Officially, the American governmental system is accountable to the populace as a whole through the voting system. Is America still accountable to the people? I think it is, but it has gotten the government it deserves.

The problem is neither a deficit of education, nor is it ignorance. The problem that those who oppose us have is a willful closing of their minds.

I knew about the 100 points criterion for voting. Personally I oppose that, but I am not going to make a big deal about it. If I didn't pay for it, I would feel guilty for not paying for it. If you don't have such guilt, then you should consider yourself blessed. I am blessed in most ways, but a Catholic upbringing instilled what I consider a proper sense of right and wrong in me. If I do something wrong, I feel guilty. Unlike a lot of Catholics, however, I am not burdened with guilt that I have not earned. Like AR, I never could feel guilt over what Catholics term original sin. I didn't sin often, but I properly earned some guilt here and there along the way.

The situation you suggested will happen. It is unclear whether such an objection would actually be successful. Shopping for courts would definitely happen. The CoS would go through several years of court battles up to SCOTUS, and then it would come down to which president was able to stack the court sufficiently.

Indeed I do exist.

yes, kickstarter is different, and unless an admin comes in here, and tells you differently, kickstarter is closed. Enjoying your contributions, rim.

Actually my district's representative, Bill Posey, is quite solid in his own right. Part of the problem is that almost all of us have voted with our feet to get to places where we find those who share common values with us, but we have little or no effect on all of those in other districts whose representatives more than cancel our representatives out.

Your enthusiasm is nice to see. I had that enthusiasm for many years, and for those things within my sphere of influence, I still do. Large political movements are beyond my control. Thus I will focus my energy on making a difference in my sphere of influence.

actually, this is not true. Here is the system. Under 100 points on the board, you may not vote. Reach 100, you have voting privileges. Guests are essential to the site, in my opinion. If you pay a nominal monthly fee it gives you back some added value: the ability to hide comments on your posts, Private messaging of any other contributor to the site, and special perks-usually you can see these in the monthly newsletter, advance pics from the movies, special deals on merchandise, etc.
To rim's last comment, I enjoy the most points on this site. There's been not too much easy about that. But, I have goals that make hanging out here a value to me. I offer the value I wish to offer.

That would certainly be a step in the right direction. The Dems and particularly SCOTUS will attempt to get that to be ruled unconstitutional.

I do not know about contributions made to the Kickstarter campaign. If you contact Scott DeSapio, I am sure that he can direct you on how to find out how to pay. It's only $40 or so per year.

Perhaps you should read my other post on "Who or what is worth saving?" People who blank out are not worth trying to save. They will never learn because they have chosen to close their minds.

When a government selectively enforces or chooses not to enforce certain laws, the loss of respect for the entire system is profound. Let us suppose that Directive 10-289 actually passed. I would gladly tell the government to stick their law where the sun doesn't shine.

For me, the straw that broke the proverbial camel's back was the government's handling of the GM and Chrysler bailout. My parents had the highest grade of GM bonds. According to bankruptcy law, a part of the Constitution, bondholders are supposed to get the first fruit of bankruptcy settlements. Instead my parents got a letter proposing a settlement of $225 for $100000 of their bonds. The same letter threatened them in the event that they chose to sue the government over the proposed settlement. During the same month, two of our local car dealers who just happened to be among the top ten Republican (and later Tea Party) contributors in our county were forced to sell their dealerships to out-of-towners.

You say "Things are bad, but not so bad as to be beyond repair. To dwell on the negative, and to exaggerate it as well, tends to diminish or attenuate those who call for a remedy." That is how I felt in 2012 even after all that had happened. America doubled down on stupid by re-electing Obama in 2012 and completely blanked out regarding all the obvious scandals and lies from this administration. There are those of us for which the characteristic is "still very much alive", but we are severely outnumbered. There are several Old Testament Biblical analogies that are relevant here, most particularly Sodom and Gomorrah or either of the exiles. When the number of those honorable enough to be worth saving had been reduced to a remnant, the remnant was saved, and the vast majority was wiped out.

Neither can I, and neither can people a whole lot smarter than I am!

I happened to be on a conference call a month or so ago with a group who were trying to talk some sense into an intransigent local legislator who, unfortunately, had the power to move or kill our COS legislation last session. One of his assistants, thinking he had us over a barrel, suggested that a liberal delegate, denied his "right" to submit a left-leaning proposal for consideration, could simply shop around for a federal judge who would grant an injunction demanding that his "rights" as a delegate not be denied.

