MARK LEVIN AND OTHER PROMOTERS OF AN ARTICLE V CONVENTION.......

.....are flat out liars.  This is the only determination one can conclude when looking at their advertisements and marketing schemes and presentations....the only reasonable deduction you can make when listening to Michael Farris,' Mark Levin's, Mark Meckler's, and other promoters' presentations on the Convention of States Project.  I know of no other way to put this.  There is no chance whatsoever that these attorneys, supposedly trained in Constitutional law, are telling their audiences the truth.  I would say the same of those who have been brought into market Article V as sales experts.  The very best thing you can feebly attempt to say is they are half-truth tellers.  It's the second half that is full of lies.  

I have a copy of the Constitution here with me where it is read frequently.  You might want to criticize my lack of legal degree, but I know a liar when I hear one.  And I can understand it when someone is using false premises and using illogical conclusions.  The holes in the Convention of States' propositions (amendments), and others,' are so large you could drive a semi-truck with a piggy-back trailer through them, that is IF you know what is in the Constitution.  Of the many, you can find two of these holes here   And here 

In previous articles I have described just some of the money behind this attempt to hijack the Constitution.  Here  Here  and Here

There are more links below to help you see more of that, if you wish to pursue the scurrilous trail on this.

I am adding to the Convention of States the rest of the Article V Convention proponents, because I (and you) might as well lump them in with the rest of the liars who are desperately trying to convince the American public that our Constitution isn't just quite good enough or to their liking, or is too antiquated, or is just not pertinent to our current circumstance, or is not anything enough, or wasn't legal in the first go 'round, or .....on and on. I know this is a disheartening piece of news to some people who wanted badly to believe that the Convention of States was the magic bullet.  But sadly, COS is just as corrupt as the others wanting their hands on the Constitution since the 1960's. Ford Foundation - Tugwell's New States Constitution."

Liars always want something from you.  This falls into many categories.  They might want your money, your admiration, power over you, or just to get away with something.  In this case, however, these liars are playing a high stakes game with your life in an arena that they want to convince you is "their playground."  Your role, they suggest, is to promote them and then stand back while they work their "magic." They tell you often how educated and experienced they are.  They tell you, "If only you'll buy my book," or "If only you'll proselytize on my behalf," or "If only you'll tell the legislatures to do what I ask," or "If only you'll donate some money," etc. 

At this point there are so many of these Article V pushers, it's hard to count them all.  I'm guessing they smell blood in the water from our corrupted and weakened system at this time and are frothing at the mouth to bite into our one great defense; the Constitution.  In picking out Mark Levin and the Convention of States bunch, I am only picking out the most obvious among the tea party grassroots today.   Heaven knows I do not want to leave out Nick Drainias of the Goldwater Institute or Cenk Uygur of WolfPAC.  Here's a handy link with a few more of them: Pro-Article V orgs.

Liars will bargain with you to get you on board with their game.  They will tell you anything you want to hear.  Sometimes they will offer to trade you something for your support.  They will demonstrate to you why your need is SO great and that they are the ONLY option you have.  They will play to your emotions.  They will play to your desires.  They are very very good at this, especially in the legal profession where arguing all sides of something / anything in court is a learned skill.

This time, your guaranteed rights, freedoms, and liberties are at stake.  Now that's a pretty high stakes game if you ask me.  I'm not too keen on allowing liars to get hold of the basis of my rights, freedoms, and liberties.  I can't help but wonder what on earth has possessed people to allow themselves to be so deceived.  Obviously the sales promotions are appealing to some people for some reasons.  There is a lot of hate and disgust involved, mostly for the unconstitutional regulations and laws that have beset this nation.  No one would argue being disgusted over that.  But you don't use that against me or the Constitution.  I didn't do it.  The Constitution didn't do it.  Most of the deceived grassroots didn't do it.  Our elected officials did it.  Congress did it.  The three branches of executive government did it.  State legislators collaborated with them to do it.  So, now, in come the clown lawyers who say they will fix what they have stood by and allowed?  The lobbyists are in on the take as well.  There are billionaires funding all of this?  Globalists as well.  And I'm supposed to hand over my Constitution to them?  I don't think so.

