DANGEROUS: Marco Rubio Says First Thing He’ll Do as President Is Amend the U.S. Constitution

| |

rubiofootball

This guy is such a slick fake. If the Powers that Shouldn’t Be didn’t in some way really want him and his terrible politics in office, even as a potential VP, he wouldn’t still be in the running.

If you watched the last debate, it’s a good thing you finally got to see how authoritarian Rubio really is. He drooled all over the NDAA and begged for more NSA surveillance state to fight the turrurists. He was roaring for boots on the ground and more war in the Middle East. Don’t forget, not only was Rubio “totally committed” to Obama’s unconstitutional immigration bill, but he’s also Israeli billionaire Sheldon Adelson’s favorite GOP lapdog. In fact, while he’s perfectly fine with even more spying on Americans here at home (to keep you safe), he’s apparently somehow outraged that spying on Israel may be worse than reported (just so you know where his allegiances truly are first and foremost).

Well now he’s saying if he becomes president, the first thing he’s going to do is call for a Constitutional Convention to amend the U.S. Constitution:

“One of the things I’m going to do on my first day in office: I will announce that I am a supporter, and as president I will put the weight of the presidency behind a constitutional convention of the states so we can pass term limits on members of Congress and the Supreme Court and so we can pass a balanced budget amendment,” Mr. Rubio said in Iowa.

But he swears it would somehow (not sure how) be limited to only those issues:

“I think you’d have to limit the convention, and that’s what they’re proposing — a very limited convention on specific, delineated issues … like term limits and like a balanced budget amendment,” he said.

Uh huh. Sure. Because Congress can’t hardly wait to limit itself.

This is extremely dangerous.

While Rubio is saying it’ll be for things that make sense (like any of his politics make sense except to the establishment’s twisted agenda), things like Congressional and Supreme Court term limits and a balanced budget, COME ON. Is anyone really dumb enough to buy that?

Considering the geopolitical climate we’re all living in here in good ‘ol Murica at the moment, and the reality of who really owns Rubio, we all know once that door is opened even half an inch, it’ll get kicked off the hinges.

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details).


Contributed by Melissa Dykes of The Daily Sheeple.

Melissa Dykes is a writer, researcher, and analyst for The Daily Sheeple and a co-creator of Truthstream Media with Aaron Dykes, a site that offers teleprompter-free, unscripted analysis of The Matrix we find ourselves living in. Melissa and Aaron also recently launched Revolution of the Method and Informed Dissent. Wake the flock up!

Wake The Flock Up! Please Share With Sheeple Far & Wide:
  • Mark

    Likely he will make Zionism the official state religion invoking the death penalty for dissenters.

    • Mr Reynard

      A Judeo-Sharia law….Yupp.. He could this ??

      • leevitowt

        Noahide law. The Lubavitchers are stalking the halls of the UN – insinuated into all UN NGOs.

        • Mr Reynard

          You’re naming it, Noahide Law. I call it Judeo-Talmudic-Sharia law…

      • Zaphod Braden

        Islam is “Judaism for DUMMIES”.
        It is the “Cliff’s Notes” of judaism.
        Judaism follows a WAR God. Islam, the sword.
        Islam is the closest religion to Judaism. If you take Mohammad out of Islam, what is left is Judaism, almost all their religious laws are the same. Sharia law copies Halacha law. Jews and Moslems got along beautifully until Israel replaced the original inhabitants of Palestine who were treated exactly the same way the American Indians were treated and much worse.

        • Mr Reynard

          Wahabist= Judeo-Islamist…

      • bsroon

        See above, plz

      • Uh, Zionism is neither jewish nor muslim.

    • bsroon

      NO Executive Order is legally binding upon anyone who is NOT an employee of the Executive Branch of the Fed govt. To say that EVERYONE must do ______ means that he made a law. The constitution – highest law of the land – forbids that authority to the president. ONLY congress can make a law.

      Take it one step further – congress can only make LEGITIMATE legislation regarding the clearly ennumerated powers which the constitution limits them to – and so most of what the fed govt (and states) does is totally unlawful, anti-constitutional, and treasonous.

      While we can freely disobey these illegitimate “laws” we do have to accept that the govts have big sticks and don’t care if they kill you in swinging it – if it interferes with the rich man’s profits.

      • Executive orders aren’t legally binding on anyone, regardless of their employment.

        • bsroon

          Cool my friend – do you have a link?

          Mine basically are legal arguments that point where i said….

