[godfry n. glad]

I'm inclined to think that incrementalism is a much safer approach to changing problems with the constitution.

Throw open the whole ball of wax and the plutocrats will pay for plenty of stooges and gull many more and I'd suspect that the result would have greater potentials for abuse than the current one. Plus, given what I've seen with state constitutions where additions and delitions are allowed through initiative, the constitution becomes littered with specific language that was better never having been placed there...I'd bet you'd see a convention steeped in big money and a laundry list of "rights", entitlements and no responsibilities.

And sure, you can start the convention on the premise that the BoR stands, but the very nature of the convention allows that they can throw out their own premises and start all over, once convened. That's what they did last time, so there is a very clear historical precedent.

What the U.S. government needs is a purging of both houses of Congress. One election could do that...there's your "revolution". I think multiple party politics are in our future, because many folks are sick of the two we have. I don't, however, think multiple party politics is any improvement (look at Italy and Israel). The current Congress has abdicated its constitutional responsibility. They sat on their hands while the Supreme Court did the job allotted to the House of Representatives when they selected the President in a close and clouded election. And did so in clear violation of the majority's judicial principles. In short, the U.S. is currently in a constitutional crisis because the House of Representatives has not impeached five Supreme Court justices and the Senate has not tried them. This is because the candidate selected was of the same political party of the majority of the House. We've had a judicial coup and no response from "the people".

Given how easily my fellow Americans are manipulated, I'm even less convinced I want to throw our governance open to complete revision (though I'll admit the 38 state supermajority is a nice brake, of sorts). I'm not optimistic and, in my opinion, those who think so are excessively optimistic.

I'd rather see the discussions take place separately and the decisions be made separately, rather than create an opportunity for gross abuse, all at one sitting, as it were.

godfry