I’m just a informed layperson, but this point seems to hold a lot of potential for persuading many people. I wonder why I haven’t heard it used more often.

I looked into it and armed with some scholarly advice I can tell you that your point is valid indeed. The Bill of Rights AMEND the previously written constitution, including Article I section 8, which is being used as a justification for much that currently flies in the face of the constitution.

We need 33 state legislatures to demand a constitution convention. We need a 28th amendment that gives a 1 term limit on the house, the senate, and the president-6 years would by my choice. Ladies and gentlemen, if we don’t do this soon, our federal government will become so large and powerfull that it will be impossible to do it later.

The time for talking about fixing our government is over. IT’S TIME TO FIX IT!

They will accuse us of advocating anarchy, and we will accuse them to advocating dictatorship not upholding any written and consented to Constitutional law.

Tell them the U.S. Supreme court is but one side in a dispute of powers and rights, ceded to them by the States, A biased side which cannot be held as the just definer of winners and losers anymore then an opposing team can allowed to interpret the rules as they go. If there is any superior party here in which to resolve the dispute, it is and must be that party which originally granted the rights and powers in dispute in the first place, the people thou their States.

To say otherwise is to bind both the people and their state to an essentially unconditional union with an essentially unlimited (un-constitutional) grant of powers over them to the compete exclusion of their individual and State rights.

Tell me how is it that after having just fought a revolution to withdraw from the British union who had abused such rights, that we could possibly be persuaded to enter anther such unconditional and unlimited union?

Constitutional limited government and the right to resist such unconstitutional government (as we can clearly see for ourselves) and even if and when we feel it necessary secede from its control as a measure of that resistance is an essential natural right! We cannot and could not exist as a free people without it!

So the fact is we couldn’t have given up such an essential natural right to allow the Federal government to itself be the soul and exclusive definer of the extent of it’s own powers. Because even if we did in ratifying the Constitution, through fear, fraud or mistake, as John Adams early had put it with regard to the British constitution and Rights of the Colonists:
“If men through fear, fraud or mistake, should in terms renounce and give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the great end of society, would absolutely vacate such renunciation; the right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of Man to alienate this gift, and voluntarily become a slave.” – John Adams, Rights of the Colonists, 1772

What we really need are more serious and thorough debates in the MSM over the 10th.