Actually, it's the 14th amendment that's best left dead - or at least the self-serving federal interpretation of it. We'll keep the 9th, thank you very much. Can't have both. The problem is that incorporation is not really much of a stretch in light of Section 1 of the 14'th - people may disagree, but the case for incorporation is pretty strong, IMO. And that renders the 9'th to be a very dangerous, very broad concept. Anything becomes a right under the 9'th Amendment, if you want - gay marriage, child porn, whatever.
I suppose you could try to repeal the 14'th, though. Good luck ;)
Neither the 9th or 10th have played any real role in constitutional law. There have been no significant rulings that I am aware of which have invoked either amendment as a justification for the ruling.
Their initial meaning was to allow state police power to function with out regard to the federal government. Health regulations things like that were local/state concerns. States were to be allowed to deny constitutional rights to the chattel of the Slaveocrats.
And as you say these were wish lists much like the "rights" Reverend Al and Jesse are always yammering on about.
The complete irrelevence of these amendments is pointed out by the refusal of the Slaveocracy to claim their rebellion was based on them.
My view is that they were a sop to the anti-Federalists which both sides knew were nothing but rhetorical, face-saving devices.