Audio: Fred hammers Huckabee for his “living, breathing Constitution” remark
posted at 12:40 pm on January 19, 2008 by Bryan
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
This is from the Mark Levin Show Friday. Fred lays the smack down to Huckabee and gets at a problem with Huck’s much discussed remark that I didn’t hit yesterday — that if you’re in touch with the conservative movement, you know not to insert the words “living” and “breathing” anywhere near the Constitution. It’s code for judicial activism. Huckabee didn’t mean it that way (I think), but his use of that phrase ought to disturb conservatives.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
I’d love to see a vent with Mark Levin!
ctmom on January 19, 2008 at 12:41 PM
Oh, it does. It won’t bother Huckabee supporters a bit, though.
Laura on January 19, 2008 at 12:44 PM
Fred Thompson: continuing to lend credence to Huck’s line of attack that Fred isn’t interested in talking about himself.
Seriously Fred, you just got duped by Huckabee. You fell for his trap hook, line, and sinker.
Probably because you can’t even get your campaign staff in order.
BKennedy on January 19, 2008 at 12:44 PM
Apparently Fred doesn’t mind if McCain takes SC, and the rest of us in the wrong direction.
Speakup on January 19, 2008 at 12:44 PM
Fred is absolutely correct, those words do indeed disturb conservatives. The Huckster looks more and more like Jimmy “Peanut” Carter as this campaign wears on.
Zorro on January 19, 2008 at 12:47 PM
Fred so “gets it”. I love this guy. I also admire that he doesn’t take cheap shots–even recognizes that Huckabee was probably (?) intending to reference an amendment, which was gracious of him. He nails Huckabee on the exact issue here, which is that he’s better at quoting scripture than “talking the talk” of the leader of the free world.
TexasDan on January 19, 2008 at 12:53 PM
Luckily for us, both Michigan and now SC are having bad weather during voting, which is very bad for Huckabee supporters because they are such wimpy ass chicken dumplings:
This is bad for McCain as well because his base support is older Vets and independents, his base support is better than Huckabee’s.
I’m sticking with my prediction.
Mcguyver on January 19, 2008 at 12:56 PM
The argument of a “living and breathing” constitution is totally bankrupt. If the founding fathers didn’t intend the constitution to be cemented in meaning, subject to interpretation, they wouldn’t have seen the need, much less allowed for the process, for amendment.
And who would create a foundational document that is subject to the whims of the times anyway? The whole purpose of the constitution is to protect from distortions, populist or otherwise.
stonemeister on January 19, 2008 at 12:59 PM
Fred Thompson is living and breathing.
THAT should have happened months ago…
Your Jewish Master on January 19, 2008 at 1:00 PM
I said yesterday that Huckabee’s use of the “living breathing constitution” phrase was an ill-advised way to describe his point.
But what is manifestly more disturbing is the fact that a site that is supposedly countering the bias of the mainstream media has developed its own little bias.
It is irresponsible to report this any other way than that Huckabee was referring to constitutional amendments. Adding updates about Fred’s thoughts on this, while utterly refusing to add updates about Huckabee’s response, is, well, biased.
Second look at the MM?
medguy on January 19, 2008 at 1:07 PM
Yet another who believes we must submit to the laws of third world nations. Stupid Hucker!
DannoJyd on January 19, 2008 at 1:09 PM
medguy-
You’re surprised? The blogosphere is an echo chamber.
Your Jewish Master on January 19, 2008 at 1:09 PM
Surprised? No. Disappointed? Yes. This is a sad consequence of postmodernism.
medguy on January 19, 2008 at 1:13 PM
Eugene Volokh (a Fred supporter) agrees with you.
There’s plenty for Thompson to complain about with respect to Huckabee’s ideas about the Constitution, but his “hammering” of Huck for inadvertently stumbling on some “code words” is just silly. I guess that’s all Fred can really do, politically, since he’s proposed or agreed with plenty of new Amendments himself, although he has since backed away from some.
