Posted on 01/18/2008 12:43:08 PM PST by commish
This morning I heard that one of the other candidates commented that the Constitution is a “living, breathing document.”
Frankly, I assumed this came from Senator Clinton or Senator Obama. It is identical to what Al Gore said when he was running for President in 2000, when he said he would look for judges “who understand that our Constitution is a living, breathing document, that it was intended by our founders to be interpreted in the light of the constantly evolving experience of the American people.”
Imagine my surprise when I learned that this statement actually came from my opponent, Governor Huckabee, in an interview with CNN this morning. Now I know Governor Huckabee was talking about amending the Constitution, but I don’t think he understood that he was using code words that support judicial activism.
He does not appear to understand that reliance on the notion that the Constitution is a living, breathing document is precisely the kind of wrong-headed thinking about the Constitution that gave us Roe v. Wade, which legalized abortion across our nation, and Lawrence v. Texas, which decriminalized sodomy.
I do not believe the Constitution is a living, breathing document. I am committed to appointing strict constructionist judges to the bench if I am elected President, strict constructionists who believe the Constitution has a fixed meaning that can be applied to cases that come before the courts today. They do NOT believe the Constitution is a “living, breathing document,” whose meaning, constantly changing with the sifting sands of our culture, can be determined and applied by unelected judges.
I fear that this loose language about our Constitution calls into question Governor Huckabee’s appreciation and understanding of the issue of judicial activism and raises questions as to what kind of judges he would appoint were he to become President.
He’s in the race, but, alas, because he speaks the truth and is a true conservative, he’s being blackballed by the liberal media.
I wanted to set it in bold so that it would tell those, who are ignorant of this fact, the sad state of affairs we have in the process. How can it be? With all of the Republicans in the field, depleting their campaign war chests fighting each other, they will have little left over after the convention to fight the real enemy. Many like me want to contribute to the nominee for the home stretch. Now, we leave the candidates running on vapors with no way to get the message out when the media has done a work on them.
It shouldn't surprise any of us.
Huckabee is a pro life liberal, and he has NO business running as a Republican.
Thanks for posting the link...that was awesome!
Update! Here’s the guy that asked the questions in the article:
http://fredfile.fred08.com/blog/2008/quite-the-question/
That would require actual understanding something that seems lacking in Hope Arkansas and the poster you replied to....
He does understand. His record show that he does not mind judges, and Justices, distorting the Constitution in this way.
The same can be said about the Gospel of Jesus Christ - it is the “plumb line” for life.
To take your analogy even further the problem doesn't lay with the original source, it's those who would attempt to redefine and misrepresent it to suit their own ends.
Nominating justices who may lean pro life is the best solution to a horrible status quo. While Huckabee has proposed the amendment solution, I believe he would also nominate justices to the SC who hold the same values as Thompson’s.
Look...I have supported the Thompson campaign financially...even though he comes across a bit elitist...he needs to stop bashing his opponent and start talking to the average guy. Unless voters get fired up over him...next best is Huckabee...or maybe Romney.
You can assume what you want to assume...I can disagree and do.
A “living, breathing Document”.....Now Huck is sounding like Al Gore.
Algore isn't fit to sell used cars, or even worthless Carbon CreditsTM.
Amending the Constitution for much of anything is unrealistic, as the nation is so divided. It takes 2/3 of both houses and 3/4 of the states to ratify amendments. Not likely in the Age of Bush and Clinton. So, I don’t see any amendments forthcoming. I also never expected No. 27 in 1992, but that is meaningless because the courts have ruled that COLA’s are not “pay raises”.
Thanks to TN, or he could be finishing up his second term this year.
If so, I think our Constitution has a fever.
I don’t consider Fred elitist at all. He’s telling the American people what he plans to do about the problems the country has. Some are listening, many aren’t. But then half the country doesn’t even bother coming out to vote. He’s speaking to the half that does.
Huckabee is likely to be more powerful in the South than McCain. Fred is taking the shine off of him for those voters now, and then he can deliver the coup de grace to McCain later if that’s necessary.
1. Code words are code words.
2. People wouldn't be jumping on this if the guy didn't have so many problems with the Constitution already. He was behind a national smoking ban, for Pete's sake. The whole reason he was even on the subject in this interview was because he had said earlier in the week that we should bring the Constitution in line with God's laws.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.