Texas Governor Calls For Constitutional Convention To "Wrest Power" From Obama

Tyler Durden's picture




 

When it comes to Texas' relationship with the Federal government, the word "rocky" comes to mind. And nobody embodies said rockiness better than Texas governor Greg Abbott, who recently made headlines after announcing that irrelevant of D.C.'s demands, Texas would refuse to accept any Syrian refugees.

This followed his announcement earlier this summer 2015 when fears over nebulous Federal intentions with operation "Jade Helm" were running high, that "to address concerns that Texas citizens and to ensure that Texas communities remain safe, secure, and informed about military procedures occurring in their vicinity, I am directing the state guard to monitor Operation Jade Helm 15."

Prior to this, Abbott was again in the news back in June when he signed a bill into law that would allow Texas to build a gold and silver bullion depository, which would allow Texas to repatriate $1 billion worth of bullion from the New York Fed to the new facility once completed.

In short: the Federal government and the state of Texas have been on collision course of many months, one which culminated on Friday when Abbott called for a Constitutional Convention of states, spearheaded by Texas, and which would amend the U.S. Constitution to wrest power from a federal government "run amok."

To achieve that, Abbott proposed nine amendments to "restore the Rule of Law and return the Constitution to its intended purpose."

“If we are going to fight for, protect and hand on to the next generation, the freedom that [President] Reagan spoke of … then we have to take the lead to restore the rule of law in America,” Abbott said, cited by the Dallas News, during a speech at the Texas Public Policy Foundation’s Policy Orientation that drew raucous applause from the conservative audience. He said he will ask lawmakers to pass a bill authorizing Texas to join other states calling for a Convention of States.

According to the Hill, Abbott said that "the increasingly frequent departures from Constitutional principles are destroying the Rule of Law foundation on which this country was built,” said Abbott in a statement. We are succumbing to the caprice of man that our Founders fought to escape. The cure to these problems will not come from Washington D.C. Instead, the states must lead the way.”

Along with the speech, Abbott released a nearly 70-page plan – part American civics lesson, part anti-Obama diatribe – detailing nine proposed constitutional amendments that he said "would unravel the federal government’s decades-long power grab and restore authority over economic regulation and other matters to the states."

"The irony for our generation is that the threat to our Republic doesn’t come just from foreign enemies, it comes, in part, from our very own leaders," Abbott said in a speech that took aim at President Obama, Congress and the judicial branch.

Abbott's nine proposed amendments are:

  • Prohibit congress from regulating activity that occurs wholly within one state.
  • Require Congress to balance its budget.
  • Prohibit administrative agencies from creating federal law.
  • Prohibit administrative agencies from pre-empting state law.
  • Allow a two-thirds majority of the states to override a U.S. Supreme Court decision.
  • Require a seven-justice super-majority vote for U.S. Supreme Court decisions that invalidate a democratically enacted law
  • Restore the balance of power between the federal and state governments by limiting the former to the powers expressly delegated to it in the Constitution.
  • Give state officials the power to sue in federal court when federal officials overstep their bounds.
  • Allow a two-thirds majority of the states to override a federal law or regulation.

For those unfamiliar, a Constitutional Convention is one of two ways that the U.S. Constitution can be amended, and it’s described in Article V. One way is that Congress can propose amendments approved by two-thirds of the members of both chambers. The other method allows two-thirds of the state legislatures to call for a convention to propose amendments. Republicans backing the idea are confident that because they control state government in a majority of states, their ideas would prevail.

In both cases, the amendments become effective only if ratified by three-fourths of the states. Indicatively, of the 27 times the Constitution has been amended, none was generated by a constitutional convention.

Abbott is not the first to propose a convention: the idea has been gaining traction among some among conservative Republicans, comes just as the GOP presidential candidates begin to make forays into Texas ahead of the March primary election. The state, with 155 delegates up for grabs, will certainly be a key player in the party’s nominating process.

Earlier this week presidential contender Marco Rubio published a piece in USA Today endorsing the idea of a convention to amend the Constitution and restore limited government. In April, 27 active petitions had been filed with Congress seeking a convention to amend the constitution to require that Congress adopt a balanced budget.

