Replies

the media, you say, will want to stop an amendment to the Constitution by “shaming” the Constitution.

Perhaps I should have been a bit more specific. They aren’t interested in winning the amendment battle, because they haven’t yet won the media battle. Now continue below.

I won’t accuse you of trying to put words in my mouth. I didn’t say what you are attempting to say I said. They aren’t into stopping amendments, they will shame until the amendments just come their way. It will be like Kavenaugh on steroids. They will have control of the narrative and by public outcry the delegates to the convention. That COS is willing to risk it all for amendments to a document that is NOT the problem is astounding in itself. That reams of sheep are willing to follow is less astounding.

My bottom line is COS will not make 34 States and that is a good thing. States better focus on returning their power and Sovereignty before it is too late. The Fed is already limited, the States need to man up and reassert their position, which means pushing back not agreeing to accept what the fed steals from them being dribbled back and delivered in hugely borrowed dollars. The States are enablers to a Congress gone rogue, and no amount of amendments to the Constitution is going to change anything.

We the people are involved and engaged, but I don’t think we the people will have what it takes or leaders either until a full collapse takes place and I don’t believe anyone wants that to happen. At the moment President Trump is leading the charge, we’ll see how that pans out next year.

States better focus on returning their power and Sovereignty before it is too late.

Why do you suppose they put Article V in between Article IV and Article VI?

Just how do you propose the states do that? The whole purpose of Article V when drafted by the framers of the Constitution was to make adjustments to the Constitution when powers become unbalanced. I agree with you, the states must do something to regain their sovereignty. Apart from the states declining to accept bribe money from the federal government, which recent history demonstrates is among the most forlorn hopes on Earth, there is nothing, apart from that which has been robotically advocated over and over, except Article V.

"Manning up" is hardly a recipe to undo all the problems of the deep state or to get the nation out of that slime and muck of the swamp. Manning up? Would do you want us to do, push-ups?

This might surprise you, but I do agree that nothing much is going to happen with respect to Article V until there is some sort of crisis. I can think of about five or six sources for such a crisis, the national debt being foremost among them. Donald Trump is not doing much about the debt, and as valiantly as he is striving against immigration and trade imbalances, his dominion over affairs, such as it is, can last at best six years. The Progressives have been after this since about 1908.

Finally, these fears that there will be a runaway convention, which I think you are alluding to, is utterly illusory. The delegates proceed only under strict constraints established by their state legislatures or conventions. That they would run away is so unlikely as to be fanciful. Let's assume the absurd, delegates to the convention try to run away with it, once again only 13 legislators out of 99 can stop it.

The risks you would have us sustain by doing nothing far, far exceed any fanciful risk of a runaway convention of the states. Anyway, if you have such a fragile atmosphere, you have the risk whether you do it by a convention of the states or a traditionally proposed amendment arising out of the federal Congress. If the forces of evil are strong enough to effect a convention of the states, they certainly will be strong enough to force a mischievous amendment through Congress and you will be in the same box. That, of course, has not happened because the leftists recognize that they don't have enough control of the states to stop the 13.