« been contemplating my navel a lot, lately... | Main | a much needed history lesson - part 1 »

Wednesday, 05 March 2008


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


hey Heidi!.."when he came from what most would think to be the most liberal of liberal areas (new york city) in this country"..remember girl..so do I..lol:)..brilliant work !:)

heidianne jackson

yeah, but we all know how unique YOU are, angel...


Great story, Heidianne! He's one of my faves, too. I forget he is as old as he is, though. He is so sharp tongued and quick witted. And, he is always right.

Webb Sloane's Grandma

The caliber of judges appointed by Reagan, and the ones he tried to appoint, i.e. Bork, is light years ahead of anyone Clinton gave us. For example, Ginsburg has hinted at abolishing Mother's Day because it is demeaning. Have you ever heard of anything more ridiculous than that?

Thanks for the informative post.


Yeah, he's so smart he's sexy. The guy can just do it off the top of his head and makes so much sense. Scalia is one of Great Satan's Gentleman Intelligentsia.


Heidi, this is a really interesting post. I really think the Constitution is one of the greatest gifts the founding fathers left for their descendants. There are those who would try to tear it down...but it's not so easy.
Interesting blog. I'm blogrolling you.

heidianne jackson

karen, he IS always right - and unapologetic about it.

heidianne jackson

how about the time(s) ruth cited other nations' laws as justification for changing our constitution? in fact, during the speech, scalia commented on the fact that u.s. judges are citing laws from other countries and vice versa as a way to example "evolving morality". what a crock.

thanks for stopping by!

heidianne jackson

courtney - he, is, isn't he?!? just watching him and listening to him as he took questions at the end was so very informative. he knows this stuff backwards and forwards - makes it look easy.

heidianne jackson

aurora, welcome! i'm so glad you stopped by. i agree that it is one of the greatest gifts ever from one group of people to its posterity. it shouldn't be very easy to tear it apart, but with each new activist judge who seeks to help the "living constitution" along it loses more and mre of its power.

btw, i've blogrolled you, too!


Great reflections, Heidi!

Scalia's a great man. I'd like to catch him speak one day as well, and Clarence Thomas too.

I think, actually, when you mentioned his upbringing, that nicely explains how he came to his conservative views.


Interesting, and what a nice opportunity for you to hear one of your idols in person. Good for you and your friend.


Great post and a great blog Heidi, I am very imprssed.


Great and greatly informative post, Heidianne! I, too, am a Constitutional originalist and bristle at the all-too-successful efforts of Leftists to make the document say what they want it to say. And as for the need for flexibility, the Founding Fathers gave us a way to change the Constitution if/when necessary, it's called the amendment process but Leftists don't like it because it's slow and usually results in them losing.

heidianne jackson

donald, nice to see you over here again, thanks for stopping by. i too would like to see justice thomas - ah, maybe someday..

heidianne jackson

thanks, deb, it was a great time - and it was fun to finally meet dee :)

heidianne jackson

wow, dd2 at my humble abode. thanks for stopping by - hope to see you back again!

heidianne jackson

seane-anna, thanks for stopping by, i aways love to hear (read) what you have to say. isn't it funny how the people who believe in the living constitution always balk at the notion of following the rules set forth in the document?

Steve Harkonnen

The discussion of a living Constitution presses on yet our government seems to fail abiding to it. Let's try following what we have first, and then let's consider making amendments to the Constitution.

I have added you to my blog favorites as well. Great site, and thanks for stopping by my blog.


I've got to read that book, sounds interesting and I enjoyed your post. I've often pondered the whole "living, breathing document" issue regarding the Constitution. On one hand I don't think it should be amended at whim, on the other hand, I think that over the years, some amendments which were added made things better, they were with the times. I just don't like messing with it. It's very dangerous should the wrong people do that!

You're on my blogroll now, what a great blog!


heidianne jackson

right you are, steve, but why abide by it when you can just a gaggle of activist judges to shape the words to mean what you want it to mean?!?!

heidianne jackson

jessica, you are 100% correct. the whole reason the amendment process is so lengthy and tough is that the founding fathers wanted to dissuade posterity from modifying the document at whim. and still, a thing like prohibition got through - proof in my mind that the process works as intended, because it was also repealed just a few years later. and just think, many of the people who voted for the amendment to ban alcohol also voted to reinstate it when they realized what the unintended consequences were.

i've blogrolled you too and i'll be back to your site. thanks for stopping by!


Hi, Heidi! Yes, I'm extremely impressed with this man too. Wouldn't it be wonderful if all the Justices were even half as intelligent as he is? He's also extremely witty! :)


In talking with my friends on the left they often comment that the u.s. constitution MUST be a living document in order to make it flexible to the changes that happen as mankind evolves." (Heidianne)

Here's the problem with the Liberal view, America's Founders didn't "live in a bygone age," at least their insights into human nature and the proper role of government weren't "constricted to that bygone age," they were hundreds of years ahead of their time.

In fact, the principles upon which they based this government and its Constitution on, are timeless.

The Constitution was written precisely to limit/restrict government action, in the belief that LIBERTY (both economic and political) would "provide the most prosperity for the most people." Indeed it DOES.

The Constitution ensured LIMITED government, private property rights and individual responsibilty/self-ownership...IF those principles need to be tweaked that can ONLY be in the direction oF even LESS government intervention, LESS government power, MORE strict protections for PROPERTY RIGHTS (keeping what one earns) and MORE individualism over communalism.

How can that be so?

Because it is communalism/tribalism - the group identity and group sharing - that socialsim is based. Socialism = primitivism.

MORE Liberty, LESS government is the future of mankind, whether that is good for all...or not.

There is no question that it is "GOOD" for the vast majority and even for those who'd fail - they'd at least failed on their own merits or lack thereof, within a free society.

The problem is not merely collectivists and people who don't like America's Founding Design calling for activism from the bench, it's that these people, are, by and large, primitives who espouse a tribalist/communalist viewpoint, rooted in feudalism and hair-brained redistributionist schemes.

There is simply no rational way to argue that America's Founding design was flawed in that it delivered too much Liberty and self-responsibility (as critics maintain)....if anything, that Liberty (self-responsibility) espoused back then should be expanded.

That's how I'd respond to a "Liberal critic" supporting Leftist judicial activism.


Great post my friend, I have been highly impressed with Justice Scalia when I have heard him speak or in interviews from his wit to the depth of his knowledge and wisdom concerning the Constitution. What a great opportunity you had to see him live, it is one I would enjoy immensely. The simplicity and depth of the words the Founders used in writing our Constitution should never be taken lightly or changed to fit the whims of an uninformed mob rule mentality or activist jurists. It however is not our defining document, The Declaration of Independence is and the Constitution just set down the rules and limits of governance.

Fu Manchu Dad

You have no idea how awesome it is to find a well-informed right winger like yourself. You are now my favorite right up there with Michelle Malkin. And that's saying something. Keep it up and I've blogrolled ya'.....Totally!

Take Care


heidianne jackson

goat, what a great comment. in fact, it is the inspiration to the post i am now working on. thanks!

heidianne jackson

fu manchu dad i am honored beyond words. thanks for stopping by - i blogrolled your site, too and i'm glad to have found you!


Excellent post Heidi!! Sorry it took me so long to get over here. I've had an insane week. I'm writing up part 2 right now and I'm going to link to this post and 2 others that also attended.

And yes, high on my list is to hear Clarence Thomas speak some day.


i am gonna show this to my friend, guy

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner