[Strict vs. Liberal Construction of the Constitution: A Bogus Issue](http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1437748/posts:)

To me, it seems very simple. The Constitution, by its terms, and by the oath required of all office holders (including judges) is the “supreme law of the land,” and is unquestionably binding on the judiciary. The Constitution contains its own rules of construction, which are also binding on the judiciary:

# The list of rights enumerated in the Constitution is not to be construed as a complete list.

2. The list of powers delegated to the federal government is a complete list.

In other words, it’s not a matter of personal choice. All judges are bound by oath to use liberal construction with respect to our rights, and strict construction when it comes to the government’s powers. Anyone appointed to the judiciary should readily agree with this, or he’s unqualified to hold office.

Yes… please Mr. President… take these words to heart.

[Dictionary.com Word of the Day](http://dictionary.reference.com/wordoftheday/:) “flummox: to confuse; to perplex.”

[CNET News.com](http://news.com.com/Windows+flaw+reaches+beyond+XP/2100-1002_3-5793344.html?part=rss&tag=5793344&subj=news:) “A security flaw that could let an attacker remotely crash computers running Windows exists in several versions of the operating system, not just Windows XP.”