for public office and been defeated at the federal, state, county or local level? DISQUALIFIED.
Have you ever been appointed to a public office at the federal, state county or local level? DISQUALIFIED.
Have you ever worked, with or without compensation, on behalf of any candidate or public office holder at the federal, state, county or local level? DISQUALIFIED.
Are you related by blood or by marriage to anyone who would be disqualified under any previous question above? DISQUALIFIED.
Have you ever attended a single class for a single day at any law school on planet Earth? DISQUALIFIED.
That’s a pretty good start…
@15 you forgot
Do you like Gladiator movies?
@11. It thinking like that that has gotten us into this predicament The marxists constantly usurp, ignore, twist, and violate the constitution. They know that most Americans are afraid of what they may get away with to do anything about it. Please remember it take 36 states to ratify an amendment. Right now, the real Americans control 38. The marxists are trying everything they can to hold onto the ones they have. Already in Colorado a movement is brewing to create a new area that is controlled by real Americans. If the real Americans that are stuck in commmiefornistan did the same thing, the number of real American states increases and the power of the marxists dwindle. If we pass amendments that secure liberty, the marxists power dwindles. If we elect real Americans that impeach judges and corrupt attorney generals, the marxists power dwindles. Do not be afraid of the marxists, that is what they want. Even if they were successful at instituting the old soviet constitution, we are under no obligation to ratify or live under it once ours is dissolved.
@11 The thing to remember about the Amendment Convention is that it can only PROPOSE an amendment. According to the current constitution, it:
“shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof”.
The convention itself can not pass the amendment, it still must be ratified by 38 states.
Or by 38 state ratifying conventions, as was the 21st Amendment. Okay, that Amendment only needed 36. But it did get 38.
I nominate Dennis Miller.
The Constitution would be a LOT more fun to read if it were peppered with obscure pop-culture references.
She’s not from my state, but I’d definitely nominate Sarah Palin.
No matter how many times you explain the difference between what Mark Levin is proposing and a Constitutional Convention, which Levin IS NOT proposing, the politicians and Ruling Class suck-ups will keep calling it a Constitutional Convention. It’s sort of like the morons that talk about putting clips in guns and tarmac at the airport.
From my state, I would go with Sarah Palin, Wayne Ross, and Bob Bell. I would ask to nominate Joe Miller too, if only to see Lisa Murkowski’s hair catch on fire from impotent rage.