          It’s always nicer to have a clear interpretation because the lemming crowd can’t handle complicated or “i gotta look at something and read it and THEN understand it….”

          • I created the political_reading_room on Yahoo groups, which you needn’t join to peruse. It is not a traditional group, being a read-only place where I put stuff for those who want to learn the truth about many things that have become apocryphal. The only advantage of becoming a member is receiving every post when it is posted. If you want to contact me, you can send me email through the group. Enjoy.

  • AZBlackDog

    I disagree. While I can’t stand the thought of Rubio as POTUS, Term Limits for career politicians is inherently a GOOD THING. Come up with another way to get from here to there…how about one o’ those Executive Orders our current POTUS throws around like he invented them? There must be hundreds of Executive Orders out there, maybe even where a POTUS dog can poop at the White House (it would not surprise me).

    • Melissa Melton

      That isn’t the point. Everyone thinks term limits are a good idea. But limiting a Constitutional Convention to only that topic? Highly doubtful. Once the door is open, it’s open.

      • AZBlackDog

        What did I say? I said, ‘Come up with another way to get from here to there.’ Did I even mention the Constitution? No. Did I mention another way? Yes, the Executive Order (from Wiki) — …

        executive orders have significant influence over the internal affairs of
        government, deciding how and to what degree legislation will be
        enforced, dealing with emergencies, waging 72-hour length strikes on
        enemies, and in general fine-tuning policy choices in the implementation
        of broad statutes.

        As we all know, Obama has redefined the Executive Order so while the wiki may no longer apply, I don’t see any reason a Republican POTUS can’t ‘declare’ Term Limits via the EO.

        Where’s YOUR idea?

        • bsroon

          WIKI is totally edited by TPTB. If you change a posting in a controversial subject – whether geoengineering, vaccines, medicine, nutrition, politics, business – it can and has been changed within minutes.
          Excellent TEDx talk by a former CNN(?) investiative reporter.

      • I think term limits are a lousy idea because they are totally useless, as we have seen. We keep changing the name of the don without abolishing the gang. A constitutional convention has never been limited, the first one was never actually called.

    • Randall

      how simple minded can you be?… So many things sound good in Theory… But, try to put that Jeanie back into her bottle…Once you get your Convention, it’s all on the table…. regardless of any promises ….Come on, he’s a politician for god’s sake… If his mouth is moving, you know he’s lying…. They are all Lying about everything… except for one thing….They are fundamentally changing America… I don’t know about you, but I am getting poorer….

    • Chris Sky

      wow you’re not very bright are you… nobody is debating whether term limits are a good thing.

      the problem is that they want to invoke a Constitution CONVENTION which allows them to ALTER or DELETE ANY parts of the constitution they want.

      you know like those pesky first, second, fourth amendments for starters.

      lol the fact that you didn’t understand where this is all going is the PERFECT example for why people like OBama can get away with so much.

      please pull your head out of the sand. for your own good.

      • AZBlackDog

        😎

        Take your potshots, one and all.

        The ONLY commenter on here to actually nail it is this guy —

        chuckkel
        15 hours ago

        What he is suggesting is an Article 5 “Convention of the States”
        (limited topics chosen in advance, not a “Constitutional Convention”
        where there can be unlimited topics. They are different.

        Now who is it that didn’t understand??? But please, pile on if it makes you feel better. Tis the time to be happy, if that’s what gets you off, go for it! Happy New Year!

        • Chris Sky

          when you open the door the “Changing” the constitution it soon becomes a tidal wave of “transformation” not alluding to this elephant in the room is tantamount to lying.

      • Dan Black

        Jew Mark Levin (fake conservative) always talks about this constitutional convention. You know they would get some corrupt assholes to change the constitution in a way that would lead to more tyranny. What the government is doing right now is against the law and they know we can’t enforce the constitution until there is a revolution.

        • William S Anderson

          THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION UNDER THE US CONSTITUTION YOU IDIOT.

    • RandyJ/ProudSurvivor

      Term limits won’t make any difference as long as the politicians are under the influence of powerful elites who have no, nor serve any allegiance to the US, it’s people or the Constitution. This problem MUST be solved before any other action will make a difference. It won’t matter-we are way-WAY-past the point of no return for these types of actions. They needed to be enacted 30-40 years ago-at least.

    • Mark

      Unless you also force staffers, bureaucrats, and lobbyists to resign, term limits are an utterly useless idea.

    • It doesn’t matter if you chain the actors if you let their union go on.

  • Right to the Point

    We should be creating a Continental Congress outside our government right now. It’s time to duplicate the original movement that started this country.

