[Castigar]

“If you are a strict constructionalist - which apparently the governor isn’t because he’s looking to amend the Constitution - you would have respect for the wisdom of the Framers.”

This doesn’t follow. By that reasoning we wouldn’t have ended slavery by amending the constitution (something I’m sure strict constructionists wholeheartedly agree with). You can be a strict constructionist but still think the constitution could be amended.

[dirtboy]

I noticed that myself. For wanting to follow the Constitutionally-mandated method for changing the Constitution, Perry isn't a strict constructionist? Pah.

I'm not sure if the idea is good or not, but the process proposed is proper.

[Tublecane]

“This doesn’t follow. By that reasoning we wouldn’t have ended slavery by amending the constitution”

Liberals either actually do or only pretend to think conservatives are racists, and as such have absolutely no problem believing a strict constructionist for consistency’s sake must have opposed the 13th amendment. They are also periodic morons, so I’m not surprised.

[OneWingedShark]

You can be a strict constructionist but still think the constitution could be amended.

Actually in order to be a strict Constitutionalist you must believe that the Constitution may be amended, for in the unamended Constitution itself it lays forth the process for amending itself.