If the framers of the Constitution thought it was an imperfect document why do right-wingers criticize anybody?

Because they don't understand the Constitution was meant to be both rigid and flexible at the same time. They don't understand the massive amount of COMPROMISE that created the Constitution

It's a contract between the pre-existing states and the new federal government given new federalist powers in 1787. It cannot be changed without permission of the states and no one, not even the Supreme Court, has the right to "reinterpret" it. It is modified only by permission of three quarters of the states since they are the other party in the contract.

The Bill of Rights was demanded by anti-Federalist farmers and tradesmen who didn't trust Hamilton's Federalist Party dominated by bankers and merchants. That codicil guaranteed citizens rights. It included their right to military arms for fighting with or against the formal militia the Federalists wanted to protect their businesses from rebellions like Shays was against Massachusetts banks.

PS: The slave owners wanted their slaves to count fully in the census but Northern Federalist English descendants didn't want that because the southern Scots-Irish would dominate congress then. More freemen were in the North and the Federalist commercial interests would dominate if they weren't counted. Even at a 3/5 count the Federalists initially dominated until 1800 when the Democratic-Republican (now called just Democrat) farmers and tradesmen took control. They kept it until the Civil War took it from them and gave it back to the bankers and merchants in the newly formed Republican Party.

You asked the same question this morning. Didn't you like the answers last time? Here's my answer from this morning! Hope you enjoy it, again....

You're misinterpreting the meaning of what was said.... Compromises had to be made to ensure ratification of the constitution because the anti-federalists wanted an explicit bill of rights. The federalists insisted that all rights were already guaranteed by the stand-alone document. Naturally, you're not expecting that anybody here knows that.

There is a perfectly legitimate way to amend the document, though some people would like to take short-cuts.

Virtually everyone is in agreement that it is not perfect, hence the tools to amend it. What you're probably trying to argue is, why don't the cons buy-in to the most insane interpretations of the radical left.

They didn't , say it need to be scrapped but left it open for amending, I see I have an impersonator

Hence the amendment process.

right wingers won't admit it out loud, but they are most proud of the part in the constitution where black people count for 3/5 of a person

Both sides criticize it and don't abide by it so don't point the finger.

You need to quote bible verses more, not terrorists to the legitimate government of america at the time, can i quote bin laden?