Midknight Review explains the difference between a living document versus the rule of the people.

In case you missed it, there is a disclaimer on the inside cover of this copy of the
US Constitution published by Wilder Publications. Its been there for more than
two years. They say the disclaimer applies to all historic books they
publish as if that makes a difference to a true American. At best, the effect of
this warning is to cement in the mind of the student, the notion that the
Constitution is a "living document" with very little meaning for the 21st
century citizen. Marxist/socialists believe in a "living document" in need
of continued appraisal in our court system. True Americans believe in a
historic document that may be in need of amendment by the people, from
time to time. The difference? On the one hand, the elitists run roughshod
over the middle class (especially) ; on the other hand, the entire nation
participates in the process of self-governance. Again, under the traitorous
notion of the Constitution as a "living document," only the courts and the
legislature can decide what is best for the people. Under a system of strict
interpretation, changes to the Constitution are made via the process of
national referendum or amendment. One, the later, is the rule of the people;
the other is a rule for kings and tyrants -- jds.

keys: wilder publications, constitution, disclaimer

.