Where his heart is: Obama, in 2001 Interview, Lamented Failure of Civil Rights Movement to Redistribute Wealth

In a radio interview in 2001, Barack Obama said the civil rights movement failed when it became so dependent on the Supreme Court that it never got around to working toward redistributing income.

A 7-year-old radio interview in which Barack Obama discussed the failure of the Supreme Court to rule on redistributing wealth in its civil rights rulings has given fresh ammunition to critics who say the Democratic presidential candidate has a socialist agenda.

The interview — conducted by Chicago Public Radio in 2001, while Obama was an Illinois state senator and a law professor at the University of Chicago — delves into whether the civil rights movement should have gone further than it did, so that when “dispossessed peoples” appealed to the high court on the right to sit at the lunch counter, they should have also appealed for the right to have someone else pay for the meal.

In the interview, Obama said the civil rights movement was victorious in some regards, but failed to create a “redistributive change” in its appeals to the Supreme Court, led at the time by Chief Justice Earl Warren. He suggested that such change should occur at the state legislature level, since the courts did not interpret the U.S. Constitution to permit such change.

“The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of basic issues of political and economic justice in this society, and to that extent as radical as people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical,” Obama said in the interview, a recording of which surfaced on the Internet over the weekend.

“It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as it has been interpreted.

“And the Warren court interpreted it generally in the same way — that the Constitution is a document 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 state government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted.

“And I think one of the tragedies of the civil rights movement was that the civil rights movement became so court-focused, I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and organizing activities on the ground that are able to bring about the coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change, and in some ways we still suffer from that,” Obama said.

The 2001 interview evokes recent questioning by Joe “The Plumber” Wurzelbacher, the Ohio man who asked Obama about his proposal to raise taxes on people making more than $250,000. Obama told Wurzelbacher he wants to hike taxes on the wealthy so that the government can spread the wealth.

Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton said Monday the comments on the tape have “nothing to do with Obama’s economic plan or his plan to give the middle class a tax cut.”

“Here are the facts. In the interview, Obama went into extensive detail to explain why the courts should not get into that business of ‘redistributing’ wealth. Obama’s point — and what he called a tragedy — was that legal victories in the civil rights led too many people to rely on the courts to change society for the better. That view is shared by conservative judges and legal scholars across the country,” Burton said..

“As Obama has said before and written about, he believes that change comes from the bottom up — not from the corridors of Washington. … And so Obama’s point was simply that if we want to improve economic conditions for people in this country, we should do so by bringing people together at the community level and getting everyone involved in our democratic process,” Burton continued.

John McCain’s campaign said the tape proves that Obama is too liberal for the White House.

Now we know that the slogans ‘change you can believe in’ and ‘change we need’ are code words for Barack Obama’s ultimate goal: ‘redistributive change,'” said McCain-Palin senior policy adviser Doug Holtz-Eakin.

“Barack Obama expressed his regret that the Supreme Court hadn’t been more ‘radical’ and described as a ‘tragedy’ the court’s refusal to take up ‘the issues of redistribution of wealth.’ No wonder he wants to appoint judges that legislate from the bench,” Holtz-Eakin continued.

National Review reporter Byron York, a FOX News contributor, said the U.S. government already has a progressive tax system that gives money earned by one group to another group, but it’s a matter of degree. He added that Obama’s outlook on that system hasn’t changed.

“It seems clear from listening to this that the Obama of 2001 and probably the Obama of today feels that the government doesn’t do that enough, and I think that’s probably the big point in this tape,” York said.

“You’ve got to take him at his word,” York added. “It seems to me that the tape shows that this is simply a goal he has had for a long time.”

In a speech in Cleveland on Monday, McCain said the Obama interview is just another indication that the Democrat wants to increase sharply the amount of government spending.

“Today, he claims he will only tax the rich. But we’ve seen in the past that he’s willing to support taxes that hit people squarely in the middle class, and with a trillion dollars in new spending, the most likely outcome is that everyone who pays taxes will be paying for his spending,” McCain said.

Click here to hear the interview.

Grandma’s DEATHLY ILL… so in 3 days Im gonna rush to her side.. Huh??

interesting  http://mediamatters.org/items/200810230020?f=h_top

Rush, Michael Savage, and more question the urgency with 10 days to go, let alone 3 days after an announcement

http://www.michaelsavage.com

It’s Redistribution; Obama Turns Blind Eye to Credit Card Donation Fraud

By: Kenneth R. Timmerman

What do Bart Simpson, Family Guy, Daffy Duck, King Kong, O.J. Simpson, and Raela Odinga have in common?

All are celebrities; and with the exception of Odinga and O.J. Simpson, they also are fictional characters. And yet, all of them gave money earlier this month to the campaign of Barack Obama, without any apparent effort by the campaign to screen them out as suspect donors.

The Obama fundraising machine may owe its sensational success in part to a relaxation of standard online merchant security practices, which has allowed illegal donations from foreign donors and from unknown individuals using anonymous “gift” cards, industry analysts and a confidential informant tell Newsmax.

