Wednesday Open Thread
Markets down again after fed provides $85B bridge loan to AIG for an 80% stake in the company.
Ahnold is vetoing the CA budget . CA AG and former Gov. Jerry Brown called the budget "a mess" and said the budget sent to the governor's desk does not solve the state's financial crisis and only pushes the problems into next year. Schwarzenegger had urged lawmakers to come up with long-term solutions.
Open thread -- what's on your mind as we hit the middle of another eventful week?
Submitted by Brendan on Wed, 2008-09-17 10:48
Tags:

Comments :
Dem energy plan passed the house
story
Republicans don't like it because it doesn't open the whole OCS (offshore oil), doesn't support new nuclear plants, and most importantly it kills the reps best issue for November. The senate fight will be interesting, and the Whitehouse may veto.
If Bush does Veto the dems should flip the tables and start pointing to the republicans as obstructing relief at the pumps, although it is unclear whether gas price relief will continue to be the highest issue (people acclimatize so easily).
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
Filibuster
At least, thats what I'd think.
If they run out the clock, the offshore ban runs out and oil companies get free reign to do whatever they want offshore (still subject to leases, but literally anywhere they want -- even as close as 3 miles offshore).
No need for Bush to get out the veto stamp when the Senate can do his work for him.
I never broke the law; I am the law! --
George W. BushJudge DreddI'm listening to...
Sucks! Backstabbed by...
...Buchanan, Castle, Gilchrest, Hayes, Inglis, Jones , Kirk, Knollenberg, LaHood, LoBiondo, Porter, Ramstad, Reichert, Shays, and Smith!
“Back in the thirties we were told we must collectivize the nation because the people were so poor. Now we are told we must collectivize the nation because the people are so rich.” ~ William F. Buckley, Jr.
Hehe
Gilchrest got primaried. He's voting his conscience (which tended to be on the left side of the party).
And Shays is trying to keep the GOP shut out in New England. I think this is his last hurrah.
I never broke the law; I am the law! --
George W. BushJudge DreddI'm listening to...
Funny Kos post
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/9/17/74214/0916/698/601376
I LOL'd.
I never broke the law; I am the law! --
George W. BushJudge DreddI'm listening to...
Priceless........ (!)
The People's Insurance Company, the People's Mortgage Companies and the People's Investment Banks.
One world. One bank. One insurance company. Globalization of the free markets is on the march.
Your freedom to invest.
It is the economy, stupid.
Be sure to visit the People's Dividend Ministry
I've already registered for my AIG dividend check. Have you, comrade?
I never broke the law; I am the law! --
George W. BushJudge DreddI'm listening to...
Where is the capitol
of this new One World, One People's Bank, Abu Dhabi?
Yes I think I am registered.
Will have to wait for the 'restructuring' to see for sure if my pension fund is still alive and well.
It is the economy, stupid.
Does the People's Insurance Ministry
have a five-year plan?
And when can we expect State Farm and Allstate executives to be arrested for illegally interfering in the people's business?
qui tacet consentire
Please excuse me
for just a moment while I indulge my partisan leanings.
Sarah the 'reform' candidate keeps talking about shaking up that 'old boy network in Washington.
One of Obama's main themes in his campaign has been against lobbyists running Washington.
Music to my ears.
It is the economy, stupid.
McCain's strategy
I think his strategy is not unlike the "Big Lie" which Hitler charged that Jews were using:
McCain is attacking Obama on his strengths, which are precisely his weaknesses. He's going out of his way to make incredibly grand lies about Obama and his own record in order to make them more believable. Most particularly is the notion that the gentleman who is a product of a long line of admirals and is so well-to-do that he cannot remember how many properties he owns is the man of the people, while a biracial gentleman who was raised on food stamps by a single mother is the snooty, country club elitist.
And before anyone gets "uppity", I'm not insinuating anything about McCain being Hitler or anti-semitic in any way.
I never broke the law; I am the law! --
George W. BushJudge DreddI'm listening to...
The lie that was so bold
so audacious, and so grand, that no one dared think it was a lie. See Iraq!
I feel they are using the same strategy for McCain. Especially re: Palin as having the grasp of knowledge to run the country. Even some pretty heavy weight conservatives see this move by McCain as politically expedient, but not putting country first.
