Judge Napolitano supporting Con Con?

[dlvrme]

Oh Crap

He hosted for Glenn Beck Yesterday, I need to find the youtube link.  He had a lawyer/constitutional scholar calling for a con con, he (Judge) did not say anything.  I went to look for the show, and found this...no other proof yet though.  Ron Paul needs to tell him

NO!  JT style

http://talk.baltimoresun.com/showthread.php?t=197112

[dlvrme]

Randy Barnett is the "9th amendment scholar"  from Georgetown University he interviewed, famous for argueing Medical Marijuana case to Supreme Ct

[dlvrme]

http://www.federalismamendment.com/

http://www.jbs.org/freedom-campaign/4941

CRAP here is the smokin frickin gun I was looking for !!!n Shoot!

[xfahctor]

 Yeh, he has been a long time proponent of a con con, to strike or at least threatening a con con to strike the 16th amendment. His theory is that we don't actualy even need to have one, just the growing threat of one may tame some people in DC. I have written several emails to him about it trying to explain to him with my limited knowlege why it would be dangerous, though I have never recieved a response. Some one far more knowlegable than me should get a hold of him and explain it in detail.

[dlvrme]

I have heard the talk of the "all you have to do is threaten the con/con" before too, and they back down....
I also just read the 10 Federalist Amendments...and they are crap!  I like that word today!  Crap!

I don't see how they can get people to agree to it, especially the emissions thing, so maybe this is not to worry about.  Maybe we should do our own con/con website just to take attention from his and start a fight
a little COINTELPRO of our own (or whatever you call it!)  Oh I'm mad! 

[JTCoyoté]

  F**K - A - DUCK!!!

For the love of Michael...! What is this man THINKING...!!!

To click open the Constitution into the hands of the very criminals that the Constitution was designed to protect us against, is the most asinine, and idiotic thing that anyone could wish to promote.

There will be no Jefferson's, no Madison's, no Adams, there... for the love of God, have all of these people and lost their f**king minds!

JTCoyoté

  "Congress of the United States
begun and held at the City of New-York, on Wednesday
the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting
the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse
of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added:
And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best
ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.

RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States
of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the
following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments
to the Constitution of the United States, all, or any of which Articles, when ratified by
three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of
the said Constitution; viz.

ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States
of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States,
pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.
The Preamble to the Bill of Rights, fully Ratified with
the first 10 Amendments on Dec. 15, 1791

[TheCaliKid]

A Con-Con is the worst thing that could ever happen to us.

Yes, they have 'legally' destroyed large sections of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, but they must destroy it in our hearts by getting rid of it altogether!