Comment: It's clear, but if the purpose of free speech is not accepted

(See in situ)


It's clear, but if the purpose of free speech is not accepted

wherein constitutional intent remains unstated, and no one understands how constitutional intent controls Article V, or won't even discuss it; I can't help you know what you don't know.

In fact it almost looks like you do not want others to know by implying it hasn't been made clear perhaps 1/2 dozen different ways. Implying that if you can't understand it, no one can.

For all we know, you could be pretending to not understand while a Greek chorus creates an aura of credibility. Typical cognitive infiltrator tactic.

As an alternative, you make yourself clear on how you intend to defend our rights without these methods of gaining authority through agreement upon constitutional intent at Article V.

Why won't you or anyone comment upon what "Preparatory Amendment" does to the Article V proposal?

Preparatory Amendment:

1)End the abridging of free speech

2)Secure the vote

3)Campaign finance reform

Can we stop doing all the things we are doing that we do not want to do while still doing what we need to do?