Chuck Baldwin’s Special Little Treason?



The question:  Is the far right up to no good – or…is it someone else?

Information has been brought to  my attention that I am wrong about this.  I know the John Birch Society is helping to promote the idea.  I also thought the whole thing was a conservative joke to make the GOP look bad. Unfortunately I am discovering it is true. It also appears the Ron Paul Bots are up to no good.


Chuck Baldwin ran for President on Howard Phillips’ Constitution Party ticket this past year.  He has a super-church, Crossroads Baptist, in Jacksonville. He is a conservative.  He detests the GOP.

Chuck Baldwin is advocating what amounts to an over-throw of the United States of America.


He is part of what is called “Con Con” – a new constitutional convention designed to throw out the current one, and install one that is ultra conservative. They are also attempting to meddle in the affairs of the GOP.

This is what he wrote:

“…My good friend, Tom DeWeese, chairman of the American Policy Center, recently issued an urgent alert regarding a revived effort to assemble a modern Constitutional Convention. Mind you, the United States has not assembled such a Convention since 1787, when a Constitutional Convention replaced the Articles of Confederation with the U.S. Constitution. Fortunately, the delegates to the Con Con of 1787 were composed of freedom-loving patriots who had just fought a bloody war for independence and were in no mind to reenact tyranny upon the land they had just fought to liberate. However, can one imagine what would happen if the current bunch of politically correct leftists in Washington, D.C., were to be granted the power to rewrite our Constitution? It would be the end of the United States of America, and that is no hyperbole.

The modern Con Con effort began back in the 1970s. Since then, 32 states have issued the call. The total number of states that are required to enact the Con Con is 34. Simple math reveals that we are only two states short of this disaster. As word of this potential calamity began to surface, the effort stalled with the total states issuing the call stuck at 32. With the election of Barack Obama, however, supporters of a Con Con have been emboldened and are now trying to resurrect the momentum. The state that is currently in the crosshairs appears to be Ohio.

States that have already approved a Con Con include Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming. A few of these states have since seen the error of their ways and have voted to rescind their approvals. This fact, alone, should be enough to kill the push for another Con Con, but don’t expect the powers that be to see it that way. Therefore, it seems that if Ohio approves the Con Con, only one more state would be required, and upon the call of that 34th state, a Con Con would be seated. And, no doubt, state number 34 is already sitting quietly, but excitedly, in the wings, ready to act with “lightning speed” to seal the deal.

Lest anyone take this lightly or think that a Constitutional Convention is no big deal, DeWeese properly warned, “In truth no restrictive language from any state can legally limit the scope or outcome of a [Constitutional] Convention! Once a Convention is called Congress determines how the delegates to the Convention are chosen. Once chosen, those Convention delegates possess more power than the U.S. Congress itself.”

DeWeese is right. If called, a modern Constitutional Convention could declare the U.S. Constitution to be null and void, and could completely rewrite the document. For example, former U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger once declared, “There is no effective way to limit or muzzle the actions of a Constitutional Convention. The Convention could make its own rules and set its own agenda.”

Given the fact that Washington, D.C., is comprised mostly of Big-Government liberals and neocons, it is almost certain that the founders’ Constitution–which was founded on the principles of Natural Law that protects individual liberty–would be replaced with some sort of “collective rights” document protecting an ambiguous “common good.” 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….”


3 thoughts on “Chuck Baldwin’s Special Little Treason?

  1. Is this posting for real? Is it a joke?

    I’d suggest the author go back and read Chuck’s article again. He wasn’t advocating FOR a Constitutional Convention. He was pleading AGAINST one.

    Mary Starrett
    Communications Director,
    Constitution Party

  2. Thank you. When I am wrong, I am wrong. I am going back and working on sources, etc.

    I do think a number of Ron Paul Bots and the John Birch Society are behind some of this.

    I will be updating as I have more information.


  3. Well, if you are going to check out the Baldwin article, then you should check out all the facts he states, then decide if you are that wrong.

    First of all, Mr. Baldwin states 32 states have applied for a convention. That is wrong. The public record shows all 50 states have applied for a convention over 650 times.

    You can read the applications at I suggest, as you intend to revise this article, that you read Mr. Baldwin’s references in this particular article or any other he has written on the subject and check those out. Then come to FOAVC and read their references. Read the 650 plus applications. Read about the federal lawsuits in FAQ 9.1. In short, take time to study the subject. Then write your corrections. Thank you.

Comments are closed.