Posted on 04/22/2016 3:39:52 AM PDT by Jacquerie
In my April 20th post, I connected our existing and dire situation with that of 1787. Despite the differences between then and now, there is at least one commonality: the fear that a demagogue, a man who promises to relieve us of our misery, might emerge from the increasing anarchy and social disorders. Alexander Hamilton wrote that men who overturned republics always began their public work by proclaiming their devotion to the people.
In words that ring true today, Hamilton’s first Federalist explained the situation that faced America. The young country was at a crossroads; its very existence was in the balance. The nation was to decide whether society can establish good government through thought and choice, or whether people are forever destined to be ruled by accident and violence. The answer depended on the nation’s response to the crisis. The wrong decision deserved to be considered a misfortune for all of mankind.
Then as now, Americans have a choice. Shall we succumb to the course of current events and continue our slide into arbitrary rule by the executive and judicial branches, or step back from the abyss and work to restore free government?
Article V opponents point out that powerful forces with vested interests in the existing corruption will stand athwart reform. Hamilton would agree, for the new 1787 plan of government was similarly opposed. He noted that the Constitution affected so many institutions and interests that passions opposed to truth and the common good would join together in opposition. The first opponents to improvement of the union would be that class of men in every state whose prestige, power and wealth might be diminished. Today, “that class of men” inhabit Washington, DC. They will certainly fight like demons to retain their privileges.
Hamilton identified another sort of opposition from a class of men whose “perverted ambition” sought to profit from the anarchy, or from high positions in future partial confederacies as the union flew into pieces. Today, we need only ask the likes of President Obama, George Soros, Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch if fomenting disorder and societal collapse isn’t profitable or at least personally rewarding.
However, rather than brush all opponents with ulterior motives, Hamilton recognized the existence of heartfelt and honest disagreement. The new plan of union deserved thorough examination, and through examination, Alexander Hamilton hoped to expose the truth: the present form of government was insufficient, and that a federal republic was necessary to the preservation of liberty and happiness.
Today there are honest, sincere opponents to unknown change, to risking an Article V convention to reform our corrupted system. But as in 1787, the cure for what ails our union is federalism. In 1787-88, the people at their state ratification conventions couldn’t be sure of what to do; in 2016 we need only look at their example for the solution.
Article V.
IMHO Article V is going nowhere, despite the desire of some to exercise that Article. The presidential race is and will continue to overshadow the desire to amend the Constitution as a possible solution to the problem Government has of living within the constraints of the Constitution. Constitutionalists recognize the dangers of messing with the only document that is the blueprint for the Republic when the movement for Article V has been overcome by events.
The outcome of the coming election will be critical in keeping the desire for article V on the front burner or having it die on the vine. If Hillary wins and the Senate changes hands, no one in their right mind would be suggesting an Article V.
Ignorant populace and almost all can vote. You can’t fix that.
Nearly everyone’s getting some benefit from the widespread redistribution, and they won’t give it up.
I haven't kept track of how many states have taken the administration to court at various times, but well over half challenged Obamacare and open borders. There is more support for reform than the media wish to admit.
The de facto Constitution has long ceased to operate; the government is no longer even representative. In its place is an oligarchy composed of the president and scotus. Elections have become courtesies that give the patina of legitimacy to accelerating despotism.
Obama and his social justice warriors have free reign to continue their destruction. If we don't take advantage of the peaceful means at our disposal, we are doomed to hard tyranny.
Even if Bernie and The Beast are kept out of the White House this time around, some other demagogue will eventually worm his/her way to power in 4, 8, or 12 years, and the rot will pick up where it left off.
Our nation is at a crossroads. To do nothing is not a logical option.
Not sure where the article V movement stands today. Last I read, there were several state legislatures that have passed resolutions (binging or nonbinding?) supporting the calling of a convention.
Someone more familiar, please give a brief update as to where this movement lies.
My comment is, we need a president who is on board with Article V convention movement. Someone who sees the need to reign in essentially, his own power as well as congress's power over the states.
I support an Article V convention, but I too feel it sputtering. I've always thought, many in state government seek higher office on the national stage. By openly supporting an Article V movement to strip congress of some of it's power would most certainly taint your resume for higher office in the eyes of the establishment....right?
"Tennessee, Alabama, Alaska, Florida and Georgia have formally adopted Article V resolutions.
"They have also been introduced in 33 other state legislatures this year – including the presidential battleground state of South Carolina.
"Last month, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott endorsed an Article V Convention in his 'Texas Plan', stating that 'each branch of [the federal] government has strayed from its intended role.'"
I think Indiana may have adopted a resolution since then also.
To do nothing is not a logical option.
...and I would be in complete agreement. But to do the wrong thing would be equally illogical, and IMHO being engaged in an Article V movement that is at a standstill seems to me to be counterproductive.
It has taken well over a hundred years of leftist, progressive influence in our Federal Government to bring us to the present state where little if any consideration is given to our founding documents, and common law. We have slowly but surely taken the path of least resistance leaving us with nothing that the founders gave us but the dream of what is found in the Preamble to the Constitution.
Congress has essentially abdicated their position, as a controlling agent for the other two co-equal branches of Government. Unless and until enough people return to Congress the balls they left behind, no amount of amending the document they aren’t paying much attention to anyway is going to be a lasting solution to what ails the Republic.
5 + 33 = 38... which is enough to ratify an amendment! (Only 34 are needed to call a convention.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.