    • AllodialTitle

      Reboot the Republic,,,, just get the South to join in since they left the uSA awhile ago

  • Donna

    NFW

    I dont trust him or the people who buy political influence. The Constitution is just fine leave it the F alone.

  • ozcar

    …thought the voters were supposed to limit the terms. If not, shame on them/us.

    • SonsofAnarchy5768

      It has nothing to do with shame on “us” it has to do with voter fraud~

  • Smarty

    Rubio. Even his name sounds stupid. Like the swimming game we played as kids. “Marco……..Rubio”. He’s a tool that loves a good Ata-boy, otherwise known as a useful idiot. I doubt he’ll be “selected” though. I think he’s just in the game to keep everything warm and fuzzy. Sheep like shiny things and Rubio is a shiny thing. Once you divorce yourself from the Matrix, spotting these assholes is soooooooo easy. No matter who gets selected, what we’re experiencing now will run it’s course just as in all societies past. Everyone is choosing sides now and it won’t be long until history repeats itself….count on it, and prepare for it….

  • StevetheHun

    I’d rather see all the amendments after the 10th thrown out. Along with this Cuban pretender to the throne.

  • Smarty

    After you take a Marco, don’t forget to wipe your Rubio…..

  • Hp B

    He’s a greasy little snake.

  • Mike

    just another elitist tool.

    • Branko Brankov

      ELITE-CRIMINALS.

  • Nexusfast123

    More likely that they would revise the constitution behind closed doors and send out a 5,000 page proposed bill to amend the constitution and ask everyone to read it in a day.

  • AllodialTitle

    Who cares what the CEO of USA INC ( ie: DC) does to the Constitution OF the UNITED STATES? As long as the Constitution FOR the united States stays the same, with the original 13th amendment which forbids attorneys in office !

    All “laws” passed by attorneys do not apply to men and women

  • chuckkel

    What he is suggesting is an Article 5 “Convention of the States” (limited topics chosen in advance, not a “Constitutional Convention” where there can be unlimited topics. They are different.

  • masterblaster

    Rubio wants to turn the uSA into the shithole called cuba his parents fled from. He will not carry Florida that is for sure

  • masterblaster

    Hell the president is issuing hundreds of executive orders to bypass the constitution just add a few more and limit the court and congress to ONE TERM OF SIX YEARS and another to limit pension double and triple dippers in public service to one lifetime pension . Jon McCain is getting ready to get his third federal paid pension when he retires

    • Kyke Hunter

      Hopefully a professional sniper blows his brains out before that time.

      • BIGOTIST

        That would be wonderful and the best accolade he could leave~

    • BIGOTIST

      BS, they make enough to pay for their own fckn pension!!!! WE pay them tooo much as it is for doing nothing~

  • masterblaster

    Rubio is nothing more than a total sell out just like Paul Ryan

  • El Lobo Solo

    THE process already exists to amend or repeal amendments to the Constitution. An amendment passes 2/3rd of Congress & Senate, then goes to each of the state legislatures to be voted upon, requiring a 3/4th of the states to pass or repeal an amendment.
    I would like to see the 16th & 17th amendments repealed & a balanced budget amendment passes.

    • SonsofAnarchy5768

      With these criminals and psychopaths in charge, you better watch what you wish for, the criminals and psychopaths need to leave it just as they have found it!

  • Another Thought Criminal

    No need for them to amend the constitution; they blatantly break it all the time.

    • iamcurious

      When it suits them, they pay it no mind, preferring to characterize it as a “quaint old document”. When I read it, I see a well thought out plan for the future of the country.

      • Another Thought Criminal

        Imagine how great America would be if our schools taught us to honor our founding fathers, what they said, what they wrote, what they did?
        Instead, they had us all pledging allegiance to a flag instead of memorizing and pledging allegiance to the constitution; specifically the Bill of Rights.

        • iamcurious

          In the 7th or 8th grade, my history teacher made us all memorize the Preamble to the Constitution. To this day, I can recite it verbatim, and marvel at how clear, concise and beautifully simple it is. As an older adult, I wish I could thank her, but she’s long gone. She knew we couldn’t fully take in and appreciate the history she was teaching us. She was planting seeds that would produce in our adulthood.

  • Scotoz

    Its all just a con game with smoke and mirrors and the best description of the farce that is so called voting in the USA was made by George Carllin and Bill Hicks both now no longer with us.

    Bill’s take on he president after being elected.

    George Carlin

  • Kyke Hunter

    Amend it with ”No Spics, Niggers, half niggers, white niggers, or KIKES shall be allowed into govt”

  • Kyke Hunter

    Every goddam candidate on both sides are true pieces of worthless shit.

  • patriot156

    The supreme court should be limited, they infringe upon our rights and don’t get held accountable. The Original wording of the Constitution said that they should only be in office as long as they are in good standing. They shouldn’t be appointed ether, No wonder the Presidents can get them to say something is constitutional even when not they are appointed.
    Such BS.
    Dunno Don’t like Rubio that much but still some of that is good.

  • Chris Sky

    they would LOVE a constitutional convention… IMMEDIATELY things like the first, second amendments will simply be DELETED the “Bill of Rights” wil be renamed “The bill of government granted privileges” and voila

    OBama’s usa realized.

    • William S Anderson

      THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A “CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION” UNDER THE US CONSTITUTION.

      • Chris Sky

        “no such thing”

        1) the constitution was CREATED by a Constutitonal Convention
        2) the constitution can only LEGALLY be CHANGED by a “Constitutional Covention”

        and here’s the OFFICIAL DEFINITION to prove my point. But please, tell everybody again how there is “no such thing” 😀

        http://thelawdictionary.org/constitutional-convention/

        • William S Anderson

          Once the Constitutional Convention created the Republic, only an Article 5 Convention could change it, short of a revolution. I am still right.

          • Chris Sky

            “an article 5”

            otherwise known as the process to carry out a “Constitutional Convention” of which there is a current petition even posted here!

            so no… you’re not even close to right

            you said “on such thing as a “constitutional convention” exists. When I proved your wrong, you said “no, that’s an article 5, there’s still no such thing.” … and of course i simply pointed out that an article 5 is the process by which a constitutional convention can be undertaken.

            so once and for all… you’re wrong. and either deliberately lying and trying to confuse people or you’re just really ignorant. either way… facts don’t change and the entire purpose of a “Constitutional Convention” (also known by it’s supporters) as “The second constitutional convention of the USA” is to ALTER the constitution… and when they mean “alter” they mean… make more power for the government and less freedom for the individual.

            but keep lying. it’s realllllly convincing 😀

            http://www.conventionofstates.com/

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Constitutional_Convention_of_the_United_States

          • William S Anderson

            Sorry, apparently English is your second language. The correct dejure legal term is “Convention for proposing Amendments” NOT “Constitutional Convention” just because people call it a “Constitutional Convention” doesn’t mean it is a “do-over” of the Original US Constitutional Convention. Here is THE text: Article V
            The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, 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, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.The Constitution may be amended in two ways. The standard device, used for all amendments so far, is for both houses of Congress to pass by two-thirds vote a proposal, which they send to the states for ratification, either by state legislatures or by conventions within the states. An amendment is ratified when three-fourths of the states approve. The Constitution also authorizes a national convention, when two-thirds of the states petition Congress for such a convention, to propose amendments, which would also have to be ratified by three-quarters of the states.

          • Chris Sky

            Article 5 = Consitutional Convention= Constitutional Convention = altering any parts of the constitution they feel like.

            The fact that you’re long winded definition she “shall call a convention for proposing amendments” makes that abundantly clear! 😀

            so once again… you’re wrong. and extra ignorant for attempting to respond… because the whole point is you pretending that Rubio isn’t calling for the constituion to be amended using the article 5 process otherwise referred to as a “Constitutional Convention” and that’s EXACTLY what he’s proposing 😀

            but nice try with you 65 big comments from a brand new fake troll profile 😀

  • lilbear68

    yeah well there is that and on the face of it a pipe dream at best. to amend the constitution your gonna need 38 states to agree to it. these days I don’t see 38 states agreeing on anything other than disagreeing lol

  • h1b_go_home

    Let’s make America great again. Trump 2016! Get behind him or get out of the way.

  • George_Costanza

    Marco Rubio is NOT eligible to be President. He is not natural born.
    He was born in 1971 as the child of a Cuban mother, and a Cuban father.
    Those Cuban did not become Americans until 1975.
    Sorry.

  • William B Stoecker

    As always, Jews make convenient scapegoats, but our problem is really America’s own corrupt NWO elite, only a few of whom are Jewish. The Birchers have warned for years of the danger of a Constitutional Convention, and, as for Marco Rino, most of us have known for a long time that the “Republican Party” is controlled by the same elites who control the Demoncraps, and Marco is one of the most vile and corrupt RINOs around.

    • Dan Black

      Only a few… LOL. Gimme what your smoking…

    • bahmi

      That’s right! Jews have no money, no high ranking positions in finance, industry, education, business, etc etc etc.
      Get serious, will ya? We have massive jew problems in this country, if you did some reading you’d find that out, but you are happier with innuendo and false bravado. Why don’t you tell us the Fed is all stocked with Irishmen instead of jews? Why don’t you tell us how Woodrow Wilson had nothing to do with placement of Louis Brandeis on the high court? Talk about the biggest “believers” of multiculturism in the US, guess who is behind that fine movement?
      Get off the dope and start to think clearly. Or, are you in the tribe?

  • Piper Michael

    Date Jan 1, 2020 at the St. Louis Continental Convention

    After the last 6 months of floor fights, some leading to actual blood on the convention floor, and after the constant circus like atmosphere surrounding the convention center, the ‘Militias of the Several States’ have now surrounded the convention center calling for the Articles of Dissolution to be presented on the floor… this resolution basically dissolves the Federal government and reestablishes the Articles of Confederation of the original 12 colonies, with modern adjustments.

    Many think that these articles will be adopted since the delegates have deadlocked, are exhausted and tired of the violence, despite all their best efforts at finding some compromise to the Article of the New Bill of Rights that most of those on the right side of the Isle call The Elimination Doctrine, that would do away with the original constitution and replace it with the ‘One World Treaty’, that in effect would convert the US of A into a province of the UN and assign all the military commands to the UN Secretary General, has basically given this convention a civil war like atmosphere.
    You will recall that this convention was called for some simple ‘tweaks’, but once the gavel fell, the Soros Coalition began demanding a ‘fuller addressing of the issues’, and managed to open the floor for amendments.

    Those who are standing for the ‘Old Republic’ have vowed that if this resolution is adopted, to quote “There will be blood running in the streets.”

    Be careful what you ask for America, you may just get it.

  • Chris Sky

    ya because you would probably love it we could get rid of the things YOU dont’ like (probably things like guns)

    so ya… you’re probably all for “changing the constitution” personally I like my rights and freedoms, and they aren’t up for “negotiation”

    • AZBlackDog

      OK, Slick. Let’s go back to the article and Mr. Rubio’s quote —
      “One of the things I’m going to do on my first day in office: I will
      announce that I am a supporter, and as president I will put the weight
      of the presidency behind a constitutional convention of the states so we
      can pass term limits on members of Congress and the Supreme Court and
      so we can pass a balanced budget amendment,” Mr. Rubio said in Iowa.

      Read that, move your lips if it helps. “a constitutional convention of the states” Further, he names two issues, not a blanket of issues. Now, go do some research and while you’re at it, season that crow you’ll be chewing on. LOLOLOLOL! Loser.

      • Chris Sky

        yes because the government ALWAYS Tells you the truth about what their true intentions are!
        “we’re gonna do a constitutional convention. but we’re only gonna talk about these two things, ok… ok.. we promise. now just let us have our constitutional convention.”

        …. “and if you like your plan…..”

        some people are wilfully ignorant… then there’s obvious trolls. congratulations. you’ve been found “Under the Bridge.”

    • William S Anderson

      What rights and freedoms? YOU LIVE IN TAIWAN!

  • Chris Sky

    everybody in favour of a constitutional convention negelects to mention they are in favour of it, because there is something in there they PERSONALLY don’t agree with and would love it if the “State” did away with it.

    cowards, traitors, and worse are anybody who would open the door to legalize a blanket assault on the fabric of the nation.

    • William S Anderson

      YOU DON’T EVEN KNOW WHAT AN ARTICLE 5 CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION IS. CONGRESS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ONE! IT ONLY INVOLVES STATE LEGISLATURES! DUH!

      • Branko Brankov

        I think I have read that there are 2 constitutions, one IN COMMERCE for THE USA CORPORATION one for united American States….

        • shamu9

          “The Act of 1871” Changed “The Constitution ‘OF’ The U.S. A.” to “the Constitution ‘FOR’ The U.S.A”. In order to borrow money from the European and English Banksters, To pay the (Un) Civil War Debt, The Act Of 1871 changed the U.S.A. from a Republic, to a Corporation!

  • hammerstamp

    It’s good that establishment types like Rubio, Bush, Christie, and Kasich are so clueless about the attitude of their base toward dangerous ideas and business as usual. It makes weeding them out as possible contenders so much easier.

  • Dutch Uncle

    Any candidate that says they want to change the Constitution has disqualified themselves in my opinion. That’s like saying ahead of time that they won’t honor their oath of office.