Congress would be forced to act once 34 states joined the effort. So far, Cruz hasn’t endorsed the idea.

A convention, Abbott wrote, would force the federal government to “take the Constitution seriously again... The only true downside comes from doing nothing and allowing the federal government to continue ignoring the very document that created it,” Abbott wrote.

To be sure many conservatives agree with Abbott's posture that the only way to limit the powers of the Federal government is to resuscitate state power .

Of course, whereas Republicans are seeking to limit the role and power of government, Democrats demand just the opposite, and were quick to denounce Abbott’s plan Friday, saying the governor has misplaced priorities.

“America added 292,000 new jobs in December. But under Abbott, Texas fell to sixth in job creation, remains the uninsured capitol of the nation, wages and incomes remain far too low for hardworking families, our neighborhood schools are still underfunded, and college education is slipping out of reach,” Texas Democratic Party Deputy Executive Director Manny Garcia said in a statement. “Texas families deserve serious solutions, not Tea Party nonsense.”

What Manny Garcia did not add is that while oil was above $100, Texas was the state that had generated the most jobs under the Obama administration, and if it hadn't been for the Kerry-Saudi Arabia secret meetings which put into play the collapse in the price of oil, meant to cripple Russia but crushing US shale instead, Texas would continue to create record numbers of jobs.

However, since this is high politics, facts be damned, and the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas issued a statement with similar sentiment. “Governor Abbott, as Texans, we prefer the Framers’ plan. Don’t mess with the Constitution,” said Terri Burke, executive director of the ACLU of Texas.

A small but vocal Republican minority has also opined against the idea of a constitutional convention: last year, House legislators filed measures calling for such a convention. Texas senator Craig Estes unleashed a screed against the proposal when it came before the Senate State Affairs Committee in May. He compared the idea to “a petulant teenager who’s lost a few basketball games and plans to burn down the gymnasium.”

“The constitution has served us well for over 200 years. The problem is not the constitution,” Estes said, adding that the solution is to elect more conservative lawmakers. “Slap a bumper sticker for Ted Cruz on your car and get after it and knock yourself out.”

Estes went on to promise a filibuster if the measure came to the Senate floor.

Whether Abbott's proposal will gain steam and ultimately succeed is unknown, but it is virtually certain that the more the Obama administration governs via executive orders and other means to bypass the Legislative and short circuit the US government, the more powerful the grass-roots response at the state level will be, until eventually there is enough anger at the dysfunctional U.S. government at the 34 required states to do precisely as the Texan wants... that, or Trump is voted into the Oval Office as a protest against everything that is broken with the current political status quo.

4.666665
Your rating: None Average: 4.7 (24 votes)
 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sat, 01/09/2016 - 20:44 | 7023774 joego1
joego1's picture

Good for him, maybe someday the Feds will get the message that they are universally despised.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 20:47 | 7023776 honestann
honestann's picture

No predator, human or otherwise, pays any attention to ink smeared on paper or parchment.  They do whatever they can get away with.

The only solution is to dissolve government.  More precisely, that is actually just recognition that so-called "government" is a fiction, does not exist, has never existed, inherently cannot exist, and is simply an absurd adult version of "Simon Says" called "Uncle Sam Says".

Would life be better in north america if the predators-DBA-federal-government adhered to the ideas presented by the ink patterns on the parchment called "constitution"?  Of course.  But human predators ALWAYS control powerful fictions like "government", so smearing more ink on more pieces of parchment is a waste of time.

The only solutions are:

#1:  Refuse ALL demands human predators make.

#2:  Exterminate ALL human predators who attempt to force/harm anyone.

Anything less is worse than pointless (especially because it makes people think they are accomplishing something, and thereby misdirects their efforts into something other than what works).

-----

BTW, look how silly this proposed effort is.  The problem is "Obama pays no attention to the ink smeared on certain pieces of parchment".  The proposed solution is "to smear some ink on some more pieces of parchment".  Exactly what about the new ink and parchment will prevent Obama (and others) from ignoring the new ink and paper?

Answer:  NOTHING.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 20:54 | 7023820 PoasterToaster
PoasterToaster's picture

Good.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 21:05 | 7023852 o r c k
o r c k's picture

Also don't forget that drones with missiles are legal in the US now.   A Const. Convention would be a tempting target for sky-murder.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 21:23 | 7023895 crossroaddemon
crossroaddemon's picture

Glad to see that I am not the only straight-out anarchist around here...

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 22:54 | 7024176 honestann
honestann's picture

I suppose we must admit two kinds of anarchists exist.

-----

#1:  Those who understand "law", "nation", "authority", "government" are blatant fictions that do not exist and cannot exist.

#2:  Those who believe all those stupid fictions are non-fiction, but just prefer "anarchy" over any current "political system".

Only #1 are sane... but at least we can get along with #2.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 23:00 | 7024188 crossroaddemon
crossroaddemon's picture

Ann, if you lived close to me I would be asking you on a date right about now... ;)

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 21:27 | 7023907 Faeriedust
Faeriedust's picture

Ah, but calling a Constitutional Convention is the perfect way to dissolve the current government.  It's LEGITIMATE.  It follows the laws as set forth by the Founders.  It will quickly end up in a quagmire of competing agendas that demonstrate the folly of trying to maintain a unitary government over such a disparate population.  It allows we the People to legally dissolve an incompetent and overreaching government without violence, by forcing it to obey its own rules.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 22:52 | 7024151 honestann
honestann's picture

What do you mean by "legitimate"?

-----

No human alive today signed the so-called constitution, and so no human alive today can possibly be obligated by anything that document says.

If more than one human who signed was still alive today, I suppose they could all sign a new document that updated the old one, and that could be legitimate.

But if you decide to type the concept "legitimate", you should first decide what you mean by that, and whether any aspect of the topic is or ever has been legitimate in the first place.

-----

PS:  What happens if human predators do what they always do... especially lately.  They somehow take over the process and insert "every human in the universe is our slave" somewhere?

Of course, that's just vapor-thought anyway, since no matter what anyone writes, all the predators-that-be need to do is pack the fictional Supreme Court so they continue to decree that "war is peace", "slavery is liberty", "taxation is not theft", and any other pro-predator claim the predators-that-be wish.

Obviously most humans aren't as smart (or sane) as Einstein, who said (something like) "doing the same thing over and over again, then expecting different results, is the definition of insanity".

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 23:38 | 7024264 gwiss
gwiss's picture

Government, in its best form, simply represents cooperation with fellow citizens.

 

I say that recognizing that few govenrments live up to their promise.  Most become parasitized very quickly.

 

But.  Getting rid of the formal structure does not get rid of the need to cooperate with your fellow citizens.  Perseverating on this is the same error that those who see money as the root of all evil fall into when they decide to just "do away with money."  Just getting rid of one particular money token does not eliminate the societal need for a unit of account, store of value, and medium of exchange.  So, as soon as you eliminate one money token, another pops up to take its place, because society needs it.  Similarly, just getting rid of one formal cooperative structure does not eliminate the need that society has for a formal way to cooperate with other citizens, so as soon as you get rid of one, another pops up to take its place, because society in groups larger than 120 people or so needs some formal cooperative structure because the group becomes too large for cooperation to happen within the confines of personal relationships.  And society only works when you all are following the same rules.

 

Consider sports.  You need rules that all players agree to abide by.  Otherwise, how can you cooperate together to play the game?  That's one aspect of govenrment.  You can't have everybody on the court playing by their own rules, otherwise the game dissolves.  And by analogy, society dissolves without any cooperation.

 

Consider a homeowners association.  Conditions are set up front before you buy, but if you buy, then you agree to abide by the rules. This protects property values, which is important when you sink a bunch of hard earned time in the form of money into a house.

