The Daily Paul is a community website with no official affiliation with Ron Paul. The content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original posters, and are not endorsed, approved, or otherwise representative of the opinions of the Daily Paul, its owner, site moderators or Ron Paul. This site may contain adult language and adult concepts. If you are offended by such content, or feel you may be offended by such content, point your browser to a different site immediately. For more, read the Full Disclaimer
© 2007 - 2013 by The Daily Paul. Not paid for by, nor officially affiliated in any way with Ron Paul.
General Site Disclaimer | DMCA Disclaimer | Advertise here


Comment: Talk of a con-con is
Talk of a con-con is
Talk of a con-con is ridiculous. Do you even understand how and why we do not follow the constitution we already have? Do you understand how you have waived your constitutional protections by voluntarily contracting with the federal government? So you have volunteered yourself into slavery and now you want to change the rules that the slavemasters follow? Do you see how ridiculous that is? I'm not attacking you but the slavemasters' wildest dream would be a con-con. There is nothing wrong that can't be fixed by amending the existing constitution (assuming we could get the federal government to follow it).
Ask yourself this: is Social Security possible under our current Constitution? Is the Federal Reserve possible under same? How about the IRS? Federal drug laws? Wars of aggression? Mandatory health insurance?
Read Invisible Contracts by George Mercier and you will begin to understand the much bigger picture. Its a very long book because these are complex issues that have evolved over centuries and things are not what they seem. People who endorse a con-con are following the illusion that things ARE what they seem.
Replies to this comment: