They only want the Constitution to be "living" so they can kill it. In totalitarian countries, a word can mean one thing today and something different tomorrow and you had better follow the party line to get the current interpretation. Likewise, a law can be "interpreted" to mean one thing one day and something else another day -- it all depends on the shifting sands of political fortunes and many people have died from being caught in the middle or not adjusting in time. Strangely, the plainest of words like "Congress shall make no law" or "inalienable rights" cause our reformers endless confusion. Those who come after the reformers have paved the way will speak very plainly. They will utter words like, "Citizen 'X' is an Enemy of the People. Kill him." Then everyone will understand everything.
Strangely, the plainest of words like "Congress shall make no law" or "inalienable rights" cause our reformers endless confusion. Yes, there are some who would twist the plain language of the Constitution until it howls in agony.
In the last election, New Jersey was suprised when 47 days didn't mean 47 days after "the Torch" bailed. In 2000, I was fascinated to learn that deadlines clearly set forth by Florida Legislators could be reconstrued to mean whatever the Florida Supreme Court said. I was further fascinated to learn that the deadlines that the Florida Supreme Court made up were equally meaningless if the Florida Supreme Court so decided later.
Fortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court taught the Florida Supreme Court about Article II and the 14th Amendment. since then Democrats have howled about the "evil Supreme Court appointing Bush" over something as trivial as the Equal Protection clause of the Constitution.