[Cicero]

I am also opposed, as long as the current gangsters are in charge. Too many crooked judges. And a crooked Justice Department. And crooks in charge of the Senate, the White House, and, I’m afraid, the House.

We’d probably end up with amendments supporting gay marriage, abortion on demand, and sharia.

[Jacquerie]

Post #11.

[JRandomFreeper]

3/4 of the states still have to ratify any amendment coming out of the convention.

/johnny

[frog in a pot]

It would indeed be viewed by many to be a very close call, even if we were looking at traditional political issues. But, we are not.

Given what you have accurately described as:
...current gangsters [many of whom are clearly anti-Americans] are in charge. Too many crooked judges. And a crooked Justice Department. And crooks in charge of the Senate, the White House, and, I’m afraid, the House.
(plus, I will add open borders and voting registration of anyone who can produce a local utility bill, voter fraud, etc. ad nausea)
- is it not possible we have already passed the "soft" tipping point?

I for one, would rather do what is necessary to defend the Constitution rather than leave it to my sons and grandsons.

[Jacquerie]

I am also opposed, as long as the current gangsters are in charge. Too many crooked judges. And a crooked Justice Department. And crooks in charge of the Senate, the White House, and, I’m afraid, the House.

Said gangsters, judges, DOJ, senate, house, La Casa Blanca are not invited to a state amendment convention. The framers designed it that way.

[Political Junkie Too]

We’d probably end up with amendments supporting gay marriage, abortion on demand, and sharia.

Again, you don't get amendments. You get amendment proposals.

If you've been a constant reader of these threads, then you know this by now.

-PJ