Replies

‘I do not want anyone touching our Constitution as it is always possible a real Judge or two could be appointed.’

God bless you for caring so deeply about Freedom!

If you can’t trust 3/4 of the states, then you must think we are doomed anyway. Look at all the states wanting to end govt recognition of unholy unions? Better known as sodomous ‘marriage’. How many states sued FOR Obama Care?

People love their rights.

And when this election is over, either we are in a great position to amend the Constitution or we are doomed to be overrun by foreign dual-citizen voters and voter fraud.

This moment is a window of opportunity. People are KEENLY aware of our political crisis right now. And, God willing, our economy will quickly improve. When it does, public awareness will diminish. The window closes.

Let’s look back in history.

Greek democracy was born after defeating tyrants. In fact, the word ‘tyrant’ comes from pre-democracy Greece.

The Roman Republic spawned from the defeat of Etruscan kings. [Tyranny, once again.]

The Magna Carta resulted from tyranny.

Our Revolution resulted from tyranny.

The post New Deal amendments resulted from tyranny.

And whatever we do now will result from tyranny.

Good fruit can be born post-tyranny.

And I would love it if the people are ready to repeal the 17th amendment. Maybe, however, we should replace it with a tight term limit to appointed senators.

Information is easier to access now than back during the 1800s. If a state legislator sticks with some creep of a senator, then that legislator could quickly be discovered and dealt with. That works well if a senator’s term is shortened to once a year, serving for a maximum of six or so years.

You bring up an interesting point. By the late 19th Century, senators were known by the companies or industries that had bought their state legislatures. Pennsylvania's senators were known as "the senators from King Coal," Montana's as "the senators from Anaconda Copper," and California's as "the senators from the Southern Pacific." In other words, the locus of corruption was in the state legislatures.

The primary change wrought by the 17th Amendment was to move the locus of corruption to K Street in Washington.

Wouldn't repeal of the 17th Amendment simply move the locus of corruption back to the states? Would 50 loci of corruption be an improvement over just one festering sore in DC? I'm merely posing the question, not proffering the answer.