Whether we a talking about a "living" Constitution or "living" borders, the real-world impact is the same: In effect, no Constitution, no borders, arbitrary law, and social chaos.
That's not good for individuals, for societies, or for nations. Not unless you like mayhem in law or mayhem along the border.
Admittedly, such mayhem could be seen by some as unfortunate but necessary crises along the way to an America really helped by people from Washington. That would include statists such as Obama, the Democrats, and too many unenlightened Republicans.
But Americans who care about freedom, dignity, and plain old staying alive and unkidnapped may want to suggest Obama change course.
Charges of racism, etc., etc., etc., blah, blah, blah, will continue to defend the current dysfunctional, out-of-the-mainstream-of-America regime. You can count on the formerly mainstream media to do its "patriotic" duty for the motherland.
J. Robert Smith at American Thinker suggests a way to climb out of the foxholes in Texas, Arizona, and other border states and go on the offensive.
"The key to end-running Mr. Obama is to factually assert that he's failing his oath of office," Smith writes.
"To turn a blind eye to America's porous southern border makes a mockery of Mr. Obama's constitutional oath to protect and defend the United States. It flouts the nation's immigration laws, thereby undermining respect for law generally."
Smith concludes: "The charge of dereliction of duty against Mr. Obama needs to be made over and over again until it sticks to him like superglue."
Obama and his radicals despise the rules for freedom. Their arbitrary "living" values pale in comparison to the ethical facts and liberating content of the actual Declaration and actual Constitution.
That's why on questions of borders, illegal aliens, and a host of other issues, Obama & Co. must decrease if freedom in America is to increase.