First off, like a lot of conservatives, you treat the Constitution as if it were something that it's not. You invoke the Constitution as a magic word -- ascribing to it mystical powers of organizational perfection, as if the Constitution, in itself, holds the power to make us all free, well-behaved, and self-sufficient.
Second, you tacitly assume that everybody basically agrees on the principles embodied in the Constitution, and on how those principles should be applied in real life.
The fact that you wrote this piece at all, should be a big clue that your assumptions are wrong.
It's not just you -- it's a failing common to a lot of conservatives, who apparently do not understand what John Adams meant when he said,
We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
John Adams understood what today's conservatives do not: that the Constitution -- as wonderful as it is -- is nothing more than a formal statement of a pre-existing common agreement on how government and people should co-exist. It was based, further, on an assumption that people are not only "moral," but more importantly that people have a common understanding of what "moral" means.
That common understanding no longer exists (if it ever really did....). It is not possible to "return" to the good old days, unless and until some sort of common agreement can be re-established.
If you want to be effective, you need to start making the case for conservative and moral behavior. Because the alternative -- expecting people to live by principles with which they do not agree -- leads to the use of force to make them live that way.
Only liberal commies disagree with the Constitution. And you are still a troll.