Wednesday, December 17, 2008


I realize it doesn't take much to freak out the far right, but I'm a bit surprised to learn that Phyllis Schlafly, Constitution Party presidential nominee Chuck Baldwin (the candidate of Todd Palin's ex-homies in the Alaskan Indepence Party), and other right-wingers are fretting over the possibility that there could soon be a constitutional convention in the United States -- a convention they're certain would be dominated by liberals and the left.

Who, us? Yup, as World Net Daily reports:

... affirmative votes are needed from only two more states before a Constitutional Convention could be assembled in which "today's corrupt politicians and judges" could formally change the U.S. Constitution's "'problematic' provisions to reflect the philosophical and social mores of our contemporary society."

"Don't for one second doubt that delegates to a Con Con wouldn't revise the First Amendment into a government-controlled privilege, replace the 2nd Amendment with a 'collective' right to self-defense, and abolish the 4th, 5th, and 10th Amendments, and the rest of the Bill of Rights," said the warning from the American Policy Institute.

Changes also could include the incorporation of "rights" to abortion and euthanasia, as well as the "separation" of church and state, the group said....

(You might have thought the Constitution already separates church and state, but apparently not.)

Schlafly foresees utter chaos, caused by the usual suspects:

The most influential players in any new Con Con would be Big Media, giving us round-the-clock television coverage. The 2008 presidential campaign proved that the media consider themselves actors in the political process, not merely reporters.

Outside of a Con Con hall, demonstrators would hold court demanding constitutional changes. These would be staged by gay activists and their opponents, pro-abortionists and pro-lifers, radical feminists, environmentalists, gun-control advocates, animal rights extremists, D.C. statehood agitators, those who want to relax immigration and those who would restrict it, mortgage defaulters and the unions -- all demanding consideration of amendments to recognize their claimed rights.

(Those fiendish D.C. statehood agitators! They want to tear this country apart!)

Baldwin, according to the WND article, sees a conspiracy so vast that it might be necessary to form a breakaway republic:

Baldwin warned the "Big-Government liberals and neocons" in Washington would adopt a "collective rights" document.

"At that point, there is no more United States of America. There would be no more Bill of Rights protecting individuals from governmental abuse and overreach. Furthermore, the principles of Natural Law would be forever removed as a basis of all our nation's laws and statutes. The nation that had been bequeathed to us by our forebears would be gone forever," he said.

Since whatever new document would result would have to be approved by individual states, Baldwin said there could come an opportunity.

"It might be a very good idea to immediately begin identifying those states that would unequivocally reject any new union, and would be willing to declare their independence from whatever government would evolve from a modern Constitutional Convention. Yes, I am saying it: we may need to resurrect the original Thirteen Colonies, except they would probably not number thirteen, and, in all likelihood, they would not be located on the East Coast," Baldwin said.

Yeah, I'm sure the epicenter would be in some other geographic region of the country. Hmmm, let me guess....

Did you know we lefties were this powerful? Did you know we were this organized? Did you know we had it in us to enshrine our various interest groups' wish lists in the Constitution without squabbling among ourselves? Me either.

Hell, I always assumed that if we had a constitutional convention, it would be dominated by right-wingers, who'd pass amendments declaring America a Christian nation, banning gay marriage, mandating public school prayer, removing the U.S. from the United Nations ... and that's just off the top of my head. I'm sure you can add to the list.


I don't know if there's even a remote chance of anything like this happening. I don't know if the righties' claim that we're only two states away from having a con-con is true, but Rob Boston of Americans United for Separation of Church & State, who's sane, concurs, so maybe so. Ohio apparently just put off consideration of a con-con resolution, though it's not clear how seriously it was being taken. (There's hardly anything about it at Google News.) Oh, and the WND story says Wyoming rescinded a con-con resolution in 1999 (but state rescissions may not be valid!!!).

I really don't know what brought all this on. Maybe it's just a ruse by which WND and fringe-right organizations can raise money now that the election's over and the Obama's-not-a-citizen lunacy has been rendered moot by the Electoral College. In any event, it's nice to know that the left has so much power ... at least in right-wing kooks' fevered imaginations.

No comments: