Go for it, RimCountry. I will support you, but when it doesn't work, you will come to my conclusion that it would be better to start anew.

I don't have as much fear as several in this forum do about the Convention of States, but at least half of all politicians now believe that they either are the law and/or are above the law. The Founders expected that people of honor would be elected to office. Now people of dishonor get re-elected and re-elected. Things are generally better on the state level than at the national level, but getting 38 states to agree on much of anything will require a pole vaulter's agility.

Let me see if I've got this Article V argument right:
The original intent and wording of the Constitution has been subverted through mis-interpretation and implied additions by the Federal government and acquiescence by State government and by citizens.
Thomas Jefferson's original 13th Amendment mysteriously disappeared from all mention when Lincoln's 13th was added.
Lincoln's Federal government replaced State's governors, legislators, and their Congressional representatives and senators to get the 14th Amendment agreed to.
The 16th Amendment, though not actually ratified by sufficient State's in the proper time was listed as approved by the Federal government.
No President, Congress, or Court has followed the Constitution since at least Teddy Roosevelt, if not Lincoln.
None of the natural rights referred to in the Constitution nor even those guaranteed to not be infringed in the Bill of Rights still exist in fact today and the government doesn't even bother to pretend that they do anymore.
None of the limits imposed on the Federal government by the Constitution are followed by the government.
A US dollar's purchasing power is about 3% today of what it was in 1913.

And we're going to straighten all of that out with an Article V Convention manned by people drawn from the minor league of professional politicians who mostly seek to graduate to the big leagues in DC themselves?

Golly gee whiz and just WOW! What great Objectivist thought.

Your premise is that America is worth saving. I reject that premise. Yes, the spread of evil is as you and Ms. Rand said. I made the effort that could have made a difference in the 1998-2012 time frame. I even got a few chuckles for bring AS to Tea Party meetings. When America doubled down on socialism with Obama a second time, that was it. The country is burnt toast. If there was any doubt, the recent primary losses to vulnerable weaklings like Boehner and McConnell confirms the end.

The Clinton era frankly wasn't all that bad, as much as I didn't like him personally. Clinton at least was able to learn from his mistakes. The Convention of States idea has much merit, but we are badly outnumbered by looters, moochers, and crony crapitalists (The US Chamber of Commerce, for example). At best, 20% of the population shares our values.

I have not lost faith in the Constitution. I have lost faith in Americans' ability to keep it. Ben Franklin gave us a republic if we could keep it. We haven't. Article V was meant as a final safeguard. It will not be enough. When someone makes a half-hearted attempt at financial restraint (Tim Penny's Penny Plan, Paul Ryan's proposed budget a few years ago, G.W. Bush's attempt to privatize Social Security), they are shot down immediately. Frankly, those remedies were relatively superficial. The last persons to make serious attempt at budget restraint were Newt Gingrich (now a pariah) and Ross Perot (now commonly portrayed as nuts). America needs open heart surgery. It is literally hemorrhaging debt. Money is a barometer of a society's virtue - Francisco d'Anconia. The dollar isn't worth the ink that is used to print it anymore.

The Not Ready for Prime Time Players... some of the best comedy since The Honeymooners!

The Convention of States idea is a good idea as Mark Levin is touting it. However, it won't work because thinking, productive, independent individuals have their votes cancelled out routinely by looters and moochers. My support for the Convention of States about a week ago was met with blistering criticism for some very valid reasons that I can't refute. Just because something is a great idea doesn't mean that it can be implemented. America is beyond gone. You can turn the lights out when you come to the same conclusion.

Until just a very few years ago, America's ship could have been righted.

How could we not?

OK... even if I were accept your pretty grim appraisal of mainstream Republican idealism (and that's not to say that I don't!), you still haven't convinced me that there would be enough of delegates at the convention itself who would dare to violate their sworn commission - and their own state law - by voting in an open assembly against their own leadership. Please... show me one example of such a thing having happened, or even a rational hypothetical as to how it could conceivably happen.

In the first place, these delegates will be selected at the state level based on their certified dedication to Constitutional Conservatism and to the principles espoused in the legislation that they've just passed. This is not a free-for-all convention to re-write the Constitution... it's a convention that's being called for very clear and specific reasons, to propose amendments that will shrink the size and scope of the federal, while returning power to the states.

I hear your concern, believe me, I do, but unless you offer something tangible, something procedural, something probable or even possible, something other than simply "fear" of it happening, than I'm afraid that that's all it is.

OK, just so I understand... you are saying now that you are no longer supportive of an Article V Convention of States, and having no reason to suspect that further argument, reason or factual data will change your position, I'll accept that. I must, however, beg your indulgence while I pursue the matter with you a bit further. A number of your ancillary comments have piqued my curiosity, and I simply must try to understand your reasoning.

You initially said that you were generally in favor of A5, but added that you were criticized by others on this forum for taking that position. You didn't say how strident the criticism was, but I'm assuming that it must have been considerable, since you chose to mentioned it. Since that initial declaration of support, however, if I may use a sailing reference, your heading seems to have come about 180°... in less than 24 hours.

You also indicated that you were an optimist up until, roughly, the first Clinton administration, and I can completely relate to that. I, too, suffered from an extended period of depression and shame for the subject matter that his behavior brought into polite conversation, and for the indignity that he, his family and his coterie brought to the Office of the Presidency and to the nation.

And lastly you say that the Republic is lost, and that, in so many words, we are defeated, and that you have given up the fight. You’ve shrugged. And you seem to say it not in defiance, but in a rather matter-of-fact sort of way. Not as resignation, but as identification… this is me… I have shrugged. And you said it twice. Yet in what seems to be an assurance that you're not seeking sympathy, that you're not claiming "victimization" status, we're advised that you've feathered your nest quite well enough to survive no matter what.

All well and good, I suppose, but I'm still left thoroughly confused. Just to help me understand, could you tell me what specific element it was about the Article V remedy that you most believed in… yesterday… and then tell me what the primary factor was in your sudden loss of faith in the Constitution. Was it remembering all that unbearable criticism? Was is those painful Clinton-era memories of soul-crushing pessimism? Or could it have been that you misspoke about your support for the Constitution and have decided that it’s far easier to settle for self-indulgent complacency?

The Church Lady - yes, she was hilarious. SNL was actually funny then.

LOL! In this instance, however, I see it more as the Church Lady... W would be prudent, indeed, but I'm thinking he wouldn't let it go until it was "Mission Accomplished"

I am glad that I saved and invested well during the Clinton era. Now that I am debt-free and have a pretty decent nest egg, I probably could retire at 47 if I had to do so, but I really don't want to.

In my best Dana Carvey imitation of George H.W. Bush, "Gotta be prudent". Yes, prudent is the correct term.

I should have said that I am, while generally optimistic, being cured of that optimism by the reality of the Obama/Bush economy. There was reason for optimism through 1990. That is no longer true.

Glad to see some clear-headed thinking on these issues, Robbie. This is why I came here, to Galt’s Gulch. This is what I prayed for, this is what I expected. Frankly, I am not in a place in my life where I can turn my back on my country nor those younger who must follow me. In matters this critical, if there is no reason NOT to do something, then I must. Otherwise, all I will have been about is bluster. To borrow from Ayn Rand herself, “The question isn't who is going to let me; it's who is going to stop me!” I’ll be damned if the “who” is going to be me!

We all know what the problems are. Many of us have spent the better portion of our adult lives watching as these problems have gotten progressively worse – pun intended. And virtually every one of us here in this forum has spent countless hours at the keyboard complaining about them. Now, we have a chance to actually do something about it, to pick up the weapon left to us by the Founders of this great nation and take up the fight in their absence. To do otherwise borders on cowardice.

Let me try to address one concern of yours, the fear of a “progressive takeover,” which seems to be a recurring one, despite an abundance of facts that clearly refute the issue. As noted in a previous post, when you look at the demographics of potential delegates, which can only be state legislators, the numbers are seriously in our favor. There are 26 Red States versus 18 Blue States, and it’s a one-state, one vote assembly. Those numbers, by the way, are subject to increase in our favor in the upcoming midterm, if the polls and the media are to be believed. And in this case, since they all seem to agree, I’m inclined to count on that trend. The delegates will, by popular vote, elect the leadership, then the leadership will establish the rules and control the agenda.

That agenda, by the way, will be legislatively limited to proposing amendments to the Constitution that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, that limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and that limit the terms of office for its officials and for members of Congress. Read those words carefully… that is the actual text of the application to Congress in the call for the convention, and will be so stated in the commission of each delegate. Any motion made by any delegate to consider any proposal that would fall outside of those parameters would be immediately ruled out of order by the Chair, and they would simply move on. I would welcome anyone to demonstrate how a delegate is going to even introduce a progressive proposal, let alone get it debated and passed.

Caution is one thing, and I completely understand and applaud it, but when all worrisome issues have been swept aside by clear reason and logic, I struggle to find an honorable motive for continued resistance.

Again, to the words of Ayn Rand herself… “The spread of evil is the symptom of a vacuum. Whenever evil wins, it is only by default: by the moral failure of those who evade the fact that there can be no compromise on basic principles.”

Fear can be a good thing, especially in matters as grave as this. Some prefer to call it caution, or concern... how about prudence?

Optimism... an undying trait... possibly one reason the Left still survives... Example: “You may encounter many defeats, but you must not be defeated. In fact, it may be necessary to encounter the defeats, so you can know who you are, what you can rise from, how you can still come out of it.” ~ Maya Angelou