(or, edges of the big tent can't go both ways)
Does anyone else but me find it amusing, and maybe a little unsettling, that the most shrill, insistent voices (No activist judges! Stick to the original intent! What would Alexander Hamilton say?!) for preserving the legal, literal integrity of the U.S. Constitution and the most shrill, insistent voices (Ban flag-burning! Ban same-sex marriage! Term limits for Congress!) for adding knee-jerk, flavor-of-the-month amendments to the U.S. Constitution come from the same side of the political spectrum? It's a broad side, to be sure, but it's still the same Big Tent.
And, though most of those tent-dwellers aren't too happy about people who go both ways, they often seem to want it both ways themselves. You must respect tradition, they say, while lining up to decorate the Constitutional Christmas tree with a whole family-(values)-room full of tacky, tasteless ornaments, hawking homespun images of snow-covered pines but delivering instead the philosophical equivalent of flashing lights and barbarian garland.
I know there's a distinction to be made here between oligarchical judicial tampering and democratic legislative tampering, between the critical will of a few appointed (and confirmed by officials democratically elected, but anyway...) individuals and the collective will of the people (as determined by democratically elected officials, but anyway...), yet the simple fact remains that, whatever Alexander Hamilton wanted then or John Boehner wants now, the U.S. Constitution, in all its foresighted glory, happily harbors both.
Need a judicial interpretation? Bring it on! Want a popular amendment? Let's do it!
Many of those Big Tent Dwellers may seem to want it both ways, but in the end, like all political partisans and persuasions, they really only want it one way: their own. No surprise there. No harm, either. Because the big, sloppy, supple, subtle, originalist, activist beauty of the U.S. Constitution is that it's free to go both ways. Even lots of ways.
You just have to accept that contradiction. Preferably while avoiding one of your own.