Big S on January 19, 2008 at 1:16 PM
I think it’s best to admit that the Constitution is a living breathing document while pointing out that its respiratory system is the amendment process. It even exhales as well as inhales such as when it inhaled the 18th and exhaled it with 21.
Best we should appropriate the left’s language and then use the language appropriately.
Buddahpundit on January 19, 2008 at 1:16 PM
Fred was asked about this Huckism, and his response is classy and accurate.
http://www.fred08.com
redneck hippie on January 19, 2008 at 1:26 PM
/amused watching all the Fred haters scrambling in this post.
geckomon on January 19, 2008 at 1:42 PM
Gee, Huckleberry’s been using words that demonstrate his ignorance about important issues?
I’m shocked . . . just shocked.
AZCoyote on January 19, 2008 at 1:46 PM
I think it’s possible Huckabee meant that the Constitution simply isn’t dead, meaning that it still demands strict adherence. But even then, what it means is that he heard the phrase “living, breathing Constitution” somewhere, whether from Gore or someone else, thought it was a grand idea, and plugged it into his sales pitch without any further thought about its context or significance. This is, after all, a very ill-informed man, as he has proven several times in the past.
Mark V. on January 19, 2008 at 1:49 PM
That’s what got us into this mess to begin with!
geckomon on January 19, 2008 at 1:50 PM
Gomer Huck……
http://www.flickr.com/photos/21615320@N06/2203519293/in/photostream/
I’m an independant baptist…and he turns my stomach sour with his politics…..
awesum on January 19, 2008 at 1:55 PM
Re-read the post. The point is that Huck is out of touch with the conservative movement. That’s a valid and ongoing complaint.
Yesterday, Bryan plainly acknowledged that Huck was referring to constitutional amendments, and pointed out that he’s still wrong:
Laura on January 19, 2008 at 1:58 PM
Not on the issue of judges, constitutional amendments, and constitutional process. In fact, he’s the one who is most in lock step with the GOP on this front.
I have said that I personally detest “living, breathing” metaphor. The reason is not because the left uses that phrase. The reason is because it personifies a piece of paper. But the knee-jerk reaction that has occurred because Huckabee used that phrase is ridiculous. It is ridiculous because Huckabee clearly did not use the metaphor to mean that the meaning of the document changes at a whim, but rather that the document can be changed through the difficult amendment process.
medguy on January 19, 2008 at 2:10 PM
Will Hot Air please invite Mark Levin to do a vent?
paulsur on January 19, 2008 at 2:27 PM
Stop being a GOP apologist whomever you are…
If you want to lose the general to the DNC…….Keep shucking and jiving for the semi-lib R.I.N.O.’s……
In a general election….with a choice between a TRUE Lib and a HALFWAY Lib…..
Who do you think wins????????????????????
Gomer Huck…….a HalfWay Lib…….
http://www.flickr.com/photos/21615320@N06/2203519293/in/photostream/
awesum on January 19, 2008 at 2:34 PM
P.S.
I’d rather lose a general election to a Full-Lib with a Full-Conservative…….
Than trying to appease the press with a R.I.N.O. candidate and lose to UTTER EMBARRASMENT
awesum on January 19, 2008 at 2:52 PM
That was my very first thought. His supporters seem to be the single-issue evangelical Christian bigots that the leftist press is always shrieking about.
The numbers seem to show that there are fewer of them than the leftists ever said, but more of them than conservatives ever knew. He’s such a fraud; I am sickened by him.
Jaibones on January 19, 2008 at 3:16 PM
In 1999, Sen. Fred Thompson joined legal giants like Sens. Jim Jeffords, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins to vote against removing Bill Clinton from office for perjury.
Thompson, whom President Nixon once called “dumb as hell,” claimed to have carefully studied the Constitution and determined that perjury by the president of the United States did not constitute “high crimes and misdemeanors.” He must have been looking at one of those living, breathing Constitutions we’ve heard so much about.
—Ann Coulter
Fred Sawyer and Huckabee Finn By Ann Coulter
Chakra Hammer on January 19, 2008 at 3:57 PM
Why don’t some of you idiots listen to the posted interview before you comment? He talked about himself, his views on the constitution, responded to some questions about Huck, etc… He also talked about McCain’s faults.
Anybody on here attempting to excuse Huck’s ignorance of conservative principles and totally uneducated and “progressive” view of the constitution are sounding like morons. Why are you even on a “conservative” forum to begin with? This is really getting old.
This is such an ignorant (or trolling) level of comments that I feel like I’m reading YouTube. Fred explained the “living breathing” philosphy clearly, but that should be common knowledge for this group.
nottakingsides on January 19, 2008 at 3:59 PM
S.25
Title: A bill to reform the financing of Federal elections.
Sponsor: (R)Sen McCain, John [AZ] (introduced 1/21/1997) Cosponsors (31)
COSPONSORS(31), ALPHABETICAL
(D)Sen Bingaman, Jeff [NM] - 1/21/1997
(D)Sen Boxer, Barbara [CA] - 1/29/1997
(D)Sen Bryan, Richard H. [NV] - 2/13/1997
(D)Sen Byrd, Robert C. [WV] - 5/9/1997
(D)Sen Cleland, Max [GA] - 1/21/1997
(D)Sen Dodd, Christopher J. [CT] - 1/21/1997
(D)Sen Dorgan, Byron L. [ND] - 9/4/1997
(D)Sen Durbin, Richard [IL] - 1/21/1997
(D)Sen Feingold, Russell D. [WI] - 1/21/1997
(D)Sen Feinstein, Dianne [CA] - 3/17/1997
(D)Sen Ford, Wendell H. [KY] - 1/21/1997
(D)Sen Glenn, John H., Jr. [OH] - 1/21/1997
(D)Sen Graham, Bob [FL] - 1/21/1997
(D)Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 2/6/1997
(D)Sen Johnson, Tim [SD] - 1/21/1997
(D)Sen Kerrey, J. Robert [NE] - 1/21/1997
(D)Sen Kerry, John F. [MA] - 1/21/1997
(D)Sen Kohl, Herb [WI] - 1/21/1997
(D)Sen Leahy, Patrick J. [VT] - 1/21/1997
(D)Sen Levin, Carl [MI] - 2/4/1997
(D)Sen Lieberman, Joseph I. [CT] - 3/10/1997
(D)Sen Mikulski, Barbara A. [MD] - 3/12/1997
(D)Sen Moseley-Braun, Carol [IL] - 1/21/1997
(D)Sen Moynihan, Daniel Patrick [NY] - 2/24/1997
(D)Sen Murray, Patty [WA] - 1/21/1997
(D)Sen Reid, Harry [NV] - 1/21/1997
(D)Sen Robb, Charles S. [VA] - 7/16/1997
(D)Sen Sarbanes, Paul S. [MD] - 4/15/1997
(R)Sen Thompson, Fred [TN] - 1/21/1997
(D)Sen Wellstone, Paul D. [MN] - 1/21/1997
(D)Sen Wyden, Ron [OR] - 1/21/1997
——————
Bi-Partisan bill?
Hmmm… McCain, Fred Thompson and 30 Democrats!
Chakra Hammer on January 19, 2008 at 4:00 PM
Broken record much?
geckomon on January 19, 2008 at 4:46 PM
Fred will go on to Florida
Bill C on January 19, 2008 at 4:49 PM
Wow. It took Fred a while to get to his point. He is painful to listen to on the radio. He does better on television where at least you can watch his head bob and his hand moving in a circular motion.
joncoltonis on January 19, 2008 at 5:01 PM
It would be nice if you would be accurate with your assessment of the article you link to.
csdeven on January 19, 2008 at 7:05 PM
The founding fathers would, apparently, otherwise the courts couldn’t “interpret” the constitution and amendments wouldn’t be allowed. The fact remains that you’re wrong. The constitution is not set in stone. If someone decides to “amend it” or “interpret it” to suit their own twisted purposes they can do it provided they have enough politicians under their control.
Darth Executor on January 20, 2008 at 12:57 PM
Love Fred’s laugh.
That, however, is disturbing.
Tzetzes on January 21, 2008 at 12:43 AM