Huckabee on changing the Constitution

[realFedUp]

He was for changing the Constitution before he was against it.
Must be thinking about running for Prez again.

Looking a little more sane than your party does give one
some cred these days. Hard to believe.

http://www.newshounds.us/2008/01/16/mike_huckabee_clari...

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/08/12/huckabe... /

[rurallib]

1. Huckabee scares me - he sounds sane.

he is basically a teabagger, but his radio and TV background makes him another Reagan type.

[burnsei sensei]

2. but, but, but

I thought conservatives revered the Constitution.

[Mariana]

3. Since the Consititution contains provision to change it

one can rever the Constitution and favor amending it at the same time.

I'm surprised they're even bothering to bring it up, though. They usually just ignore the parts they don't like.

[burnsei sensei]

4. A liberal generally reveres the Constitution

with the understanding that it has been & can be amended.
A conservative, because if his very mindset, would revere it as something unchanging.
So yes, this is a departure of conservatives from conservatism.
Just like neoconservatism was about 15 years ago.

[Igel]

6. Partly true.

Many liberals that I've known have revered the Constitution, with the understanding that it is a "living" document. Changes can more profitably and easily come by reinterpreting and reframing its provisions rather than seeking amendments.

Many conservatives I've known have revered the Constitution, with the understanding that it is a piece of paper, a dead and not a living document so that the content of that piece of paper is remarkably unchanging. (Not entirely unchanging, and there are quibbles over exactly how non-changing it is.) At the same time, the primary way of changing the document is through amendments.

I think we pretty much think "conservatively" when it's our employer redefining and re-interpreting the terms of our employment contracts, when our insurance company decides that our contract with them is a "living document." We're all fairly liberal in redefining things ourselves when it helps us.

On a slightly different note, I usually object to a person outside a group defining, on the basis of his/her own beliefs and perceptions, what members of a group believes. I mean, I've seen non-Muslims state what Muslims "really believe," whites declare what blacks "really mean and believe," and so on and so forth, and seldom have I felt in the least inclined to accept their rantings. There's a veritable garden of fallacies down that path.

[Douglas Carpenter]

5. the danger of Huckabee is that he appears ostensibly friendly, amiable and articulate

Even Bill Clinton described him as the candidate who ordinary people would find easiest to imagine sitting around and chatting with.

Underneath this is a dangerous ideology - in foreign policy apocalyptically dangerous:

http://washingtonindependent.com/55391/mike-huckabee-is...

[Erose999]

7. I want to know who the 39% of Dems who favor changing the 14 amendment are. The DLC, perhaps?