You have to wonder, how many enemies did McCain make of some of the heavier hitting Republicans in the inner circles.
McCain's biggest strength has been his 'honor' which seems to be going down the tubes.
It is the economy, stupid.
Barry is a joke...He is transparent all right...
...if you're willing to see the truth?
“Back in the thirties we were told we must collectivize the nation because the people were so poor. Now we are told we must collectivize the nation because the people are so rich.” ~ William F. Buckley, Jr.
Wow. That was deep
Got anything that isn't from the Ministry of Propaganda?
qui tacet consentire
Hard to take huh...I know, i know...
...with Barry beating the streets lying about this...but surely you're used to it by now?
“Back in the thirties we were told we must collectivize the nation because the people were so poor. Now we are told we must collectivize the nation because the people are so rich.” ~ William F. Buckley, Jr.
You can have an impoverished background
and still grow up to be an elitest, and you can be rich and still care about and respect the comman people. For McCain to portray Obama as an elitest isn't a lie (he's certainly opened himself up to that charge when talking about rural folks), it's simply portraying one side of the story, which is what campaigning is about.
Dude is this out of the Obama playbook or what?
This is libeal political tactics 101! LOL!
“Back in the thirties we were told we must collectivize the nation because the people were so poor. Now we are told we must collectivize the nation because the people are so rich.” ~ William F. Buckley, Jr.
Do you have anything of substance
Or just a bunch of tired old one-liners?
qui tacet consentire
Read your last few posts and ask yourself that Q! LOL!
“Back in the thirties we were told we must collectivize the nation because the people were so poor. Now we are told we must collectivize the nation because the people are so rich.” ~ William F. Buckley, Jr.
Ya, all we'd have to add is
Gov. Jim Hodges, Jim Demers, Helen Foley, ,Rose McKinney-James and Billy Vassiliadis from Obama's campaign, awe heck considering;
There are so many lobbyists working on Obama's campaign it's hard to keep 'em all straight!
Such hypocrisy!
“Back in the thirties we were told we must collectivize the nation because the people were so poor. Now we are told we must collectivize the nation because the people are so rich.” ~ William F. Buckley, Jr.
2 wrongs make a right!
How does that show that the McCain camp isn't too heavily influenced by lobbyist and the "Maverick" isn't really a Maverick.
Or are you going with the strategy of "Ya, McCain is a the most lizard like of all the lizards, but Obama is also a lizard.
"
In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
Pretty obvious if you consider the reason we are having this...
...conversation.
Obama is the one running his mouth making more egregious claims, this time it's this nonsense of he does not have lobbyists working in his campaign, and he does not take lobby money or PAC money, which is BS.
McCain has been able for 26 years to balance his relationships with Washington, and still not vote for their earmarks!
Obama took almost A BILLION DOLLARS IN EARMARKS in the short time he has been in the US Senate!!!!!!
That's why.
“Back in the thirties we were told we must collectivize the nation because the people were so poor. Now we are told we must collectivize the nation because the people are so rich.” ~ William F. Buckley, Jr.
More music
Team Obama using Rush Limbaugh's own words in a Spanish Language ad.
It's about time somebody quoted that blowhard.
Remember how well McCain stood up to his own party on immigration reform?
It is the economy, stupid.
Market news
DJIA down 450 pts.
NASDAQ down 100 pts.
S&P down 50 pts.
The DJIA is flirting with sub 10,000 levels.
The NASDAQ is very close to going below 2,000.
I never broke the law; I am the law! --
George W. BushJudge DreddI'm listening to...
Silver Lining:
It needs to happen.
Dark Cloud:
The government won't let correction get itself over with without making it worse along the way.
*bizarre*
I don't pretend to understand the inner workings, because *who does*.
What I completely don't understand is this reluctance of banks to lend to each other??? Or why they would????
I also really really do not understand why oil has suddenly tanked. I mean it sure seems like someone somewhere is pulling the strings to drop the price of oil. It makes no sense to me.
It is the economy, stupid.
Stocks Finish at 3-Year Low on Bank Panic
All 30 Dow components lost for the day as did all but 10 on the 100 stocks on the tech-heavy Nasdaq.
The last time the Dow saw this territory was November 2005 and the S&P 500 hasn't been here since May of the same year...Morgan Stanley plummeted more than 40 percent to a five-year low....The overall slump reflected a sense that the worst had not passed for the markets and the economy, despite the recent blowout of bad news. The worries seemed focused especially on liquidity and the refusal overnight of banks to lend.
I can't address all the concerns about "the Market". As far as all the bad mortgage paper out there, there has to be some way to go back over all the Securities Wall Street created and identify the bad paper from the good paper. Once folks have an idea what the true value of the securities is, they will be able to sell them or keep them.
Welcome to the nightmare. I'm still waiting to see some yahoo blame President Clinton for it all.
Too Big to Fail
The answer seems to be getting bigger.
Tons of mergers in the works.
Bizarre!
It is the economy, stupid.
The seeds of the next problem
are being planted. this is all wrong and will not work itself out for the long run good.
The old seeds
were/are the beauty of globalization. Free markets = free people. While that philosophy sounds nice, the interconnectedness of this mess on supposedly the sub-prime mortgage crises in housing, that would collapse the world markets, is illogical.
Obviously the housing crises is not the problem. It's the way the keep the books.
AIG could not be allowed to fail. The books were too crooked. Who is asking for these ratings mark to market. That is what is causing the collapse of the markets.
Pressure brought to bear on these giants to tell us what is on their books. It's not an unreasonable question. That it can't be answered is a mark of wide spread, pervasive global greed!
It is the economy, stupid.
How so?
Really, what is the rooted connection between globalization and the current mess?
And at the risk of you completely misinterpreting my point, here goes:
No, the housing "crisis" is the problem. Books are kept however they are. Those standards are the results of a combination of practice, experience and and government mandates in light whatever they thought mattered at the time they were created. They seemed to serve their purpose well though they were surly never perfect.
In hindsight, when something happens to make the existing public and private mixture of institutions to perform XYZ task seem inadequate...like ratings...the first question is:
What happened? By that, I don't mean "what happened to the regulation?" but what happened to the market to make the current structure a problem.
What happened (and yes, I know you've heard this before) is that there was a housing boom for artificial reasons and home prices began to shoot up and alter behavior of market actors. Now, you can say that that, in itself, is OK and that we should adjust regulations to it. I say NO. What's the point of adjusting regulations to something that shouldn't be happening under normal market conditions?
That's like seeing someone go on a carb binge for 6 months and after they are over weight, risking diabetes and lacking protein and fats, we say:
"Well, someone should have regulated you and made you take carb-blocker pills and vitamin/mineral supplements and there wouldn't have been so much of a problem...VOILA!"
No. The person shouldn't have gone on a carb binge. Period.
And as soon as the home price bubble could no longer sustain itself, the numbers didn't add up anymore.
"Well, there should have been more accounting and ratings regulations!"
That's the same as saying the person should have taken carb blockers and supplements.
So what happens if we force the person to take carb blockers and supplements and they stop eating so many carbs? then what? Now they are on a fat binge....while taking supplements for protein and fat and carb blockers for the few barbs they eating.
You see? Now, in our real life scenario, nobody notices or cares about the previous regimen or its context.
Now, I know you don't care to see it this way. But if you're going to assess blame, look at what you're blaming in a larger context.
If a dam bursts from too much rain, we don't blame the river banks for not being high enough.
remember:
the real price of anything (money, homes, real estate, risk...anything) is always present in any market...no matter how distorted...and will always assert itself in the end regardless of any tricks that make them appear to be otherwise or any attempts to make the discords not matter or be excused.
The rooted connection is
obviously (unregulated ) capitalism (of investment banks.)
Note that this mess extends beyond US boundaries.
These other for profit capitalist entities involved are not subject to the US government or US laws, which is the consistent enemy in your theories.
What happened is that to gain competitive advantage other investment agencies on a global scale copied the model of creative accounting I will call the Enron model.
The force behind all of this is competitive advantage.
The best metaphor I can think of is the steroids scandal in baseball. Everyone knew it was wrong, but it worked. At first it seemed harmless enough, but then it became so pervasive that to keep that edge in the game everyone was doing it to stay competitive. To the point where managers, and everyone else were looking the other way, and breaking the law, becoming more secretive.
The difference in your scenario is that if someone else takes carb blockers it doesn't affect the value of my home, or the dollar amount that I or anyone else is being charged to borrow money.