  • Anonymous1

    I think the main reason most people are afraid of a Constitutional Convention is because it’s most likely that conservative issues will be pushed and liberals will get their clocks cleaned.

  • iamcurious

    The Senators are supposed to represent the states, not the people.

    • BIGOTIST

      WTF is a state w/out people???~

      • iamcurious

        You obviously aren’t in touch with the founding concepts of our country. The people are represented by their representatives in the House. The states were represented by 2 senators from each state, a total of 100. The senators did not represent the people directly.

  • Sailcat

    Convention? Only a pure crook would go for that. Levin?… misguided.

  • William S Anderson

    NOT THAT I AM A BIG MARCO RUBIO SUPPORTER, BUT I POINT OUT THAT THIS IGNORANT BLOGGER DOESN’T EVEN KNOW WHAT AN ARTICLE 5 CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION IS, OR SHE WOULD NOT BE CONCERNED THAT CONGRESS HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH ONE! IT ONLY INVOLVES STATE LEGISLATURES! DUH!

    • Chris Sky

      LOL the State Legislators are the ones who vote whether there will be a “Constitutional Convention” once they vote and agree to it, they can literally change ANYTHING in the constitution whether it be “congress term limits” or “second amendment rights.” so no.. congress doesn’t have anything to do with the voting process to begin the constitutional convention… but considering the entire purpose of the constitutional convention is to alter the constitution, once they have voted FOR a convention… ANYTHING can be altered! DUHHHHHH that’s called LOGIC, COMMON SENSE, TRUTH AND REALITY!
      stop deliberately misleading people and attempting to “muddy the waters”

      Americans are stupid… but nobody is as stupid as you are pretending to be,.

      • William S Anderson

        You are mixing apples and oranges. A Constitutional Convention establishes a constitution. An Article 5 Convention is NOT a “Constitutional Convention” rather it is the only way to alter a Constitution. It is impossible for one to run amok since its goals are agreed upon beforehand. I can’t be too awfully stupid… I am qualified to belong to Mensa and Triple 9. That means only <1% of the population is smarter than me.

        • Chris Sky

          “A constitutional Convention ESTABLSHES a constitution”

          correct… and an “article 5” is the process of establishing a CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION which sole purpose is to AMEND THE CONSTITUTION. and regardless of what they “Say” they are going to amend, once the CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION has been established under Article 5… they can discuss changing ANYTHING they want. all it takes is a vote.

          but there’s “no such thing as a constitutional convention” and they definitely are called when they want to change the constitution… riiiiggghht.

          I guess these 34 states calling for a “constitutional convention” are simply “using the wrong words”

          http://www.newsmax.com/US/constitutional-convention-Boehner-balanced-budget/2014/04/11/id/565155/

        • Chris Sky

          😀 MENSA? TRIPLE 9? That’s why you’re trolling the internet behind a fake name, fake picture, fake profile, spewing 100% certfied bullsh*t that can easily be debunked by simply typing “constitutional convention” into google! (and seeing 1) it’s a VERY REAL thing 2) its how people change the constitution

          “triple 9” lol more like “711”… and you prob got fired 😀 thanks for laugh, captain pathetic.

          • William S Anderson

            Hey A-HOLE, I am using my REAL name, and my REAL Picture… THAT’S MORE THAN YOU CAN SAY YOU LITTLE CREEP. I STUDIED THE U.S. CONSTITUTION UNDER CLEON SKOUSEN AND
            Dr. Edwin Viera, Jr., Ph.D., J.D.

          • Chris Sky

            LOL yup. just like your ridiculous claim that “I live in Taiwan” your Hasbara is showing… and your credibility is dwindling by the post 😀

            you’ll have to make a NEW, NEW account.

      • William S Anderson

        Chris, You live in Taiwan, so what the heck do you know about the US Constitution and its processes… or “The Law of Nations”?

