Strict Constructionism -- Not the Way to Go

Richard A. Posner, a judge in the seventh district of the United States Court of Appeals, was the author of "What Am I, a Potted Plant?" which happened to be the article I read and summarized in our last class. Posner was one-hundred percent against strict constructionism. I would have to agree with his stance on how the United States constitution should be read, interpreted, and altered. As he states, the founders created a very vague constitution for the people. If we were to follow only the word-for-word instructions, rights, and legislation of the constitution it would be nearly impossible to solve most court cases. The specific situations that cause a case to go to court are not going to be states in the constitution, unless it is a direct violation of the our stated rights. This would make the judicial branch pretty much useless. Wouldn't that throw off the balance of powers set up by the founders when they came up with the idea for a separation of powers between the different branches of government?