If the rush to populism for the GOP candidates was not stomach churning enough, today we get treated to Mike Huckabee on CNN this morning, stating a time-honored Mantra of the Left that the Constitution is a “Living, breathing document written in order that it could be changed”. He was answering the question about whether or not the Constitution was a secular document, or a religious one. He then added: “The scriptures however were not written so we would change them to adapt them to ever-changing cultural norms”.
Funny that Huckabee, claiming that he wears the mantle of Reagan Conservatism (which his record clearly shows that he is not), while rightfully believing the scriptures are not adaptable to cultural change – somehow now thinks that the Constitution should change to “adapt them to ever-changing cultural norms”. If that be the case then Mr. Huckabee – you just shot down your own Marriage Amendment idea since the cultural zeitgeist of the moment desires or is indifferent to Homosexual marriage.
The truth is, he is parroting liberal socialist beliefs that the Constitution is amendable to whatever whim the culture brings along. If it is that easy to change, as we would taking in a breath – why bother having a Constitution at all? Let’s bend with every political wind that blows.
But outside of the obvious answer to that absurd notion, apparently Huckabee is in a state of contradiction. Contrary to his statement this morning on CNN, his campaign website says the opposite:
I firmly believe that the Constitution must be interpreted according to its original meaning, and flatly reject the notion of a “living Constitution.”
So which is it?
I’m beginning to think that Huckabee has the same disease that the Clinton’s have: expedient ideas stated for the moment. Must be something in the air in Arkansas where you can say one thing to one crowd, disagree with yourself on your own webiste and then flatly deny all of them on camera.
The spin cycle on this election cycle’s campaigns is dizzying beyond all reason.
So how will Huckabee spin this particular contradiction? Will his excuse be that he didn’t write that part of his own web site, or that he didn’t read it?
Ron Paul already pulled that number of denying he wrote or had anything to do with the racist anti-semetism of his newsletters that he says he now does not agree with.
I suppose if that excuse works for Ron Paul, then obviously it’s worth a shot for the Huckabee campaign.
After all, charges of anti-semitism and racism are harder to dodge than when one starts sounding like a liberal Democrat.