If you are not willing to study the reasoning about why a Constitutional Convention is a wickedly bad thing for this nation, don't come to me later and say, "Gee, you were right."  Study now and prevent this disaster from happening.  Tell all of your legislators you DO NOT approve of Convention of States or any other Article V Convention being proposed.

To be continued........

Michelle Horstman

Several more Michelle Horstman Articles here
Excellent piece by Joe Wolverton here, PLUS links to more Con Con players

FOLLOW THE MONEY TO THE ARTICLE V CONVENTION

BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR.....seems like the apt phrase for this.
The Convention of States / Aritcle V Consitutional Convention / Con Con is appealing to people through deception. That is a fact.  And that is the tragedy of it.

Digging deeper into the Convention of States, I find that there is a Texas billionaire named Leo Linbeck III, who is the champion of the misnamed Fair Tax. Actually, his father who passed away recently, began that scheme, but his son, Linbeck III, is still in the Fair Tax game, only this time through the COS / Article V proposition.

In the midst of upper economic echelons and now in the midst of middle class, disgruntled taxpayers, Mr. Linbeck has found he can manipulate politicians, and policies with his fortune. Sadly, I find some of my conservative tea party friends being sucked into the whirling toilet bowl he is stirring up.  I've been told by some of them that the Fair Tax is why they want the Convention of States / Constitutional Convention.  I wondered why the Con Con was going to be bringing in the Fair Tax, so I went looking for answers.  Mr. Leo Linbeck III is that answer.

Mr. Linbeck describes himself as a "conservative communitarian." (see below)  Don't you love double speak! In the Orwellian method of twisting words and combining opposite philosophies in the same phrase, Mr. Linbeck describes himself as two opposite points of view. (I describe myself as a “conservative communitarian.”) He has hired and convinced some lawyers to do the propaganda tour to convince the grassroots that a Constitutional Convention is the answer to all that ails our nation.

Mr. Linbeck is not the lone wealthy person behind COS, but is a major player. In 2012, Mark Meckler left the Tea Party Patriots to join Linbeck in a PAC called Campaign for Primary Accountability, the purpose of which was to unseat incumbent politicians. There was money from Campaign for Primary Accountability (CPA) spent with Karl Rove who was active in our state of NC, as my friends well know.  (Mike Huckabee was involved with one of the candidates during the primary.  Connection to Huckabee below.) Mr.  Meckler also set up another non-profit called "Citizens for Self Governance."  "Self Governance" is a favorite phrase of Leo Linbeck III.  Now Mr. Meckler, formerly with Tea Party Patriots, is on the sales tour for Convention of States.

According to Mr. Linbeck regarding descriptions of his actions and orgs. "Well, we've been described as conservative, liberal, anarchists, nihilists, right-wingers, and – my personal favorite – both pro-Obama and anti-Obama."

Having it both ways:

So, in North Carolina, perhaps that is why we hear from Thom Tillis (NC Senate Candidate) that Obamacare just needs tweaking...is mostly just fine? And Mr. Tillis is on board with North Carolina P3 toll roads, a "Third Way" financing of our roads.  Is this why we are hearing mixed messages from our Lt. Gov. who says he is against Common Core on the one hand, but then says 95% of it is just great? Perhaps this explains why our Lt. Gov. said something similar to me regarding "sustainability," i.e. "most of it is just great."  This evening, our Lt. Governor is at a promotional  presentation with Michael Farris, the National Director of Convention of Sates.  ("Farris and both Mark and Patty Meckler, founders of the increasingly influential Convention Of States, a division of Citizens for Self Governance. ")

Mike Huckabee tried to have it both ways on Common Core as well...and is all in for the Fair Tax. Now Huckabee is out there promoting the movie, "UnFair," which is nothing more than a propaganda film for the Fair Tax ....which IS the Linbeck scheme.  From what I've seen of Mike Huckabee, he would call himself a "progressive conservative," so being attached to Linbeck's Fair Tax scheme and promoting Common Core would fit like a glove.

Do you wonder who is driving this mind-bending duplicity campaign to the grassroots?  It's positively schizophrenic. 

Again, from 2012, a press release: (Mark Meckler) The Tea Party leader is joining a CPA leadership team that includes the libertarian O’Keefe, the “conservative communitarian” Leo Linbeck..."   

Between the misnamed, so-called "Fair Tax," the Convention of States / Article V / Constitutional Convention, and now finding a Communitarian with large sums of money behind them,  I am seriously concerned that our State legislators are once again being bought and led down a garden path....the wrong way and over a cliff with no return tickets. The Constitutional Convention, these people call a "Convention of States to propose amendments" has no return (to the Constitution) tickets.

Today, I want to hammer home the definition of "communitarianism," so my friends will understand the game afoot. Communitarianism is defined below. I would ask people read and realize who is shoving this Article V Convention at the grassroots tea partiers. And then ask, how does this fit with your beliefs and hopes for our Constitution.

Definition of Communitarianism:

Like Collectivism, which stresses human interdependence and the importance of a collective, Communitarianism focuses on community and society, and seeks to give priority to group goals over individual goals. However, for the most part, communitarians emphasize the use of non-governmental organizations in furthering their goals, and so differ from authoritarian or Communist sympathizers. Its exact premises and policy consequences are difficult to pin down, and most criticism of Communitarianism has come from individualist thinkers concerned that it just provides cover for collectivists.

Although a 20th Century philosophy, the term "communitarian" was coined in the 1840s by the British utopian Socialist Goodwyn Barmby (1820 - 1881) to refer to advocates of a communalist society (which refers to communal living and/or communal property, essentially a forerunner to modern Communism).

Ideological Communitarianism can be seen as a radical centrist ideology (a third way philosophy which includes the belief that, in affirming the core principles involved on both sides of a political argument, the disagreement can be resolved or rendered moot). It is sometimes marked by leftism on economic issues and conservatism on social issues. Communitarians seek to bolster social capital (the value to democracy of social networks and groups) and the institutions of civil society. It also affirms positive rights such as state subsidized education, state subsidized housing, a safe and clean environment, universal health care, extensive public works programs, and often even the right to a job, and laws limiting pollution, gun ownership, etc.

Communitarianism from Philosophy Basics

Sources:
Forbes
New York Times - Huckabee + Fair Tax

Linbeck Videos

Fair Tax - Tell the Truth on Them
="http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/sunday-commentary/20120406-point-person-our-qa-with-leo-linbeck-iii-of-the-campaign-for-primary-accountability.ece">I describe myself....

GRASPING AT POISON STRAWS - PART ONE - CONVENTION OF STATES

There is a move afoot, brought to the mass of grassroots tea party participants by Mark Levin, whose book, "The Liberty Amendments," is all the latest rage.  Glenn Beck, who was NOT on board, has been convinced to take on the job of pushing the idea of a Constitutional Convention, but renamed "Convention of States." I can't imagine why.  Don't be fooled by the branding experts, a Constitutional Convention and Convention of States (COS) are one and the same thing, most likely become one and the same thing.  Yet, Levin and the other pushers on this idea are insisting you don't "get it" if you think other than what he is selling.  Oh, no...."It isn't the same thing!" they adamantly proclaim.  "It's Article V!!"  "We can do this!"  "The framers gave it to us!"

The sales pitch is incredible.  Pie in the sky and all the candy you could ever consume.  The sellers of this are preying on tea party conservatives who are literally desperate to do something BIG to rein in the federal government.  I get the desperation part....really, I do. They tell you nothing else is working, so you might as well go for the brass ring and grab the Constitution and amend it.  They tell you the process has NO chance of being hijacked by the leftists / socialists.  (Do they know who was behind the 25th Amendment?  Hint: Birch Bayh with Rockefeller money.)  They tell you the 10th Amendment using nullification is too cumbersome and doesn't solve the problems we face.  They tell you the whole thing is driven by state legislators, those closest to the voters.  They tell you this is perfectly legitimate through Article V of the Constitution and that the framers handed this golden opportunity for moments just like the one we face today.  They tell you this, knowing that right now our federal government doesn't follow the Constitution as it was written anyway, but they insist that the federal government WILL listen to new amendments that curtail the wrack and ruin being done now. 

O.K.  Here is why I am saying the COS and Constitutional Convention are the same thing.  Yes, Article V is the prescription for amending the Constitution....which IS CHANGING the Constitution by amendment(s).  (Note the plural.) The argument the COS people are pushing is that at no time has there ever been a Constitutional Convention but the first one that created the Constitution.  Otherwise, the COS people will tell you, there can be no such thing as a Constitutional Convention. So why didn't they just ask for one or two amendments ONLY as part of this process?  Why didn't they call this effort a Call to Amend?  They aren't specific.  What they are doing is asking for a Convention of States (state legislators) to propose amendments, but no one knows what those amendments would be.  This could be limitless.  Several are floating around from left and right and all could be on the docket.  Sounds like an open convention to change the Constitution to me.  But wait... the Call to Amend under another name already exists....keep reading.

Unknown to many of the tea party people getting pulled into this is another effort to change the Constitution called "Move To Amend."  COS was not first out of the starting gate to do this.  "Move To Amend" has been at this a while.  The backers of that one are all the usual suspects from the global communist / socialist left.  It looks, from what I can find out, COS and Move To Amend are joining forces, each to accomplish the same goal, changing / amending the Constitution to suit their own aims.  (I see that Mark Meckler has been coordinating the effort with the Aspen Institute. Look them up please.) I hear the promotions for "bipartisanship" in both the COS and Move To Amend.  This is going to end in a free for all, with state legislators being bought off right and left.  (pun intended.)  There is no restriction on how many amendments or the subject of these amendments.  The amendments can come from anywhere and about anything.  I can guarantee you, the Move To Amend people are salivating at the chance to do this.  Social Justice is on the agenda. 

"Formed in September 2009, Move to Amend is a coalition of hundreds of organizations and hundreds of thousands of individuals committed to social and economic justice, ending corporate rule, and building a vibrant democracy that is genuinely accountable to the people, not corporate interests."

First of all, the Constitution set up a democratic REPUBLIC, not a democracy.  Secondly, EQUAL JUSTICE is what we are guaranteed under the Constitution.  NOT social justice or economic justice.  But oh well...

Levin has said, in an interview I heard (but can't cite right now), that if the left hijacks this, then we know where we stand and that America is over anyway.  He says, "that's the risk we take." I'm here to say this is already hijacked by both the left and the right. I will note to my friends that no where in this discussion from COS am I hearing a move to completely restore the Constitution as written.  Is there an Article V move to reclaim the Constitution?  Not seeing that. Nor am I seeing something that somehow holds elected officials accountable for ignoring the Constitution.  (Legally we have that already...again not enforced.)  I heard from a friend that what he (the friend) wants to do is remove the 16th amendment and replace it with "The Fair Tax."  I have heard the "real" amendment behind this is a "Balanced Budget Amendment."  Then, I am hearing the amendment most desired is "Term Limits" for Congress. (which sounds very appealing to those who hate career politicians, but we have the ballot box to remove them already.  There is the term limit for the Presidency that was added by amendment, so is that the answer?  The power of the Presidency has grown beyond Constitutional limits anyway, so did that help?  How'd that work out? )  Move to Amend wants an amendment to restrict campaign contributions, but as you see above they have much more stated in their mission.  There is another one about the federal government granting "parental rights."  Folks, this is the tip of the iceberg. 

The next question I hear is, "Well, what would you do?"  "The situation we are in is DIRE!"  "We MUST do something!"  These cries of desperation, again I understand completely, are missing the point that the same people conservatives wish to corral are behind the COS and Move To Amend propositions and want to use this opportunity to finally destroy and replace the U.S. Constitution.  I believe it is a deceitful distraction to preoccupy the malcontents, while the forces behind the efforts are busy shredding the Constitution, taking down the economic structure of the U.S., running the cultural rot industries, and dumbing down the American public even more! The whole idea is to take more power away from the American people, hand over more power to the federal government, not restore the LIMITED powers of the federal government.  Both projects allow or require the government to grant government authority not included in the Constitution.

Maybe this is over the head of some of my friends and most people.  I don't know.  But it fills me with dismay to see people grasping at straws that will not fulfill their dreams of America that we once had and want returned to us.  It saddens me for more personal reasons as well, my heartfelt concern for the futures of my children and grandchildren.  

I refer you all to this article written by  William F. Buckley in 1979.  And if you read this, ask yourself what is really going on here?  Do you honestly think the financial backers of the COS and / or the Move To Amend are doing this to restore the Constitution or to further erode the freedoms we were originally given?  It is pretty easy to see from the proposed amendments. 