It is the economy, stupid.
???
What exactly do you mean here?
What are you referring to here?
All by itself? Funny how that seems to work well in other areas. Must be something else at play that perverting the game. See my comments in the previous post.
The problem with your baseball scenario is that it didn't spill over into anything else and also that the use of steroids is ILLEGAL.
If you read my scenario correctly as it was intended, it's clear the carb over-eater represents the entire market.
BTW, you didn't really respond to my post. ;) Tsk.
Oh it's all process
Is that the answer you want?
I don't want to discuss economic theory. I would rather discuss what is really happening.
There are way too many Greenspan dollars on the market, because of his irrational fear of Stalinism.
It is the economy, stupid.
What's really happening?
That's what I'm talking about.
Who's talking about theory other than you by referencing it?
Nobody.
What does this mean?
Palin's personal email account hacked
Gawker
has the details.
Apparently she used the account for official business, which is a major no-no.
I never broke the law; I am the law! --
George W. BushJudge DreddI'm listening to...
So much for liberals and the rule of law ...
hopefully those who hacked her account will be prosecuted.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
MM has an account of the details behind the story ...
for those who are interested:
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/17/the-story-behind-the-palin-e-mail-hacking/
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
Details...Come on baby....
Who needs details?
It was obviously an attempt by the Republicans to garner sympathy for SP.
And we all know that Dick Cheney and GW authorized it.
It is typical Christian manipulation of the media.
Besides MM is to biased to be taken seriously!
LOL! ;-)
Can't wait to see that MF'r get locked down!
“Back in the thirties we were told we must collectivize the nation because the people were so poor. Now we are told we must collectivize the nation because the people are so rich.” ~ William F. Buckley, Jr.
/b/
Lolcats originated there
In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
Hold on a sec....
...I was only kidding when I said you're having one sided conversations with yourself...or was I? LOL! ;-)
“Back in the thirties we were told we must collectivize the nation because the people were so poor. Now we are told we must collectivize the nation because the people are so rich.” ~ William F. Buckley, Jr.
Instead of using a roller
you might want to try a finer brush.
Try "Democrats" instead of "liberals" next time. The two are not synonyms, you know.
And for all you know it was an escaped libertarian zombie mutant rather than some liberal that did the cracking. Most crackers are libertarians and/or anarchists of some sort.
I never broke the law; I am the law! --
George W. BushJudge DreddI'm listening to...
Why bother with facts
when you can leap to conclusions?
It must have been liberal haters of America!!!!!!!
qui tacet consentire
Hey Qualude - You see a video with "FACTS"...
...and just poo poo it as propaganda.
If it is propaganda prove it.
I'll tell you right here and right now you can't.
Those were facts, rock solid facts.
But you have little interest in the facts, because facts shine light on Barry, and as so much of what have learned about him - it is best left in the shadows.
“Back in the thirties we were told we must collectivize the nation because the people were so poor. Now we are told we must collectivize the nation because the people are so rich.” ~ William F. Buckley, Jr.
Its a fact that the hackers were liberal? n/t
In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
Probably - almost to a certainly - but...
...that's not what I was talking to HIM about.
“Back in the thirties we were told we must collectivize the nation because the people were so poor. Now we are told we must collectivize the nation because the people are so rich.” ~ William F. Buckley, Jr.
Qualude? Barry?
And you misspelled it too.
qui tacet consentire
One must adapt to fit the situation..;-) Was just teasing... n/t
“Back in the thirties we were told we must collectivize the nation because the people were so poor. Now we are told we must collectivize the nation because the people are so rich.” ~ William F. Buckley, Jr.
Good question
I find the "Barry" moniker is most puzzling.
The original strategy was to emphasis the whole name "Barack Hussein Obama", with even extra emphasis on the middle name. The name sounds foreign (it is) which makes the person attached to that name unamerican.
This "Barry" stuff totally undermines that strategy. Barry is that guy down the street who helps the old lady mow her lawn. Barry is the popular football player at the high school.
I don't get it. Perhaps our conservative/Republican friends could explain it to us.
I never broke the law; I am the law! --
George W. BushJudge DreddI'm listening to...
No no no Stinerman...
You don't know Barry...
Barry is that guy with the Alinsky handbook rabble rousing down the street.
He's the guy doing backroom deals with Tony and chumming up to the radical fringe elements in the neighborhood.
He's the guy runs for state office by having the competition knocked of the ballots, so there is no vote.
He's the guy who once in office votes present and gives taxpayer earmarks to his wife's employer and good old Tony, but nothing else much changes in the hood.
He's the guy who now runs for US senate, but never gets anything done for his constituents because he spends his whole first term campaigning for yet another office, this time he thinks it's all been so easy why not POTUS?
This is the guy who joined the racist church in town for political gain, and he liked it, he sat and listened to the vile hate speech for years, even had the sinister grand master marry him, good thing his wife is racist too, and baptize his kids? He loved the sick old man and his thinking. Until it became known and was thought to be a problem for his cake walk, I mean coronation, I mean campaign, so he cut the old man off at the knees denouncing him publicly hoping people would forget it.
He's the guy who is that Alinsky kid at heart, but now turned his back on all that he believed and all those in the fringe element in a desperate hope of cloaking his true feelings just long enough to get elected.
...Should I continue, or do you get the idea that Barry is not such a great guy after all, and it doesn't matter what you call him, or what he say's, he is what he is.
“Back in the thirties we were told we must collectivize the nation because the people were so poor. Now we are told we must collectivize the nation because the people are so rich.” ~ William F. Buckley, Jr.
Ohhh kayyyyy
Must have hit a nerve there.
I never broke the law; I am the law! --
George W. BushJudge DreddI'm listening to...
Conservatism can't fail, only people can fail conservatism.
Former National Review publisher Wick Allison endorses Obama and says:
"[T]oday it is so-called conservatives who are cemented to political programs when they clearly don’t work. The Bush tax cuts—a solution for which there was no real problem and which he refused to end even when the nation went to war—led to huge deficit spending and a $3 trillion growth in the federal debt. Facing this, John McCain pumps his “conservative” credentials by proposing even bigger tax cuts. Meanwhile, a movement that once fought for limited government has presided over the greatest growth of government in our history. That is not conservatism; it is profligacy using conservatism as a mask.
Today it is conservatives, not liberals, who talk with alarming bellicosity about making the world “safe for democracy.” It is John McCain who says America’s job is to “defeat evil,” a theological expansion of the nation’s mission that would make George Washington cough out his wooden teeth.
This kind of conservatism, which is not conservative at all, has produced financial mismanagement, the waste of human lives, the loss of moral authority, and the wreckage of our economy that McCain now threatens to make worse.
I now see that Obama is almost the ideal candidate for this moment in American history. I disagree with him on many issues. But those don’t matter as much as what Obama offers, which is a deeply conservative view of the world. Nobody can read Obama’s books (which, it is worth noting, he wrote himself) or listen to him speak without realizing that this is a thoughtful, pragmatic, and prudent man. It gives me comfort just to think that after eight years of George W. Bush we will have a president who has actually read the Federalist Papers.
Most important, Obama will be a realist. I doubt he will taunt Russia, as McCain has, at the very moment when our national interest requires it as an ally. The crucial distinction in my mind is that, unlike John McCain, I am convinced he will not impulsively take us into another war unless American national interests are directly threatened."
The rats, they are jumping off the listing ship of Republicanism. Unlike Republicans like Tom DeLay & Karl Rove, I don't want to kill Republicanism. I just want the people that vote for the current leaders to see that the fruition of their votes. There's a place for conservatism in this world. There is also a place for those who hijacked conservatism, but I don't think it's in this world per say.
Alright I know who I'm voting for...
one hint:
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
Teacher Accused Of Showing Porn In Class
A high school teacher in Arizona is accused of unwittingly show porn during class.
"Torture porn, of like girls being tied up."
Maybe my high school physics teacher wasn't playing fantasy sports during class.
In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
Not the usage of "torture porn" I'm used to.
What the kid described sounds like BDSM. The movie Saw is torture porn.
Kids these days...
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
lulz
"Criticism:"
Influential director George A. Romero
has stated, "I don’t get the torture porn films", "they're lacking metaphor.
O. J. Simpson: Juice on the Loose
In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
Flip-flopping is ok if you end up in the "right" spot
"McCain Makes Sharp Right Turn on Stem Cells"
In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
Where does John McCain say he's going to not fund any ESCR?
On John McCain website, it says he's will fund all forms of research that's non-Embryonic, while this may seem to imply that he's going to fund embryonic research, that's not what it says, and he's had this statement on his website I think without ever making a statement changing his postion on ESCR. I don't know that he's ever changed his position. I think he's always been against certain forms of ESCR.
You think he'll fund something
he wants to criminalize? Am I missing something, here?
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
As far as I can tell he
As far as I can tell he wants to crimnalize producing Embryos for the sake of research. I believe his position before was that he was in favor of researching embryos which were slated for distruction. I don't see the change.
What's the differeence between burning the embryos or using
them? Right now, excess fertilized embryo's are either incinerated in a medical burn waste plant or used to help us understand our physiology.
I just don't get that part of the moral argument against using stem cells for science because those cells are getting killed no matter what. How is one form of killing them more immoral than another?
If you wanted to actually stop the practice you'd have to support making fertility treatments for women illegal. Are you willing to do that?
McCain has wiggle room to make all ESCR illegal.
McCain "supports" ESCR for existing lines of embryos, but most are worthless, I would also like to know his definition of "embryos created for science" and whether someone embryos created with approval of extra being used for stem cell research would be criminal.
In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
It now looks like McCain has effectively zero support of ESCR
I took the article's wording at face value:
'The new stance is an abrupt reversal for the Arizona senator"
McCain has uncertain support
for any form of ESCR. It looks like McCain will completely pigeon hole any funds for ESCR until other "scientific breakthroughs" happen.
"McCain also indicates his support for ESCR alternatives, which some say he will prioritize as president [sic]"
In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
Christians are being played by McCain.
Look how many positions he's flip flopped around on since the 90's. He doesn't have any positions of his own it seems so much as he adopts the positions of those he think will get him elected.
We've all seen the drill. Republicans claim these real lofty principles and goals of adhering to Christian doctrine only to do squat when they get elected. Here's the Republican Presidents that have pulled that one on the hard core christians: Reagan, Bush41, & now bush43. Do you really think McSame is going to be any different?
PT Barnum had a saying for those of you who believe McCain. Had something to do with suckers being born every minute or something.
Before someone else gets to it
"But look at these Barry flip flops [ignore McCains]."
In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
Perfect - Good for you - Makes for your kind of conversations...
...all one sided.
“Back in the thirties we were told we must collectivize the nation because the people were so poor. Now we are told we must collectivize the nation because the people are so rich.” ~ William F. Buckley, Jr.
All three Republican presidents have done a much better job
in getting judicial nominees.
No John, you don't get it...
...you are under the impression they want Justices who try their best to interpret the constitution and apply that to make laws.
They don't.
They want Justices who will find any way to actively further their liberal agenda.
They will tell you what is lawful or not...whether it is constitutional or not is of little concern.
“Back in the thirties we were told we must collectivize the nation because the people were so poor. Now we are told we must collectivize the nation because the people are so rich.” ~ William F. Buckley, Jr.
Liberal justices
There is more than one way to read the Constitution. It is not as if conservatives read the Constitution "correctly" and liberals actively try to subvert it, they just happen to disagree about what it says. You don't really believe Barbara Lee gets up in the morning and thinks to herself "oh, yet another day of trashing the Constitution" do you? Everyone's heart is in the right place (well, for the most part), but they just differ on the views.
I happen to agree with the originalists more than anyone else, but your or my reading of the Constitution is not inherently more correct than anyone else's.
I never broke the law; I am the law! --
George W. BushJudge DreddI'm listening to...
Liberals are generally on the side of the living constitution
I think the constitution is what those who enacted it meant it to mean, and that's how it get's it democratic validity. To have a document mean whatever you think it should mean rather than what it actually means, is to trash that document in my mind. If you translate my comment to say something that I clearly did not mean, than you are trashing my comment, because my comment is nothing without it's intending meaning.
Now there are liberals who are Originalist for example one of my favorite legal scholars, Akhil Amer. However, they're doesn't seem to be that many of this type. Most liberals adhere to rejecting the real meaning of the constitution in favor of an interpretation based on what they think the constitution should mean. Now, you can argue for this method of "interpretation", but ultimately its not respecting the constitution as a law itself - its just a tool to make law.