It's a beautiful day...
Posted on 10/27/2008 9:15:23 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
The tape recording of an interview that Barack Obama gave to Radio Station WBEZ in Chicago in 2001 surfaced, and in that interview Mr. Obama, then a law professor and a state senator, lays out how he would redistribute the wealth. He sounds like a man with a plan. ....
Mr. Obama doesn't think much of the Constitution, or even of the Supreme Court justices who have rewritten it over the years to accommodate notions of "social justice." The Warren Court, which wrote finis to public-school segregation with its unanimous Brown v. Board of Education decision in 1954, has been decried since as radical, but it wasn't radical enough. Earl Warren only pretended to be a soldier of the revolution.
One of the "tragedies of the civil-rights movement," Mr. Obama says, is that the Supreme Court did not address redistribution of wealth, probably because of the inherent difficulty of achieving such goals through the courts. The Supreme Court did not break from the restraints of the Constitution and "we still suffer from that." Mr. Obama is not "optimistic" that the Supreme Court can achieve redistribution of wealth - of taking from the workers to give to the deadbeats - but he obviously thinks he knows how to do it. A president with a compliant Congress, which he expects to be in January, can do it through legislation and "administration."
The Barack Obama of this interview clearly does not think much of what the Founding Fathers bequeathed to us: "The Constitution reflected the enormous blind spot in this culture that carries on to this day. The framers had that same blind spot ... the fundamental flaw of this country."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
He's a terrorist mole.
I think the Washington Times site has been hacked. Even if I go directly to their site and try to pull up this article, I get a blank page. Others in this thread are reporting popups and attempts to access their computer.
Half the country is FOR Socialism. That’s a selling point to them.
Transcipt: Chicago Public Radio Interview WBEZ.FM
Good morning and welcome to Odyssey on WBEZ Chicago 91.5 FM
And we’re joined by Barack Obama, who is Illinois State Senator from the 13th District and a senior lecturer in the law school at the University of Chicago
Obama: “…you know if you look at, um, the victories and the failures of the civil rights movement, um, and, its litigation strategy in the court. I think where it succeeded was to vest formal rights, uh, in, previously dispossessed peoples, so that uh I would now have the right to vote, I would now be able to sit at lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it I would be okay, uh, but the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth. Uh, and, served more basic issues of political and, and, uh, economic justice in this society. And, uh, to that extent as radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren court, uh, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed, uh, uh, by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as it’s been interpreted and Warren Court interpreted it in the same way that, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties, says what the states can’t do to you, says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf. Uh, and that hasn’t shifted, and one of the, uh, I think, uh the tragedies of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court-focused, uh I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and, and activities on the ground, that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive, uh, change, uh, and, uh in some ways we still suffer from that.”
[He just said it’s a tragedy the constitution wasn’t radically reinterpreted to force redistribution of wealth for African Americans. And it‘s still an issue today.]
HOST: Let’s talk with Karen, good morning Karen, you’re on Chicago Public Radio.
CALLER: Hi, um, the gentleman made the point that the Warren court wasn’t, uh, terribly radical. My question is — um, with economic changes. My question is, is it to late for that kind of reparative work, economically, and, is that the appropriate place for reparative — economic work to take place…
HOST: you mean the court?
CALLER: the courts, or would it be legislation at this point?
OBAMA: Uh, you know, maybe I’m showing my bias here as a legislator as well as a law professor, but uh, I’m not optimistic about bringing about, uh, major, uh, redistribute, uh, uh, change, uh through the courts, um — you know the institution just isn’t structured that way.
[He doesn’t think the courts can do it but he does think the court can do it legislatively. It isn’t too late]
Uh, um, you know you just should look at very rare examples where during the desegregation era the court was willing to, for example, order uh, uh, you know changes that cost money, to uh, local school district. And the court was very uncomfortable with it, it was hard to manage, it was hard to figure out. Uh, you start getting into all sorts of uh separation of powers issues, uh, you know in terms of, uh, the court monitoring or engaging in a process uh that, essentially, is administrative and takes a lot of time.
[He just said redistribution of wealth is an administrative task!!!]
Um, you know and, the court just isn’t very good at it and politically it’s just it’s very hard to legitimize opinions, from the, uh, from the court in that regard. So I mean I think that, uh, although you can craft theoretical justifications for it legally, um, you know I think you can — any three of us sitting here could, could come up with, uh, a rationale for bringing about economic change through the courts.
[This is not a discussion about whether redistribution of wealth is right or wrong. This is a discussion about how best to do it!!!]
FAST FORWARD TO 2008:
Joe the Plumber: ….plan is going to tax me more. Doesn’t it?
Obama: It’s not that I want to punish your success, I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they’ve got a chance at success too. I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.
Lazy left-wing moonbats would sell out the constitution for a piece of pie....as long as they don’t have to earn, buy or bake the pie themselves.
I was over at Political Punch today - the Jake Tapper ABC blog - and it’s just amazing how many people rationalize the spread the wealth statement. Either they talk around it, they blame the Republicans for something or other, or they outright think this socialism is the way it should be. Many of the comments are made by people who sound like they have the emotional maturity of an 11th grader.
Yeah....we’ve got big problems even if BO loses.
The person "behind" Joe already has a chance a success....the same chance Joe has.
“Socialist” is not “Communist”.
“Socialist” finally crossed their lips in the last week or two.
Where were they all Summer?
A: Playing nice.
I think an intersting question is - if liberals love the Constitution so much, why do they hate justices who interpret it strictly?
And of course honest leftists know the Constitution is a huge obstacle to their cause. But yeah, the average liberal is totally schizo about it.
Commie, Socialist, Fascist, it all fits.
Obama is a National Socialist
www.freerepublic.com ^ | October 27, 2008 | Kevmo
Posted on Monday, October 27, 2008 4:19:47 PM by Kevmo
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2116981/posts
They are truly mentally sick.
I spent the past Saturday surrounded by them while at a football game.
They blame President Bush for our economic problems, and do not mention Dodd, Obama or Pelosi for the responsibility.
They are all crazy.
It's very lonely being a Conservative sometimes.
Obama could be caught having sex with Osama Bin Laden,
confess to killing Elvis
take responsiblity for the Oklahoma City Bombing
Run over a crosswalk full of kids while driving drunk
...... and he would still get the same number of votes
the more that the shocking commie/terrorist information surfaces the better he does
I heard a new one.People are voting for Obama but don’t really like him and feel he won’t last in office and Biden will take over.At last Biden has a reason to be on the ballot:)He is very popular here in PA burgs.
“Not so, in the IBD TIPP poll, undecideds are still running at 10% of the electorate.”
And most are going to break for McCain.
The left just wants enemies of the United States to have unlimited freedom to commit espionage and terrorism. They also want common criminals and deviants to have extensive freedom to destabilize society. That does not mean they want ordinary people to live in freedom. That is why they want to silence Rush Limbaugh but they have no problem with Islamists inciting violence. That is why your Bible is a horrible, offensive intolerant book but pornographic "art" that blasphemes God is a wonderful manifestation of tolerance. That is why they are little troubled by violent criminals using guns but they are horrified that a peaceful citizen keeps a gun in his house. That is why a foreign terrorist has the rights of a citizen while a citizen has no rights.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.