Giving a Los Angeles address, he listed his employer as the “State of Nevada” and his occupation as “convict.” The donor used a disposable “gift” credit card to make the donation.

The Obama campaign sent O.J. a thank-you note confirming his contribution, and gave him the name of another donor who had agreed to “match” his contribution.

Four minutes earlier, an individual using the name “Raela Odinga” also made a $5 contribution, using the same credit card.

The real Raela Odinga became prime minister of Kenya in April and has claimed to be a cousin of Obama’s through a maternal uncle.

Obama donor “Raela Odinga” listed his address as “2007 Stolen Election Passage” in “Nairobi, KY.” This credit card donation raised no alarm bells in the Obama campaign.

A few minutes earlier, “Daffy Duck” gave $5 to the Obama matching campaign, listing his address as “124 Wacky Way, Beverly Hills, Calif.”

But just as with Odinga’s address, the “Wacky Way” address failed to raise any alarm bells or security traps on the Obama Web site. Daffy Duck also used the same credit card.

Within the hour, three other new donors gave $5 to the Obama campaign. They were:

READ THE REST HERE

  • [Editor’s Note: See “Obama Campaign Runs Afoul of Finance Rules.”]

    “I tried it myself a few days ago,” he said. “I’m attaching for you proof of the contributions I made in the names of Daffy Duck, Bart Simpson, Raela Odinga, and Family Guy.

    “What this means is that the Obama campaign does no verification of the name of the contributor. With a normal credit card, this wouldn’t wor[k], but with these disposable debit cards, no problem!

    “This needs to be exposed,” he said.

  • Time for McCain to tell it like it is: Obama is a socialist

    Excerpts from Star Parker’s Townhall.com column

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    McCain must paint with clarity the starkly different worlds that Americans will be buying into when they step into voting booths in November.

    Barack Obama is a socialist. McCain must say it. It’s not slinging mud but stating fact.

    Perhaps a complicating factor in explaining freedom to Americans today is that when “classic” Republicanism was selling, we all still remembered the Soviet Union and communist China. The difference between the United States and the rest of the world then was clearer than today.

    When someone said “socialist” or “communist,” we could look abroad and know exactly what this meant.

    There is nowhere where Senator Obama sees Americans suffering from excessive government. The opposite. He sees all our suffering from not enough.

    The collapse of communism and socialism abroad was not accidental. Central planning is both dysfunctional and immoral.

    Incredibly, Obama thinks that a huge and complex market like health care, where a few hundred million Americans spend almost two and half trillion dollars a year, can be improved with more government controls and spending.

    And he thinks that parents, in a country that is supposed to be free, should not be given control over where they send their child to school and the type of education their child gets.

    To turn things around, McCain must quickly reestablish the Republican brand of freedom and contrast this with Obama’s clear socialism.

    NJ Primary Information: SUPER TUESDAY IS FEB. 5th.

    Calling New Jersey: today (dec. 17) is the last day to “SWING” register for NJ Primary

    NJ Primary on Feb 5th.
    I want to share some thought provoking ideas for you to ponder before deciding who will get your vote.
    RIGHT now –  to do the following 2 things:
    FIRST:
    Take inventory of your values and convictions… what’s most important to you and your family?
    SECOND:
    Remove from your mind: “who do I think will win”, and “everyone I know is voting for —“ and instead, ask yourself: Who is the candidate that closely shares my values and convictions?
    That is the person to vote for!
    (go to my other blog HERE for a candidate information page. I’m pro Huckabee – but I do have information for ALL our candidates so please spend some time learning about them)
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    NOW FOR THE INFORMATION YOU NEED
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    IF YOU ARE AN INDEPENDENT, YOU CAN PARTICIPATE ONLY IF YOU JOIN A PARTY.
    IF YOU ARE NOT AFFILIATED: you can participate only if you shed your unaffiliated status and join a party on primary day.
    Q: HOW DO I Register?
    A: You need to go to your City Hall/Town Clerk or the county board of ElectionsNeed help finding them? CLICK HEREI strongly urge you: if you have considered voting for someone in the general Presidential election that is outside your Party affiliate, in order to do all you can to make that candidate the party nominee, please consider visiting your local TOWN HALL and fill out the necessary paperwork TODAY.
    SO – for example: if you’re a registered Democrat or independent, but like Governor Huckabee, well, you can vote for Governor Huckabee in the general election on Nov. 2008 only if he’s the Republican nominee… in order for him to be the nominee, all the individual state registered voters need to vote him in as candidate, to represent the Republican party. So the only way you can really exercise your right and be heard, is to do all you can to make Governor Huckabee the nominee – so come on New Jersey – go to your local TOWN HALL and make the change before its too late!!!

    Please do all you can to support our next Commander in Chief – whoever you vote for, like Huckabee ;o), make sure your registered for that party or declare a party on Primary day if unaffiliated or Independent!