 

We need to start considering what I call a "post empire government."  Our empire is done.  Let's move on.  Local needs to rule, but local still needs cooperation, and this cooperation happens through some type of government structure.  So.  Local government that makes almost all decisions, including control of schools, land, environment, taxes, healthcare, housing, and whatever social support structures the local population desires.  And then, you let the social ecology bubble away.  People vote with their feet as they are free to move about the country, and this steady and gentle bubbling allows change to happen as it organically is necessary.  Regions that are too restrictive or try to lean on producers to benefit consumers too much find themselves losing producers.  The right to peacefully withdraw from a contract is the aspect missing from our national society currently, so we need to re-establish this in order to fix what is currently broken symmetry in our society, and broken symmetry is why our society is out of balance.  If you fix the broken symmetry, and once again enshrine the right to peacefully leave a contract, then manipulative and unequal relationships will tend to decline, which means society is getting more healthy.

 

Let's quit talking about "dissolving govenment" and instead let's start talking about how best to cooperate with our neighbors.

 

 

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 23:53 | 7024329 honestann
honestann's picture

Sorry, but you're brain is confused beyond saving.  Sure, all individuals should try to figure out "best ways to cooperate with neighbors".  THE END.

PS:  "government" is OPPOSITE of "voluntary contracts".

The only reason honest, ethical, productive, benevolent human beings accept endless abuse from human predators is because their brain is confused beyond the point of insanity by bogus fictions like "law", "nation", "authority", "government".

And so... to say we should "accept government" or that "government exists and is legit" is simply a call for the endless hyper-abuse of human beings FOREVER.

Sun, 01/10/2016 - 00:10 | 7024365 gwiss
gwiss's picture

No, I've gone through my anarchist stage.  I love the purity.  But it's no more stable than communism is.  Know why?  Because humans aren't all good.  And we have to band together with the good ones to protect ourselves from the bad.  That's what society actually represents, a protection mechanism for good people.  

 

And once you have a group of like minded individuals, then how do you decide how to cooperate together?  How do you reach peaceful settlements when disagreements erupt?  Because they always do.  Reasonable people with good hearts solve this problem by agreeing to rules of behavior.  But then what do you do when someone crosses those rules of behavior?  You cooperatively decide how to handle it with your fellow citizens. Which is how courts are born. But then you need someone to handle that process because you really don't have time to be putting together a posse every time the neighborhood drunk decides to tie one on and starts breaking glass. And so forth and so on.  Which was the point of my post, which you apparently didn't read because you really didn't address the points I brought up.  You still just want to roll around in your ideological purity, which is attractive, don't get me wrong, just no more practical than dreamy eyed urbanites who set off into the wilds with a gun and think they are going to "live off the land" only to be found dead in a bus from eating poisonous plants a few months later.

 

I have a suggestion.  How about you start from a small group of people, lets say 20, and tell me how you think interactions should go between them? How would you handle, for example, this problem.  Your neighbor runs a bar in his backyard, and sold some home made beer to another neighbor, who got drunk and pulled out his pistol and put a hole in the gas tank of your car.  The bar neighbor says its not his fault, and the drunk neighbor says its the fault of the guy who got him drunk. Meanwhile you have a broken car.  How do you solve this problem without shooting someone yourself?

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 20:45 | 7023778 johnnycanuck
johnnycanuck's picture

"Require Congress to balance its budget."

 

Couldn't help think this guy is wasting his talents and should apply for a job with the Onion.

 

Surely everyone knows the billionaires across the Western hemisphere are just aching for balanced budgets and an end to Corporate Welfare. 

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 21:22 | 7023781 Arthur Schopenhauer
Arthur Schopenhauer's picture

 

THE DANGEROUS PATH 

Big Money’s  Plan to Shred the Constitution

There is a threat to our democracy so severe it is shocking it has gone unnoticed this long, or been dismissed as impossible by the few who know about it and should be sounding the alarm. Given the current hyper-partisan environment of U.S. politics, the power of special and corporate interests in the post-Citizens United era, the call for a convention poses a huge threat to the nation.

Table of Contents

Executive Summary

Acknowledgments

Introduction: The Threat

The Balanced Budget Amendment

Other Convention Proposals

Opposition From Across the Aisle and Across the Spectrum

Conclusion: An Article V Convention Would Invite Constitutional Chaos

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 21:23 | 7023896 Faeriedust
Faeriedust's picture

Yes, indeed.  The Powers That Be are scared shitless of a Constitutional Convention; one should be called for that reason alone.

It's time to seriously update a system that was hacked together when black men were legally 3/5 of a person, and women of any race weren't people at all.  The U.S. has one of the OLDEST democratic constitutions currently in practice, and it creaks audibly under any strain.  Oh, and it's become totally dysfunctional?  That's usually a good sign that it's time for a rehab.

An Article V Convention would invite consideration of issues that no longer bear any resemblence to conditions in 1776.  Things like electronic voting (and vote counting), massive imbalances of wealth and population, instantaneous communication and the issuance of the "full faith and credit of the United States" by a cabal of private bankers.  These things NEED to be discussed and reconsidered by today's citizenry, stripped of the accumulation of power in the hands of the obscenely wealthy and hereditarily well-connected.  The past is in failure mode.  It's time to reconstruct our future.

 

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 21:42 | 7023955 Arthur Schopenhauer
Arthur Schopenhauer's picture

I've been involved with common cause for many years. You should spend some time reading the documents I referenced above, read them very, very carefully; and take everything into consideration.

If you do the research regarding this push for a "balanced budget", I think you may soon come to the same conclusion an accountant might, using the simplest basic accounting equation:

Assets = Liabilities + Capital

Where:

1. All current and future Assets and Capital will belong to big money

2. All current and future Liabilities will belong to YOU and ME, fellow citizens.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 21:50 | 7023975 Buster Cherry
Buster Cherry's picture

Liked your post, but make one correction: The United States has THE oldest democratic constitution in the history of the world.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 22:01 | 7024006 crossroaddemon
crossroaddemon's picture

Problem with that is that any such convention would be controlled by the squid and there would be fuckall we could do about that.

Besides, who the fuck wants to reform government? Let's abolish it instead...

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 22:25 | 7024086 pipes
pipes's picture

Today's citizenry is packed full of dolts and integrity-challenged, spineless socialists.

 

I will not allow myself to be subject to ANY RESULT that such rabble may produce.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 21:53 | 7023983 bshirley1968
bshirley1968's picture

How can you be so informed and yet so stupid?  The same people that gave us the Constitution gave the states the power to amen it.  As good as it is, there are a couple of areas that are being abused and need to be made clear....in writing....before the ass whoopin' starts.

The framers never imagined that the pricks we have running things would ever be so devoid of character or integrity or that the people would tolerate it to the extent we have.  If they had, they would have nailed down certain areas that the king prick, Mr. Lincoln,  made assumptions about.  Like just who has the final say in the matter of states rights.  They would have made it clear that no BS agency appointed by the President could make laws that the states had to follow.  I could go on, but if you can't see the obviousness of the situation, you are a waste of time.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 20:50 | 7023798 Bunga Bunga
Bunga Bunga's picture

Catalonia makes deal for separatist government:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-09/catalonia-s-mas-stands...

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 20:54 | 7023821 WillyGroper
WillyGroper's picture

All sounds real good, barring presidential ambition/grandstanding lip service.

I have one question...Were they successful in repatriating their gold?

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 20:57 | 7023827 Jack's Raging B...
Jack's Raging Bile Duct's picture

Some logical fallacies:

  1. Attempting to reign in a government which has ignored a piece of paper by amending a piece of paper.
  2. It's difficult to name one single component of any part of the US Government which hasn't inexorably worked towards undoing the US Constitution.
  3. Given the above, organizing a constitional convention only puts what little of the Bill of Rights which remains intact.
Sat, 01/09/2016 - 21:37 | 7023935 withglee
withglee's picture

And what does it mean to amend a constitution of an occupied country ... witness WTC7 falling down proving without doubt that 9/11 was an inside job perpetrated by those who occupy our government?

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 22:31 | 7024107 Ms No
Ms No's picture

Your right.  There is no way in hell any states can be trusted to carve on our constitution right now.  We already have a constitution and none of it being adhered to.

