>>>I would suggest, as always, that folks go back and read the Federalis Papers.
>>
>>Acknowledging their brilliance, but bearing in mind that these were white, male, prosperous slaveowners in the 17th century, and times have changed considerably. Note that we have amended the constitution many times.
>
>Bruce,
>
>I have no trouble with ammending the Constitution as long as people don't try to change the rules like they did with the ERA.

Amending the Constitution is, by definition, changing rules. Eliminating slavery, allowing an income tax, granting women the right to vote all changed the rules.

>
>As far as your remark about "white, male, prosperous slaveowners" goes... I cannot even imagine how indignant some people would rightly get if you said, "black, female poor free people" as though that were a justification for some argument you were making.
>
>Since when does one's race or level of prosperity or social status have any bearing on whether something is right or wrong?
>

It doesn't. But it does explain the context in which they frame their thoughts. The framers of the Constitution WERE white, male, prosperous - but very divided over the slavery issues. They had very definite thoughts about what classes should enjoy certain rights. As the nation has evolved, many of those thoughts were modified. I think some of the arguements in favor of the Electoral College are still valid. But the coutry for which the Constitution was written has obviously changed drasticly and arguements in favor of a national president voted in a national election being determined by the total national vote are hard to ignore.


>I will presume that you do not have a racist bone in your body but your remarks are clearly higly racist. Imagine, if someone is white or wealthy they are automatically morally presumed to be "bad". Stupid, illogical political correctness raises its ugly head once again.
>
>What about all those rich dead white guys who set slaves free? Remember, it was the southers Liberal Democrats who fought against the Civil Rights movement in the 60's including Al Gore's father. And the southern Liberal Democrats who enacted all the bad voting laws.
>
>Bruce, you need to get your facts straight I think. <g>

Calling the Southern Democrats of the 60's Liberal is a gross mis-statement of fact. They were Democrats for a century largely as a reaction to the Republican imposed Reconstruction period after the Civil War. There was almost no ideological agreement with their Liberal Northern Democrat brethern.