To: Jacquerie
I don't think a Convention can be limited as to what it considers. I firmly believe that the 17th Amendment guaranteed the present all consuming because it eliminated states as sovereign entities with representation as States in the federal legislature. States cannot defend their interests. The 17th should be repealed or rather should never have been ratified. Seriously, I don't think anything done to the Constitution beyond repealing the 17th is relevant to the State as it exists. We are way past that point. A serious attempt to repeal would meet massive opposition by the entire DC establishment and might bring on the the actual formal scrapping of the Constitution.That said the 17th Amendment should be repealed. The sooner the shooting starts the more likely it is that the Patriots will win it.
39 posted on
10/08/2013 3:39:07 PM PDT by
arthurus
(Read Hazlitt's Economics In One Lesson ONLINEhttp://steshaw.org/economics-in-one-lesson/)
To: arthurus
There are safeguards as to the fear of an out of control convention. The primary one is that states will not send representatives, but rather delegates with commissions that define their powers; the other is the 3/4 ratification bar.
Considering our government is renegade now, there is little to lose with a convention. Our framers gave us peaceful means to correct our mistakes, one that all the bare-knuckle, raw power of the consolidated government cannot stop.
![](https://scontent-a-lga.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/p480x480/563150_364045510392916_1082995097_n.jpg)
40 posted on
10/08/2013 4:19:59 PM PDT by
Jacquerie
(Obamacare forces slaves to buy their chains.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson