NO FORWARD PASS

The game was coming to an end.

There were only 53 seconds left to play.

The score was Miami 14, the Colts 21.

Miami had the ball on the Colts' 25 yard line.

It was third and ten.

The ball was snapped.

Pennington dropped back to pass.

Suddenly the head official blew his whistle and came running into the middle of the fray.

Play stopped.

"OK!" yelled the official. "No more forward passes."

Pennington turned in amazement, "Say what!?"

"You heard what I said...NO MORE FORWARD PASSES. If you want to play this game, you'll have to run the ball."

"You can't do that!" Pennington was really frustrated.

"Oh yes I can! The NFL has given me the power to change whatever rule I want to, any time I want to. All I have to do is to issue a decree. And I'm issuing one now: NO MORE FORWARD PASSES!"

Wouldn't that just get your goat?

Imagine changing the rules in the middle of the game.

There is a process for changing the rules. But it's not done by the officials on the field.

It's done by the NFL Rules Committee during the off season.

In our country, The United States of America, there is a rule book. It's called The Constitution of the United States of America.

In it there is are four provisions for changing it, two of which have never been used.

They are:
1) Proposal by convention of states, ratification by state conventions (never used)
2) Proposal by convention of states, ratification by state legislatures (never used)
3) Proposal by Congress, ratification by state conventions (used once)
4) Proposal by Congress, ratification by state legislatures (used all other times)

There is a reason numbers one and two have never been used: they are considered radical and potentially dangerous, as they could be used to change the very nature of the Constitution.

Holding a Constitutional Convention would usually be reserved for the purpose of completely altering the fabric of American society and jurisprudence, and reforming it as a new country.

There are those who consider the Constitution a "living document," subject to change at the whim of the nine members of the Supreme Court.

Like the errant football official, they have sought, and in many cases have, changed the rules in the middle of the game, by judicial decree.

They are considered the "liberal" members of the Supreme Court. For them, the Constitution is a "living," "breathing" document that can be changed on the fly, like the breathing of a marathon runner after the race.

The more conservative members of the Court, see the Constitution as "living" and "breathing," but doing so slowly, like the breathing of a Yoga practitioner.

John McCain promises, if elected, to nominate judges to the Supreme Court who understand the intent of the writers of the Constitution, and who would work through the amendment process if changes are needed.

Barack Obama has stated his intent to nominate to the Supreme Court, judges who are activists, who believe they have the power to change what they see as needing change whenever they see the need for change, without going through the process of allowing citizens to have a voice in that change.

Some of you like the latter approach...so you think.

Wait until some activist judges start messing with one of YOUR "sacred cows."

You'll see.