Not being a parliamentarian myself, but having attended a number of conventions, I suggested that once the chair got wind of the filing, he could simply adjourn the assembly indefinitely, placing the court in a position of having to rule on a mute point.

The silence was deafening.

Seriously, if there is a real threat to the process that's not covered in the several layers of safeguards already built into the legislation, I haven't run across it. Many people have said, as you just did, that it could happen, but no one has come up with a "how."

In that case, perhaps more important than term limits for politicians is term limits for judges. You asked earlier how an Article V convention would be legislatively delayed. For the Dems to win, it might not even have to be done legislatively. All they would have to do is exert their control over the kangaroo court system to deny such change as unconstitutional, even if it is constitutional. The ability to "shop for a friendly court" is perhaps the biggest problem that America has.

Ah, an inventor... you exist at the creative core of the commercial universe!

I like the sentiment, Solver, I only worry about who would set themselves up as the arbiter as to which money has been earned honestly, and which has not. Possibly a slippery slope there...

My wife is from South Florida, and we have friends over on the Gulf Coast side, so we followed the antics of Charlie Crist from a distance, almost in disbelief. I fully expect John McCain, if he were ever seriously primaried, to do the same thing.

Obviously, I share your frustration with the Establishment, but I guess I'm just not there yet... "there" being the point where I lump them all together and shrug, as you say.

I have learned the easy part - not to trust them all - and in doing so, have discovered that there are those, indeed, who are deserving of trust. Determining who they are is the hard part... it's risky... and sometimes I find I run against the grain of others with closely held opinions contrary to mine.

But it keeps me energized, and now that I'm once again actively engaged and hopeful and forward thinking and confident and trusting in a political movement, the contrast between how it is today and how it has been for the last several years is astounding.

I wouldn't trade it for the world... no matter how safe and secure.

PS: Love Mike Lee... he's an A5 supporter, you know - http://www.westernfreepress.com/2014/02/...

No, I can't think of a way that could derail a parliamentary process, but I am not very familiar with Roberts' rules of order, let alone all of the political sausagemaking process.

Hooah!

They should make it easier to find the various levels of membership... I just went to the Home Page and could not find an obvious link. I'm not offering that as an excuse, I'm just saying that I'll look into it if I can find where to look. And I'm assuming that contributions made through the Kickstarter campaign don't count here.

Well, you're certainly right on one count, jbrenner... you can't make the "blankouts" learn... particularly once you've quit trying.

Almost sounds like a "Duh" moment to me. Just about as profound as justifying it by saying you're satisfied with just preaching to the choir.

I can't argue with you that the rule of law has suffered some serious setbacks of late, and not beginning with this administration. But again, we have to watch the absolutes... not ALL laws are being ignored.

Things are bad, but not so bad as to be beyond repair. To dwell on the negative, and to exaggerate it as well, tends to diminish or attenuate those who call for a remedy.

To the extent that there are still many, many Americans who recognize the regression and want dearly for us to return to being a nation of laws, I contend that there is, indeed, that characteristic still very much alive and well out there, and it is that to which I refer when I use the term "American DNA"

Excellent analysis, Robbie, and I couldn't agree more with your closing. To jbrenner's contention that men are the problem, not the document, I point only to the Supreme Court... it is those men (and women) who are the problem. They find holes where there should be none, and lest we live to see Robbie's fear of institutionalized unconstitutionality (is that a word?), we need to repair those holes, using the remedy afforded in Article V.

I love Zen's attitude and intent in his amendment proposal, but think that it should probably be trimmed down to something less than a national referendum, probably something initiated at the state level to give it some level of credibility above that of a crazed mob. I forget who said it, probably Franklin, but "in democracy, dangers go there."

Here in Arizona, the state Republican Party just censured John McCain. That’s all they can do because of the 17th Amendment. He comes back to his mansion in Sedona for about 6 months every six years and says some very conservative things to his rabid sycophants, gets re-elected, then goes back to the DC bubble and the Establishment where there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between a (D) and an (R). He hasn't represented the needs of this state in the 21 years I’ve lived here. By the way, for the record, I’m a registered independent, I believe in “sending a message” when I vote, and I haven’t contributed to any political campaign since GWB I.

As for making it easier to impeach a sitting official, no more letting the fox guard the henhouse. I’d recommend an amendment along the lines of one I described earlier, requiring all bills to pass muster in a newly created Constitutionality Committee before being voted on by the full chamber. Any member who even submits for consideration a bill that fails by unanimous vote in that committee would be declared eligible for impeachment by the legislature in the state that he represents.

Thwap!