[INVAR]

I think you're making two arguments: 1) reform amendments will be invaded by subterfuge but with at least a nod toward constitutional government;

No, wrong.

The Current Constitution has been completely sabotaged under the guise of 'constitutionality' and 'rights' from all 3 branches of government working in collusion to support a dictatorship's agenda.

Facts dictate the truth that the entire current government is creating a tyranny under THE COLOR OF LAW AND THE CONSTITUTION. It's a dictatorship with support from an oligarchy in both the legislatures AND the courts.

Today's ruling is proof of this.

Any Article V amendments will be rendered null and void just as the current Amendments and Constitutional limits on government have been rendered null and void.

What about that do you not understand??

2) tyrannical leaders will simply stage a coup and take over by force.

They already have, but not by force - via corruption and subterfuge under the color of 'rights' and 'fairness'. Call it a velvet coup if you like. But it is a coup nonetheless. As to 2), a forcible takeover of the government is beyond the scope of this discussion.

We have already been fundamentally transformed and laws are now written and passed in secret with dictatorial edicts being enforced by Alphabets.

The government is already taken over and the Republic has been demolished. As Mark Levin notes, we are a Post-Constitutional country. I submit we are become a Marxist/Fascist Oligarchy.

[Political Junkie Too]

Any Article V amendments will be rendered null and void just as the current Amendments and Constitutional limits on government have been rendered null and void.

I would settle for just a repeal of the 17th. Here's why.

1. States appoint a Senator when their next seat comes due. what will the current incumbent do? Refuse to leave? Barricade himself in his office when the new Senator arrives? will the Senate refuse to seat the newly appointed Senator because they are "buddies" with the former Senator?

2. A challenge will be between what parties? Current Senators vs. their states? The "federal government" vs. individual states? What if some states choose to keep popular elections and others choose to appoint? Who gets sued, only those that choose to appoint? On what grounds?

-PJ

[nathanbedford]

INVAR: We are not in fundamental disagreement about your conclusion that we are in a post constitutional Republic nor are we in disagreement about the subterfuge that we are victimized by. To prove that I will reproduce a post of some time ago but first one must ask, what do you want to do about it if you do not want to support article 5?

Meanwhile, here is that old post which asks that same question:

Nathan Bedford's first Maxim of the American Constitution:

The Constitution has become so distorted in interpretation and application that it has become at best ineffective in protecting liberty and at worst an instrument inflicting tyranny.

Nathan Bedford's second Maxim of the American Constitution:

The American Constitution is being amended everyday without the consent of the governed.

In order to believe that a Convention of the States presents a greater threat to liberty than our current state of politics one must believe:

1. The Constitution is not being amended by three women in black robes +1 liberal in black robes +1 swing vote on a case by case basis.

2. The Constitution is not being amended at the caprice of the president by executive order.

3. The Constitution is not being amended at the caprice of the president when he chooses which laws he will "faithfully" execute.

4. The Constitution is not being amended daily by regulation done by an unaccountable bureaucracy.

5. The Constitution is not being amended by simply being ignored.

6. The Constitution is not being amended by international treaty.

7. The Constitution is not being amended by Executive Order creating treaty powers depriving citizens of liberty as codified in the Bill of Rights.

8. The Constitution is not being amended by international bureaucracies such as, UN, GATT, World Bank, etc.

9. The Constitution is not being amended by the Federal Reserve Bank without reference to the will of the people.

10. The federal government under our current "constitutional" regime has so containing the debt.

11. The national debt of the United States is sustainable and will not cause the American constitutional system and our economy to crash and with them our representative democracy, the rule of law, and the Constitution, such as it is, itself.

12. The Republican Party, presuming it gains a majority in the House and the Senate and gains the White House, will now do what is failed to do even under Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush and balance the budget, reduce the debt, stop regulating, reform the tax system, end crony capitalism, appoint judges who will not betray us and, finally, listen to the people.

13. That a runaway Convention of the States will occur, that it will persuade the delegates from conservative states, that it will be ratified by three quarters of the states' legislatures among whom conservatives control a majority, and the end result will somehow be worse than what we have now.

14. If we do nothing everything will be fine; if we keep doing what we have been doing everything will be fine; we have all the time in the world.