        • Chris Sky

          “I live in Taiwan” … sure bud… sure.. and “there’s no such thing as a constitutional convention” like the one that was called to create the original constiution in 1787 :D… referred to specifically as a “constitutional convention” for the express purpose of defining amendments in the constitution.

          it”doesn’t exist” though…

  • Oingo Boingo

    Rubio is MORE of an establishment stooge than is Bush.
    At least Bush doesn’t sound like he’s running for President of Israel.
    (Cruz does the same but less blatantly.)
    Gowdy declaring his support for Rubio and acting upon it by campaigning with the dictator wannabe is the latest political disappointment for myself and many others that I’m aware of. I used to think, and believe, that Gowdy was The Real Deal.
    By this stage in my life, I thought I couldn’t be fooled again.
    New Boss, same as The Old Boss.
    Gowdy’s apparent inability, now seen by me as dissembling unwillingness disguised by much sound and fury, to get Hillary arrested and indicted over her Benghazi scumbaggery that would have no doubt lead right into The Oval Office with at least Obama and Jarrett similarly charged…
    is now made crystal clear and brands Gowdy as merely another Federal Gubbamint self interested, unprincipled, careerist political hack.
    The only good thing about it is that he showed his hand early and revealed himself as just another Beltway Bastard, before I made a commitment to his political support that would have embarrassed me moreso.
    I’m DONE. This Republic is dead and gone. It’s OVER.
    I’m heading for The Hills, while I still can.

    • bahmi

      This is a highly significant series of comments. I, too, thought Gowdy was independent and real, nothing further from the truth. It’s apparent he took the lifetime financial security and joined the tribal admiration society and now is a big, big believer in the tiny little wonderful nation that owns us lock, stock, and barrel.
      Nice job, Gowdy. Thanks a bunch.

    • iamcurious

      I think Trump represents a slight ray of hope. The election cycle of 2016 represents our last political hope.

      • Oingo Boingo

        Historically, political periods of Hard Left misbehavior and/or incompetence are usually followed by a pendulum swing to the Right often characterized and lead by a charismatic figure that, by word and deed, resolves the anxieties of the afflicted masses and focuses them upon himself as The Solution to their problems.
        Recent historical examples of this are Napoleon coming to power after the flailing, murderous, destructive rule of The Jacobites of The French Revolution and Hitler rising in Germany after the intolerable orchestrated and intentional institutionalized corruption and systemic weakness of The Weimar Republic.
        Trump, irrespective of his perceived flaws, now fills that role as The Remediator and Corrector of the intentionally inflicted Hard Left institutionalized flailing, destructive dysfunction inescapably personified and characterized by the fronter figurehead character Obama…supported and managed by subversive agenda driven forces that few know of…and whose time is coming to a well deserved end.
        There is nobody else on the political horizon that has the potential to not only halt the Obama fronted nation wrecking but, to vastly improve the long neglected aspects of our national culture and body politic.
        If The RINOS that run The Republican Party deny Trump the nomination, that would not entirely be a bad thing IF Trump would display a more gravitas image and do something so dramatic and forceful that gaining The Presidency by votes long kept dormant would be inevitable.
        Running as a Third Party candidate with a surprise choice for Vice President like the honorable and competent DEMOCRAT Jim Webb, he who has hammered the vile Hillary repeatedly and fearlessly, would so enable a well funded Trump/Webb ticket that it would mop the floor with ANY OTHERS, especially the evil female Clinton, that aspires to the Highest Office.
        If no quantum leap of political development occurs here and the entrenched Oligarchs, via the enthroning of The Snake Queen Rodham-Clinton ( CLINTON / ?) or the parking of The Blinking Puppet Bush ( BUSH / RUBIO ) in The Oval Office…
        further tighten their rapacious, deranged stranglehold on this declining Empire, it will very soon be GAME OVER…
        Stick a fork in it, it’s DONE.

  • Branko Brankov

    It is kind of rule that every next president or prime minister is worse than predecessor. Hopefully, this disgusting creature in human body will not be that one.

  • Ron Mann

    Rubio is such an oxygen thief! He isn’t even eligible for President! How in the world can this idiot be in the running for anything beyond dog catcher? It is pure treason to cast one single vote for this guy. I hope people wake on this guy and Ted Cruz – another non-elligible contender.

  • Alleged Comment

    That is extremely dangerous is very understated.

    You are giving them the RIGHT and AUTHORITY to change your Constitution by very UNQUALIFIED men.

    That is like making a negro sodomite Moslem your “president”! Say….. ain’t that……

  • bahmi

    I just love how some people can’t get enough of Zionism. Of course, it’s disguised behind the fat checks given to sell-out politicians who will sell us all down the river so they can get their 15 minutes of fame as turncoat politicians. Let’s face it, we have a massive problem here and it’s called suffocating government and financial/political control by the Khazarian invaders. A truly disgusting reality that makes our futures even dimmer.

