What Would a Constitutional Convention Really Do?
I recently received an email letting me know that 35 states have filed suit against the federal government. Apparently it only takes 38 states to convene a constitutional convention.
I have mixed feelings about a constitutional convention.
On one hand, it might be a way to stop the dumbocrats and republiscams.
What was in the email that I received was a proposed 28th amendment:
“Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and/or Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States .”
Well, I like it, except for a few small errors, but can we trust that constitutional convention delegates, even though the law commands them, will stop at that simple rule?
You see, amendments are interesting things: I recall the creation of the IRS, the prohibition, and of course there is the nefarious and never to be trusted 14th amendment, which went a long way towards destroying the constitution, sovereignty, and everything that makes us American.
You see, the real problem is this: what representative, in modern times, brings to mind a founding father?
The founding fathers were rogues, of course, but only because they lived life large.
Today’s present crop of politicians live life small. They hang out in bathrooms and try to pick up cops, they cheat on their wives, they are are panderers and pimps; they sell the virtues of the American public for their own purses.
So, we balance a new constitutional convention v _____ (fill in your reps name).
We balance a convention designed to change the law by which we live…when that law has already been broken.
Do you understand what I am getting at here?
You don’t have to read the Federalist Papers to know that even if the government has a convention, and does the right thing, it won’t mean anything to a government that believes in ignoring the public, breaking the law, and making themselves rulers in spite of law.
Personally, while I see some merit in a constitutional convention-perhaps if it was to merely reload the original constitution, and perhaps get rid of various and assorted amendments–I see more merit in making the law work.
Protest the newspapers until they report the truth…or go out of business.
Sue the judicial system until it actually starts to work.
Get rid of those wife-cheating, back-stabbing, purse-lining grinners that claim to represent us.
That’s my take on a constitutional convention.