US

US News

By Andy Goldberg Oct 28, 2008, 7:59 GMT

PREVIEW: Abortion, gay marriage, animal rights on US ballot bids


And Also

The Decade: Film's 10 Best Music Moments In The Aughts


Your Talkback on this Story

Similar articles

Obama's historic election was landmark for race relations (Feature)
Obama victory helps turn page on US racial history (Feature)
Obama seeks expanded civilian role as counter to strained military
US presidential hopefuls share genes with Winston, Angelina
Clinton supporter steps down over racial remarks

Latest Headlines in US

Older Talkback

page: 1 

Obama IS a socialistOct 28th, 2008 - 18:26:55

WOW Redistribution of Wealth From OBAMA's OWN Mouth

This is a major find. This is from Drudge, a Radio interview with Senator Obama where he mourns the fact that the Warren Court Never forced REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH. Partial transcript and Audio Below:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck

Speaking on a call-in radio show in 2001, you can hear Senator Obama say things that should profoundly shock any American — or at least those who have not taken the time to dig deeply enough into this man’s beliefs and affiliations.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck


Barack Obama:

You know, if you look at the victories and failures of the civil-rights movement, and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to vest formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples. So that I would now have the right to vote, I would now be able to sit at a lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it, I’d be okay, but the Supreme Court never entered into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society.

And uh, to that extent, as radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution — at least as it’s been interpreted, and Warren Court interpreted it in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties: [It] 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. And that hasn’t shifted, and one of the, I think, the tragedies of the civil-rights movement was 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 activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change. And in some ways we still suffer from that.

In Obama’s America, we’ll finally be able to break free of the “constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution” — and in so doing, achieve “social justice” through “redistributive change.”

Report this comment

SP4: yeah, rightOct 28th, 2008 - 19:17:27

..as if we did not spot this before.

Report this comment

page: 1 

From Sites we Like

NASA: Evidence of life on Mars [Cool]
Santa Claus fired for making children cry at a Christmas tree lighting event. "He was inept, sullen and incommunicative" [Amusing]
Woman goes on £50,000 spending spree buying trips and cars for her family thinking she was going to die from breast cancer. Turns out the joke was on her when her doctor gave her the "all clear." [Stupid]
More Not News from Fark