[INVAR]

I'm talking about authorizing power amendments, such as term limits or repealing the 17th amendment. One cannot easily ignore those Article V outcomes without threatening the entire Constitutional construct.

Part of the discussion has to be the expectation that the tyrannical oligarchy we seek to restrain and limit, WILL make attempts to do just that and claim that they are acting within legality while you and I are acting from a 'destructive'/'disruptive' mindset.

If that discussion is not going to take place, and everyone is going to assume that the power in Washington is simply bloated and NOT a tyranny - then there is no point in attempting an Article V convention because the proponents are not serious and/or ignorant about what the Establishment Oligarchy is likely capable of.

Again, I'm proceeding from the historical fact and precedent that you cannot limit a usurping and tyrannical Oligarchy via civil means.

I think a frank discussion about what the plan will be if this 'last attempt' to rein -in an out of control federal leviathan by civil means is thwarted and blocked.

[Political Junkie Too]

Then you might as well abolish everything in the Constitution except Article II, and then call it Constitutional because the elites have deemed it so and dared the rest of us to do something about it.

Because you're basically saying they will effectively ignore Article V and dare us to do something about it.

-PJ