Is this the time for amending the Constitution with multiple amendments that, in my view, contradict the limits of the federal government?  Given what I have just told you?  I could go on with my disapproval and will continue to address this again.  Meanwhile, I hope my friends who have bought into this will step back, take a deep breath, and really really dive into the weeds to discover what is lurking here to trap us all. 

'Two-thirds of the state legislatures, or 34, must approve an application for a convention to occur, according to the Constitution’s article five. State legislatures would then send delegates to the convention, each state getting one vote on proposed amendments. For an amendment to pass and become a part of the Constitution, it would have to be approved by three-fourths, or 38, of the state legislatures."

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.

Did Levin take Citizen Initiatives'

idea and then run with it?  What is the connection here?  If you poke around you will find it says it is a "public private partnership" and some advisors were Wall Street traders and also from ALEC.  For all the angst among Tea Party folks regarding ALEC and the corporate cronyism in this nation, I wonder if they even know that ALEC is involved in this.  The interesting thing that red flagged me right away about this site was the promotion of "single amendment" initiatives, but they have written several amendments ready to go. This site calls the project "Single Issue Amendment Convention."  But they have written multiple amendments, linked for you to read.  It's obvious the plan is for MANY amendments....not just one.  Strangely enough, Grover Norquist (member of the CFR) shows up again and again in this push for a Convention.  He and Michael Farris are partners in another organization: Parental Rights.org. 

Citizen Initiatives

More on Citizen Initiatives

SINGLE ISSUE CONVENTION ENDORSEMENTS: Grover Norquist, President, Americans for Tax Reform, Al Cardenas, Chair, American Conservative Union, David Keene, Chair Emeritus, American Conservative Union, Ted Cruz, Former Solicitor General of Texas, David McIntosh. Co-Founder of the Federalist Society, Colin Hanna, President Let Freedom Ring Lew Uhler President, National Tax Limitation Committee, Charlie Black, Chair of the McCain 2008 Campaign, Michael Farris, President Parental, ALEC (The American Legislative Exchange Council), Goldwater Institute, Dr. Robert G. Natelson (Sr. Fellow ALEC and Goldwater Institute), Roman Buhler (Fdr BBA Task Force) plus many others. Members of Congress and State Legislators: Rep. John Culberson (R, TX), Rep. Henry Cuellar (D, TX), Rep. Rob Bishop (R, UT), Rep. Cynthia Lummis (R, WY), Rep. Tom McClintock (R, CA), Rep. Louie Gohmert (R, TX), Former Rep. Walt Minnick (D, ID), Del. John Overington (R, WV), Rep. Glen Bradley (R, NC), Sen. Josh McKoon, (R, GA), Sen. Bruce Tutvedt (R, MT), Rep. Peggy Mast (R, KS), Sen. Art Wittich (R, MT), Sen. Josh Brecheen (R, OK), plus hundreds of State Legislators.

Is the Convention Of States connected to the Council On Foreign Relations? 

Michael P. Farris is Head of Convention of the States Project, better known as a Constitutional Convention (Con-Con), and President of Parentalrights.org in which Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member Grover G. Norquist is the Director.  Mr. Farris is also the advisory board member of Christian Freedom International.  George Soros is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations with Grover P. Norquist.   

- See more at: http://arkansas.securetherepublic.com/news/caution-questionable-players-in-the-convention-of-states/#sthash.I9tLLKUn.dpuf

Is the Convention Of States connected to the Council On Foreign Relations? 

Michael P. Farris is Head of Convention of the States Project, better known as a Constitutional Convention (Con-Con), and President of Parentalrights.org in which Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member Grover G. Norquist is the Director.  Mr. Farris is also the advisory board member of Christian Freedom International.  George Soros is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations with Grover P. Norquist.   

- See more at: http://arkansas.securetherepublic.com/news/caution-questionable-players-in-the-convention-of-states/#sthash.I9tLLKUn.dpuf

Sources of interest:

Regarding the 25th Amendment - Birch Bayh Amendments

Move to Amend Endorsing Organizations

Excellent article here from Freedom Outpost

Secure the Republic - blog post on the COS

Grover Norquist

Michelle Malkin on Grover Norquist