People being interviewed by dolts like this have GOT to learn that the 78 cents for a woman vs $1.00 for a man is completely and utterly WRONG. If Ms. Dash knew that she could have blown Vierra and her audience right out of the water. Women and men are NOT $.78 vs $1.00 in EQUAL JOBS. That 78 cents is overall, and is of no comparison. It’s not comparing doing the SAME job. The Left will NEVER speak about that, because it’s nearly even, if not even. A man and a woman BOTH waiting tables make the same. A man engineer and a woman waiting tables is NOT, yet this is how the Left works their numbers. All jobs with men and all jobs with women, add it all up and divide by the number of men and women, and this is how they arrive at that stupid BS 78 cents. I wish Ms Dash knew this, she would have CRUSHED Vierra.
Oddly all the Indiana liberty haters keep commenting all over the place that all discrimination is WRONG! And they’re pretty emphatic about it regarding homosexuality. Most would not care an ounce about this. Gee that’s weird.
If ALL discrimination is wrong, we need to pass a law requiring everyone's spouse to be selected at random by government-run lottery.
 April 1, 2015 at 4:39pm
So what does Principle O’Doofus have to do with this? She should ignore him.
April 1, 2015 at 4:38pm
Interestingly, I didn’t realize she was black until you said it. Nothing in the story says she is, but I guess your eyes are better than mine to see her tiny avatar.
 April 1, 2015 at 9:55am
Uhhhhhh………”shows several children getting into the truck of the car”
March 14, 2015 at 10:22pm
Its often said that a convention of states is wide open and cannot be limited to an amendment or subject. That isnt logical. States created the federal govt. States in Art V call for convention howerever they so choose. It is their convention and to have it 34 states must pass an equal resolution calling for it. If 33 call for a convention to limit the power of the fed govt and one calls for it with a resolution specifying expansion of fed power or perhaps a single amendment such as lowering voting age, that convention will not be called because there are not 34 calling for it under equal topic. So to require equal topic yet claim that once the convention starts that topic that got it called is out the window is simply not logical.
 March 12, 2015 at 8:42pm
We cannot say “this will take too long, we don’t have that long”. The reality is, no one knows how “long we have” nor “how long this will take”. We would all hate to look back after the train goes off the cliff and say “we had a lot longer than we thought and we should have embraced and supported the Article V solution back when we were thinking time was too short”. Pursue it, and if time runs out while pursuing then it just does, but that’s 1000% more sensible than having really no idea of any timeframe yet pretending we do.
 March 10, 2015 at 7:26pm
Keep up your great work. Thank you.
 March 9, 2015 at 6:04pm
A convention of states called under subject of limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government (which was created by the States), can produce amendment proposed that, if ratified, will be followed. It is far to broad of a statement otherwise.
Presidential term limits are currently followed. Congressional and Supreme Court term limits would also be followed. Length of terms is followed, as would be lengths of these terms. Women can vote, because the Constitution in that regard is followed. Prohibition doesn’t exist, because the Constitution in that regard is followed. The 17th Amendment, an abomination, taking away State legislatures’ choosing US Senators, is followed. A repeal of it, giving that back to State legislatures, will be followed.
 February 9, 2015 at 10:50pm
The entire Constitutional Convention debate was filled with the topic of state sovereignty. Of course every detail is not written in Art V but state sovereignty and power was so basic to the Framers and permeating discussions that to have to say that states could decide on the topic of their very own called proposal convention could not have been viewed as anything short of needless.
 February 9, 2015 at 10:39pm
It is only logical that states, which created the federal govt, would decide, based on their applications, under what pretext a convention – a meeting – to propose amendments would be held. To think otherwise simply doesnt fit the power that states were meant to maintain.
 February 9, 2015 at 10:30pm
@bcanderson. That would be best of course. VA has one supportive Democrat, but I think he is the only one.
That could end up to bite us in the end. The liberals could co-opt a convention of states and we could end up with worse than what we have. We just need to demand that the president and congress follow the constitution as it is. I don't know why they get by with swearing in on a Bible and not honor their promise to uphold the Constitution of the U.S.A.
November 28, 2014 at 12:12pm
So continue. An article 5 convention and that do not interfere with one another.