In our quest for freedom, it is important to spend our time and resources wisely. The new push for a Constitutional Convention (Con Con) as a remedy for our nation’s troubles is a dangerous diversion being pushed by known charlatans to neutralize the burgeoning liberty and tea party movements.

A Con Con is called for by Congress or the states to alter the Constitution. Article V of the Constitution states that “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.”

This Con Con idea is troublesome for many reasons. First, because it appeals to many patriots out there. They mistakenly think that the reason the government does not follow the law is because the Constitution is not a good enough document. That is not the case. The Constitution is one of the greatest documents ever written. The out-of-control federal government does not follow the law because it is not enforced.

Does a Con Con do anything to enforce the Constitution? It certainly does not. If it is somehow successful, it just gives the government a few new laws that they will disobey. Obama and his cronies have repeatedly shown complete disrespect for the rule of law. There is no evidence to suggest that they would do a complete turn-around just because some new amendments were passed.

Second, there could easily be a runaway convention. The proponents of a Con Con have attempted some token measures to ease people’s concerns over this, but they are all just gimmicks. Because there is no set protocol for Con Cons, delegate selection is a tricky process. Ultimately, they will either be selected by the popular vote or state legislatures.

These methods of delegate selection are both highly dubious. State legislatures are often as corrupt as their federal counterparts. There is no guarantee that they will abide by the Constitution and appoint delegates who are responsible and care deeply about liberty. The popular vote has its problems as well. The people have shown repeatedly that they will vote for crooks who lie to them. Who’s to say that they wouldn’t vote for crooks to be their delegates?

Third, it is being pushed by con men who have a long history of taking stances on issues that have been in direct contradiction to the Constitution. Much of the impetus for this Con Con push comes from a recently published book by neoconservative talk radio host Mark Levin called the Liberty Amendments. Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity have endorsed his ideas as well. Levin has been hailed as the ‘savior of the Republic’ by desperate conservatives looking for a false idol to follow. When you examine his statements pre-Obama, you can see what Mark Levin is all about and it isn’t pretty.

Before Obama was around, Mark Levin was the biggest cheerleader for warrantless wiretapping, illegal wars and all of the other anti-constitutional nonsense that George W. Bush perpetrated onto the American public post-9/11. He also routinely slandered the best liberty candidate in a generation, Ron Paul, calling him every vicious name in the book during his two heroic campaigns in ’08 and ’12. It was his lies, in part, that sabotaged Ron Paul’s campaign, paved the way for Romney to take the nomination and gave us four more years of Obama. And this is the guy who is supposed to be leading the Republic to salvation? Gimme a break.

These are just a few of the reasons why a Con Con is such a bad idea. Conservatives must not be led astray by radio hacks who only want to get establishment, big government RINOs into office. Focusing on nullification which stops big government in its tracks is a much better use of time and energy than this Con Con distraction. Revising the Constitution is not the answer, enforcing it is.