Over the past several weeks, I’ve had exchanges of view about whether the Constitution is a “living, breathing” document with Mr. Schweers. I have challenged him to identify what, exactly, gives the Constitution “life.” He has been, either, unable or unwilling to do so.

So, for the record, the Constitution is, in fact, a “living, breathing” document and it does have a form of “life.” Fortunately, the “life” is not embodied in legislators, lobbyists or judges, as progressive ideologues prefer. At least, it’s not supposed to be.

The founders set forth a hierarchy of governance, with maximum liberty accruing to the individual and only very limited authority for the federal government to tell individuals what to do.

And, they set forth a means (life) for citizens to modify the authority of the federal government to influence their lives.

The form of “life” of the Constitution of the United States is Article V, the amendment process. Article V provides the means for the Constitution, as Chief Justice John Marshall said, “to be adapted to the various crisis of human affairs.”

Progressives don’t like this process. It requires that ideas for change be exposed to open, vigorous, and oftentimes noisy national debate. It does not satisfy their immediate, emotional wants. It requires that people take time to listen to many ideas and actually think about whether they want to relinquish more control over their lives to the Federal Government. It is lengthy and cumbersome. It is supposed to be that way.

Would I like to “Return to The Constitution,” with the Federal Government exercising only the authority authorized by the Constitution? You bet.

And if the desire for individual liberty embodied in the Constitution is “poppycock,” then I like poppycock.