I’m really amazed how often people bring up this idea that would magically “restore the Republic” especially considering it has as much a chance of ever happening as Sarah Shahi inviting me to her Golden Globes after party and when I get there it’s just her and she’s wearing a dress made only of whipped cream.
Wanna restore constitutional government? Process isn’t the problem, leftists are.
Wanna repeal an amendment? How about the 16th?
Or how about the the 19th? Just kidding ladies!! (or am I?)
Also repeal section 2 of the 21st amendment. There is a lot of Byzantine corruption in those states with onerous liquor laws, distribution monopolies, ect. And violating section 2 is only way an ordinary citizen can violate the constitution other than enslaving someone, think about that.
Part of the problem is the anti-17th amendment crowd wants to live in their "tonight we're gonna party like it's 1789" fantasy and not take into account that the state legislatures themselves have changed VASTLY from what they were when "the founders" wrote that amendment. If James Madison or Thomas Jefferson could arrive in a time machine and see the way state legislatures are run TODAY, I doubt they'd trust these people to elect the Senate's dog catcher. For example, the Illinois State Senate is vastly different from the U.S. Senate is because the Illinois State Senate is drawn solely by population, so Chicago-based districts make up half the seats. Under the "1 man, 1 vote" rule, you can't design the Illinois Senate to look like the U.S. Senate and be based on geographic interests, so Chicago gets overrepresented in BOTH houses at the expense of the rest of Illinois. Unless you can return the state legislatures to the type of government they had when "the founders" wrote the constitution, repealing the 17th wouldn't accomplish anything except giving crooked politicians more power.
>> Wanna restore constitutional government? Process isn’t the problem, leftists are. <<
The ridiculous thing here is there are a lot of realistic things that conservatives COULD accomplish at the state level to prevent numerous problems from the 2012 election from occurring again. For example, the constitution is silent about how states can allocate their electoral votes, so in the swing states where we're repeatedly failed to win statewide because of the RAT's GOTV urban machines, the state legislators could adapt the Maine/Nebraska system by majority vote. I believe there's at least four swing states right now where we have a GOP majority in both houses to do this (Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, etc.) It would instantly give us access to numerous electoral votes in 2016 in those states when we're gotten a big fat 0 electoral votes out of them ever since 1992.
But are conservatives talking about and organizing reforms like that? No, they're passing meaningless secession petitions, calling on Obama to be impeached, demanding the 17th be repealed so corrupt RAT legislators can appoint Senators for life, etc., none of which has a snowball's chance in hell of happening. They might as well pass a resolution declaring Ronald Reagan is the "honorary" President now so they can feel good about their circle jerk.
>> Wanna repeal an amendment? How about the 16th? Or how about the the 19th? Just kidding ladies!! (or am I?) Also repeal section 2 of the 21st amendment. There is a lot of Byzantine corruption in those states with onerous liquor laws, distribution monopolies, ect. And violating section 2 is only way an ordinary citizen can violate the constitution other than enslaving someone, think about that. <<
They can blather on all they want about "the founders", it doesn't change that it goes against Conservatism 101 to claim politicians make better decisions for us than the individual does. If the argument is "the founders were ALWAYS right!!" then they might as well add in a repeal of the 12th as a package deal and start demanding Mitt Romney get sworn in as veep because "the founders" thought it was a good idea. They need to start writing talking points about how "our Republic was destroyed" because Al Gore didn't get to be Bush's veep. The rebuttal to the "runner up candidates make bad veeps" response can be "If you don't like the Vice President, MOVE!" Let's be consistent after all. ;-)
But if we wanna have fun with meaningless exercises to "repeal" amendments, then at least focus on repealing amendments that ALL conservatives would agree on That means the 16th for sure. Also, repeal the 23rd, I'm pretty sure all conservatives could get behind that one, even if AuH2ORepublican's proposal for a "state of new Columbia" with the liberal Virginia and Maryland suburbs isn't addressed. In any case, just repealing the 23rd on its own would "disenfranchise" those hard-left socialists who live in D.C. and that's music to my ears. No electoral votes for you!
::insert graphic of Nelson from the Simpsons pointing and laughing::