The man doesn't understand...that, or he's a complete idealogue. In an interview in 2001, when Barack Obama was a Illionis State Senator, he said this:
"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 invest formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples, so that now I would have the right to vote...I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order and, as long as I could pay for it, I’d be OK.
But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in the society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try 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 the Warren Court interpreted in the same way, 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 doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf."
Let's put aside any underlying arguements about Barack Obama's stance on repairations, and just focus on his sentiment of the founding documents of this country.
If this doesn't convince you that at minimum he believes in Socialism, then I hear Joy Behar has some great Kool-Aid for you.
I believe the Constitution of the United States was divinely influenced. I know some will disagree, and I'm not saying that the Constitution is the word of God by any means. What I'm saying is that it was divine influence that gathered these Founding Fathers together...brilliant minds from many walks of life...and they created this document that is...well...Awesome. Who can look at that great document and see negativity?!
Barack Obama is exactly right. The Constitution doesn't say what the Government must do for us. Because the Founding Fathers believed that too much Government was a problem. That the role of government must be small...but not tyranical. THAT is why it says what the Government CAN'T do. It CAN'T take away our freedoms...right now.
And it is absolutely NOT the role of courts to say what Government can do. There's a reason that Lady Justice is blindfolded. She's supposed to follow the letter of the law as it's written, not change it on a whim based on one judge's interpretation of the law.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I keep on thinking, wouldn't Jesus be a "socialist" and on the side of Obama to spread the wealth and help the poor?
People make it sound like what Obama wants to do is take everyone's money and splitt it up equally amonst everyone. All he is saying is that he wants to undue the tax cuts for the rich that Bush gave to the rich.
Well, Jesus was never a fan of the tax collector, and believed that people ought to be called to give to the poor of their own valition. He never said that he wanted a government to force people to give to the poor. He also believed that people shouldn't merely sit back and wait for help, which is exactly what Socialism creates...a class of peoples that have no desire to go out and do for themselves, the only want others(such as government) to do for them.
Jesus believes that giving came from the heart, there's nothing about forcing people to help others, some of which don't seek to help themselves, that comes from the heart.
So in this sense, Jesus wouldn't side with Obama, who says in essence, "give me your money, I know best what to do with it."
So tieing it back into the Constitution...Jesus wasn't about...."It's my obligation to do this for you." He was about, "It's my obligation to point you in the right direction and give you purpose, it's your obligation to do with that purpose what you see fit."
Your arguemnt makes me want to go out and find the exact Jesus quotes. Only what he spoke in the bible, first person.
I have looked for something that sums up all o fhis actual words but couldn't find it. Do you know of a source?
I don't know his politics well enough truly.
I'm definitely not well verse enough to quote scripture. I only know the broad picture of His message, and it definitely wasn't give to one so that one can best decide how to provide for many.
I'll keep searching and see if I can find a summary of his words.
Post a Comment