This is probably more controlled opposition unfortunately.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 22:20 | 7024060 pipes
pipes's picture

RIGHT!?

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 21:01 | 7023839 Haole
Haole's picture

Repeat after me:  There is no "political" solution to any of this, period.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 21:46 | 7023965 Buster Cherry
Buster Cherry's picture

It is the right thing to try, before we must resort to doing our duty, as spelled out in the Declaration.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 22:04 | 7024011 crossroaddemon
crossroaddemon's picture

Before you talk about our duty, I must ask this question: what are your intentions? If your intent is to depose the present ruling powers WITHOUT REPLACING THEM then I support your cause even though I think at this moment in history you ae doomed to fail. If it is your intention to install another tyrrany to replace the current one (all government is tyrrany) then I stand against you.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 21:05 | 7023851 4 wheel drift
4 wheel drift's picture

Texas ought to seceede from these criminal  kommie pigs... who needs them anyway

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 21:08 | 7023861 atthelake
atthelake's picture

If Texas seceeds, La Raza will swoop in and take over.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 21:09 | 7023854 atthelake
atthelake's picture

Any Constitutional Convention will be ruled by the thugs and savages we know as American politicians. And it will not go well.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 21:56 | 7023941 bshirley1968
bshirley1968's picture

You obviously don't know how the process works.  It is called by the states and run by the states because the states do actually have all the power if they would just exercise it and quit being the whores of the federal government.

It is the only peaceful choice left us.  Don't be stupid or afraid. Time to step up.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 22:06 | 7024014 crossroaddemon
crossroaddemon's picture

You think the state .govs cannot be bought, or haven't been already? Dream on.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 22:08 | 7024021 pipes
pipes's picture

The same god-damned hacks run the state branches of the party. What sort of naive, deluded, mental midget would think for one nano-second that a Con Con wouldn't be the playground of these despicable, back-stabbing manipulators?

 

You think HE doesn't understand how the process works?

 

YOU are the clueless one. The state party members are NOTHING more than federal level aspirants, and have TIME AND AGAIN demonstrated that they will stoop to slime-ball tactics to advance the establishment agenda.

 

HOW IS IT POSSIBLE THAT THERE ARE STILL PEOPLE WHO THINK THERE IS A DIFFERENCE (in the ultimate outcome) BETWEEN THE STATISM OF THE (D)s and (R)s? 

 

There IS no "peacful choice" left...,don't you get that?

 

There is only time now.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 22:20 | 7024064 Ms No
Ms No's picture

“No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session.”

And therein lies the problem.  We are infested, we no longer have capitals they are nests. 

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 23:57 | 7024342 atthelake
atthelake's picture

Republicans and democrats are corrupt. Period. It is you who do not know how the process works. State politicians accept lobby money and are owned, just as much as federal politicians.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 21:44 | 7023956 Buster Cherry
Buster Cherry's picture

How many that you know of turned out the way you mention?

Better still, can you even name one time a Constitutional Convention occurred?

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 21:07 | 7023858 R19
R19's picture

If more states would act in line with Texas, our country wouldn't be so fucked.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 21:15 | 7023876 new game
new game's picture

at least i'm not alone in understanding the pen needs to be chopped off at the tip...

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 21:22 | 7023894 Wile
Wile's picture

No mess with TX.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 21:27 | 7023904 Kirk2NCC1701
Kirk2NCC1701's picture

Still playing by the Oppressor's Rules, are we?  How about starting with the standard forms of Public Dissent, like...

- Mass Protests (Million Man march),

- Strikes,

- Work-to-rule,

- Traffic Jams (Trucks & Tractors),

- Creating super-PACs (like ADL or AIPAC, but on steroids)?

If they can't even do that, then why should we give ANY credence to the Weekend-Warrrior games and 'Statements'?  Oooh, I'll bet that TPTB are just quacking in the Sachs Filth Avenue custom-shoes, seeing another Proclamation.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 21:35 | 7023926 Contrariologist
Contrariologist's picture

I live in Texas. Gov. Abbott is a dolt. Yawn.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 21:40 | 7023952 Buster Cherry
Buster Cherry's picture

Thanks Greg.

