Constitutional Convention could cause more harm

In a March 28 letter, a writer stated “A person would have to be blind, deaf and dumb not to be aware that our federal government is on a dangerous course.” She also states that “There is a tsunami of discontent growing in America” (“Amendments needed for reform”).

I agree with these statements, but she then recommends a Constitutional Convention to remedy this. That is where I strongly disagree.

Most advocates of a Constitutional Convention miss its extreme dangers.

I see a high probability of most of the same people now in office being elected as delegates to this convention. Other people elected would probably have the backing of special-interest groups.

I must point out that a Constitutional Convention can change any or all of the present Constitution and its amendments. If it chooses to, it can repeal freedom of the press (First Amendment).

It can mandate or ban any or all religions (First Amendment). It can choose to remove the right to bear arms (Second Amendment). It can choose to remove the right of a citizen to be secure from unreasonable searches and seizures (Fourth Amendment), and “the right to a speedy and public trial” may be removed (Sixth Amendment).

Our present method of amending the Constitution is safe and reasonable and does not run the risks of a convention. A Constitutional Convention could create massive government control or a total lack of control. We must fear and avoid a convention at all costs.

Ralph Schwartz

Poughkeepsie

Trump much like another controversial public figure

It seems that the liberal group-thinkers have decided that Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s antics are an affront to rational discourse, and his use of the media is antithetical to the proper course of political campaigning.

Really?

Summarizing the charges and resentments against Mr. Trump that these “great minds” bring forward, we find:

“The Donald” is a well-dressed, well-coiffed, forceful demagogue, with seemingly unlimited financial resources; his arguments are not always well-grounded nor consistent; his language is often incendiary, and his calls to action involve programs and initiatives that rarely have real possibility of being implemented. He foments — if not outright encourages — rage among his adherents that spills into confrontation and violence, while he manages to stay above the actual fray. (“I would never condone violence, but....insert excuse for the stated violence!”).

His appearances are not directed toward speeches and reasoned plans, but are “rallies” to inflame the multitudes that believe “the system” does not heed their concerns, and only by banding together and exercising methods — legal and illegal — can they enact changes in their condition, even if needing near-extortionate methods to do so.

Am I being fair?

Therefore, they resent him not for his actions, which on their face would be ineffective as political tactics, but for plagiarizing the methods of one of the not-quite-mainstream liberal icons that has helped create the society in which we live.

I give you, then, Donald Trump, the white, right-wing version of the liberal-venerated Rev. Al Sharpton!

Richard J. Ceonzo

LaGrange

Despite odds, Sanders continues onward

I am stunned at the voting habits of the people of our nation.

I am saddened that Americans have lost their ability to discern what is best for them. I refer to Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump and Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton — one a billionaire, the other worth tens of millions of dollars.

Millionaires and billionaires are abound in our government. Through the years, I have observed that the more money one acquires, two principles surface: Time spent making more money, or worrying about losing what they have.

Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders didn’t enter this race because of power, control, or even being president. This man from Vermont, who has spoken and walked his talk his entire life, entered against all odds because he cares deeply for the environment, the people, the poor, the downtrodden, seniors, infrastructure and free education. He offers an unusual commodity most no longer recognize — truth and sincerity. Despite recent losses, he keeps on ticking like the Eveready battery. Darn. That’s courage!

The media has programmed all to admire the image, not ‘see’ with intuition and discernment the real person — allowed others to think for them, projecting their own brand of insincerity.

Capitalism working? Hardly. You see its demise everywhere.

Strange. Those who like Sanders are worried about socialism. Here are the names of eight countries considered the happiest being socially democratic: Switzerland, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Canada, Finland, the Netherlands and Sweden.

Thank our “lucky stars” TV wasn’t around when former President Abe Lincoln ran.

Joyce Benedict

Hyde Park

Get election coverage online

You can get all of the latest 2016 election coverage at https://www.poughkeepsiejournal.com/section/elections-2016/

This site, powered by USA Today, includes the latest news and many interactive pieces, such as a candidate match game so you can determine which candidate fits best with the issues and qualities you care most about.