Posted on 09/21/2014 4:06:15 PM PDT by SatinDoll
Too bad, so sad.
It’s a little like thinking that the home invaders who keep running at your door, will accidently keep running out the back door if you open the rear one, and then jerk your front door open at the right second.
It is a suicidal delusion.
They will send delegates with statutory commissions. The delegate relationship to state legislatures will be that of attorney to a client, not a schlub off the street.
No name calling here, Doll. I agree. We have a fine Constitution. I’d repeal the 16th and 17th Amendments, but really, all we need to do is follow it.
That is the level of response I expected from you. Congrats.
“There is nothing wrong with the Constitution as it sits now. The problem is that it’s not followed.”
This sums up my view on the Constitution.
Just as there is nothing wrong with our immigration laws. The problem is they are not enforced.
Article V ping!
Thank you, Glad you are not disappointed.
So many people talk about so many things that they know nothing about.
Such is the state of affairs.
There is everything wrong with our post-17th Amendment government. It is an outright violation of republicanism and responsible for our current woes.
It is not a Constitutional Convention that is being organized. It is an Assembly of States where the states act in tha same capacity as Congress to propose amendments to the Constitution. There’s a huge difference between the two and Denninger obviously is clueless. Why does he feel the need to write something of which he is clueless?
As for your comment that the Constitution is perfect, if that is so, then why has it been amended 27 times?
We have near full blown socialism running our federal government and federal courts without agreement and support of the states.
Why did the Framers of the Constitution make a provision for the states to amend the US Constitution? Were they not serious?
Why should the states not be allowed to address changes that benefit the People through the provision in the Constitution that allows them to convene an assembly?
Why are states less trustworthy than the ruling class that has a lock on matters in the federal sphere?
38 states would like to have an amendment that defines marriage as between one man and one woman. Why are they told it is inappropriate to use the Constitution for them to make that amendment?
These people say they support the constitution and dreamily wish it was in force, yet don’t know its purpose and oppose Article V.
That's a great question that answers itself. Well done.
“... the only solution is to unwind the previous violence done to the Constitution and then, if appropriate, pass Amendments that further constrain the rights protected by and powers delegated therein.”
And exactly how does he plan on achieving that?
And they also say the Constitution is fine just the way it is...
...except for this, this, this, and this.
But how do you plan on doing what you suggest?
Unless you have a big majority clamoring for that it ain’t gonna happen.
We don’t need a new Constitution, just a new legislature (in both houses) that abides by the one we have.
And repeals a lot of laws that contradict it.
Your side is the liberal union concern troll side.
Those blue-collar, middle-class "Reagan Democrat" manufacturing jobs are never coming back. We could pass a law tomorrow forcing American companies to make things here at home and they'd just fill the factories with robots, employing a small handful of highly-skilled engineers and technicians to oversee them.
And as automation becomes better and cheaper, China is going to lose those jobs as well.
I don’t agree.
America needs to actively work, to bring back American jobs.
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.