Now, how about you other 49???

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 21:46 | 7023966 Atomizer
Atomizer's picture

Good job Elbert. Greg is becoming a parrot. Repeating sound bites to keep the peasants at bay. It won't work in his favor. I admire you Elbert. Keep up the good work. Fuck this highjacked political system in Washington DC. Time to restore America.  Still Report #505 - Elbert Guillory - American - YouTube
Sat, 01/09/2016 - 21:55 | 7023988 Pumpkin
Pumpkin's picture

Tell Obama to go fuck himself, put any federal agent in jail that bothers any of the people, and tell any bank within the state that freezes any account because of IRS liens they will be shut down.  Fixed

 

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 21:57 | 7023995 Lmo Mutton
Lmo Mutton's picture

Don't need a cc when you have a weapon.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 22:00 | 7024003 Stormtrooper
Stormtrooper's picture

I'm glad that a state governor is trying to kick his legislature in the ass to get the Convention of States proposal thru at least 34 legislatures to get it going.  I spoke with our Ohio Senate Speaker today at a local meeting and he recognizes the need to get our HJR3 thru the Ohio legislature.  My House Representative is also on-board with the need for the states to fix, or terminate,  their agent in D.C. with an Article V Convention.

Ohio HJR3 uses the language proposed by the Convention of States organization (ConventionofStates.com)  to provide standardized language in a call for a Convention, language which has been lacking previously.  When adopted, Ohio will be the 5th state to adopt this language for an Article V Convention.  If 34 states adopt the same language, Congress will be legally mandated to call the Convention.  After that, the entire process will be controlled by the state legislatures with no involvement from any branch of the Federal government.  Any Constitutional amendments proposed and ratified by 38 states will become law.  Article V does not create any restrictions on the states so in the most extreme case they could amend the 3 branches of Federal government out of the Constituion.  In other words, Washington, D.C. would become just another American backwater city.

It appears that Governor Abbott is doing typical political grandstanding because state governors would have absolutely no role in the Convention process.  However, if he can use his political power to kick the Texas legislature in the ass and get them to adopt the call for Convention, my hat is off to him.  It is my understanding that the Texas legislature tried to adopt this Convention call previously but was blocked by one, believe it or not, a Democratic legislator.  Hopefully, that legislator has had a heart attack or other mis-fortune by now and will not prevent future progress.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 22:13 | 7024035 Ms No
Ms No's picture

It would take a long time to consider the ramifications of all of that. If the people ever get control of our country again we will have to re-elect an entirely new Supreme Court, they have been our worst enemy.  The SC should have protected us from all that has happened but they went turncoat treason instead.

There are still good judges and lawyers out there struggling to keep our rights alive and we would have to locate them and appoint them ourselves.  Maybe then we could think about what to do with everything else.  Jefferson realized that the SC should have term limits as an afterthought.  If we had a real SC we would have states rights.  Our jury system is a joke also as they weed people like us out if they can and that's just the beginning of the problems there. 

It's all a disaster.  A couple of the things we could do is inact extreme penalties for politicians that commit treason against the constitution and the people and take away the presidents right to pardon.  Public campaign funding might work, it shouldn't cost much, you may even be able to use public television networks for platform. Its hard to know where to even start, it's all such a mess.  Bringing Thomas Jefferson back from the dead would help.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 22:25 | 7024085 Stormtrooper
Stormtrooper's picture

During the Convention of States, my proposal is to amend the Federal Supreme Court out of the Constitution and replace it with a state staffed Supreme Court with all the same powers.  However, the Justices should come from the states (perhaps from regions consisting of 3-4 states) and have limited terms with the state legislatures having the power to recall them if they abuse their positions as have the current Supreme Court justices.

The ultimate result of a Convention of States should be to strip the Federal government of all powers that do not benefit the states and to provide state oversight that can over-rule any Federal laws that usurp state powers.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!