  • bahmi

    Read Henry Makow’s disturbing expose’ on Donald Trump in his latest column. Makes ya want to barf. Ol’ Trumpie is a closet guy, his sympathies are a big concern. A very big concern. Sure, Makow could be off base, but the stakes are so high in this next election, imagine, both Trump amd Pants Suit Priscilla are both aglitter with admiration of the jew. Can’t get enough of ’em, makes me want to ralph.

  • littlebit43

    These both sound like damn good ideas to me. There is no way in hell they will ever happen. These power hungry people are never going to vote to limit themselves to term limitations. They will never vote for a balanced budget because it will limit what they can do for their buddies and money people.

    • iamcurious

      We the people, have the vote, to limit them to terms, as we approve. Time to exercise it responsibly. Turn them all out, regularly. If you don’t, they learn the system for thwarting our will. Don’t give them the opportunity.

  • GRAMPA

    Our constitution wasn’t written by congress. Any convention shouldn’t have any authority. It should write the proposals for changes and then written in plain English in concise terms. the first being that no controls of the government be over fifty words long and may not reference any other section. I would want to see the limitation of bills and referendums passed limited to single subject items with no add on sections and limited to one hundred and fifty words. All items passed would need signature that they were read and passed on verbal vote only and only when two thirds of actual representatives or proxy with direct phone link are present. We have several states with English as official language and we need the remainder. To become a citizen you must have a functional understanding of English with minimum of a one hundred word vocabulary. Citizenship to this nation must remain a privilege and by invitation only. people born in the soil of the US doesn’t give automatic citizenship. people born of soil will have the choice of citizenship with one parent as citizen. We need to replace the presidency with a committee of the governors of the many states with one elected among them to stand as representative to the nation. He would sign the bills on approval of two thirds of the states. The position of vice president would also be selected in the same manner. the remainder of the govorners would serve as support to the president. I know many would have better solutions than I and would like to hear them. It is time we talk and make our voices heard and not let a few write a constitution that restricts our rights instead of controlling government.
    Grampa

  • CherryAnn1000

    He doesn’t need to worry. He doesn’t stand a snowball’s chance of being prez.

  • bsroon

    Any constitutional convention while the govt is run by the political whores bought by the parasitic “elite” maggot parasitic wealthy class can have NO good result.

    Technically? The govt – as a corporation is legally bound by the existing constitution. YOU are NOT. Why? Because you aren’t signatory. You can’t sign a contract that forces another person to abide by your signature. You aren’t a legality – you are a human being with a heart, soul, mind, and body – individual in each. Therefore the govt (being formed BY humans to SERVE humans does not have authority OVER humans – so break your legal bonds) has not jurisdiction over human beings. Phorkem.

  • iamcurious

    Our problem isn’t a need for a constitutional amendment. It’s that so much of our populace is ignorant of the Constitution. It has provision for nearly every event that confronts us, if only we as a people would exercise good and decent civic responsibility. We need to shut off the money and influence that thwarts the will of the people. It’s our government, not that of the “special interests”. We should shut down the lobbyists!

  • bsroon

    When our political whores have passed up to 93% of their legislation FOR the rich and AGAINST you and i – what makes anyone think that the rich won’t just kill every freedom you have.
    They want to get rid of guns so that when people realize how much the rich are raping us, we have no recourse to force change or protect ourselves.
    They don’t want to allow free speech because we are finding out how badly our vaccines (don’t) work, how evil our state and allies are, how much the socialized corporate expense (privatized profit) structure PHORKS us all over. How the congress doesn’t take the desires of we the people into account AT ALL.

    So – if we have a constitutional convention – it’s going to be worse than anything that got snuck into that last spending bill – and most people won’t realize that our MANDATE is to FIGHT THE TYRANNY of our current govt – which is FAR, FAR worse than what the Colonials killed to change.

  • Solus

    The real problem being that our government currently violates and gives only lip service to the Constitution.
    What is supposed to change for the better if the Constitution is amended?
    To get back on track we need a president who will be merciless in shuttering Departments and firing government officials and employees for violation of oaths and any other infraction any civilian employee would be terminated for.
    STRONG ethics enforcement, and a return to the rule of law and Constitutional governance is the only real answer if we are to survive as a Nation of free citizens.

  • Since he isn’t a natural born citizen, it could all be negated by a simple majority of Americans learning what a natural born citizen really it. A hint: it has nothing to do with where anyone was born.

  • Why would something with zero basis in the bible be in the bible?

  • Stuck_in_Ca

    Those are good amendments.

  • morecotwo

    Everybody knows how this works. I think 3/4 or so of the States need to ratify. In the mean time, every progressive tom DICK and harry will submit an amendment. The concept is a disaster.