Taking issue with the Founding Fathers. “Just Words” Obama says about the Constitution.

“You know if you look at the victories and the 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 I would now have the right to vote, I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order as long as I could pay for it I would be okay. But the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society. And 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 its been interpreted and the Warren Court interpreted it 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 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 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.” – Barack Obama, 2001 radio interview with Chicago Public Radio 
Why does this quote made in 2001 from Obama have the campaign worried?  How is this redistribution of wealth phrase different than Joe the Plumber’s answer?  There are a few reasons. 
1)  Barack Obama says in the opening sentence that the civil rights movement did not go far enough to correct past injustices.  In Obama’s view the Civil Rights movement allowed him to eat at his local Denny’s without being kicked out or forced to eat in another section.  It also utilized the courts more than it should have to affect change. 
2) Obama told Joe the Plumber he wanted to redistribute the wealth and in this quote we see that his agenda for change has always included that idea.  However, he again criticizes the Supreme Court for not venturing into economic inequalities that existed, and as he sees it still exist, in the 1960’s.  With two openings on the Supreme Court coming, this statement clearly shows what kind of Justices he would seek to place in the highest court. 
3) Most disturbing is Obama’s idea of “the Constitution as a charter of negative liberties”.  Thanks to a quick review of Wikipedia, a negative liberty is essentially a personal liberty that people have to pursue their interests whether they be economic or otherwise.  A positive liberty is a liberty that is collective or communal in nature and is used by leaders to promote programs for the good of the citizenry.  In other words,  if you make too much money those under you suffer so for the good of the people a leader will “tax” your money to give it to someone else.  Or anither way would be to say that guns kill people so for the good of the people their ownership should be curtailed.  Essentially Obama is laying out his plan to rewrite the fundamentals of the Constitution either through legislative or judicial means. 
4) Finally, Obama admits in 2001 that ACORN and other community groups would be used to advance his agendas when he states that community organizations were left behind by the civil rights movement and their influence should have been utilized more. 
Presumably Obama was not running for the Presidency in 2001 and thus these comments are his true feelings.  While some may find the redistribution theory alarming in Obama’s answer, what should be more disturbing is Obama’s willingness to call the Constitution flawed becasue it does not say what the government MUST do for the citizens.  This statement from 2001 is the clearest example yet of Obama’s theory on government and what he means by CHANGE. 
Advertisements

It’s a Matching Test

Let me get this straight.  John McCain is a Washington insider who can’t get things done or reform Washington as President because he is controlled by lobbysists and special interest groups.  But Joe Biden, the Congressman from Delaware for 36 years, has a vast knowledge of foreign policy experience that will help lead the country in a new direction around the world. 

Barack Obama is a Washington outsider who represents the change that we need because he has not been influenced by the lobbyists etc… and will lead the reform of Washington as he did in Chicago as a community organizer then in Illinois as a Senator.  But Sarah Palin is too inexperienced to be in Washington and does not have enough experience to effectively reform Washington because she has never worked in the halls of government there.  Her reforms in Alaska were meaningless because she was mayor of a small town and is only a first term Governor who has not been tested. 

Sen John Kerry and many other Democrats have lost me in this reasoning.  Is it the Biden/Obama ticket against the McCain/Palin ticket?  Please, I need a liberal to help me understand this convoluted reasoning.

Organiztion Needs…Call 1-800-BARACK-O

As Rudy said last night–A community organizer….WHAT? 

Sen Obama and his supporters praise his time as a community organizer in Chicago.  They say that his experience in this position gave him the necessary skills to handle the duties of President of the United States.  Well, lately they have said that they way he has run his campaign is proof of his ability to be President but I’ll just let that go and let it sink in for anyone reading this.  But what is a community organizer?  What do they do?  I searched Yahoo answers but as usual I found nothing more than people expressing their beliefs.  So I did a job search and here is what a community organizer does. 

Portland, Oregon is looking for a community organizer after receiving grant money from the city to fund the position.  The position’s function is listed as organizing, part time @ 10-15 hours per week.  Their ideal candidate will have experience in community organizing, coordinating volunteers, a commitment to stability, familiarity with building codes and zoning regulations,  experience being self motivated and a flexible schedule. 

Still,  how does one get experience in community organizing?  According to the listing, a community organizer can coordinate volunteers into organized campaigns to educate the public , and lets not forget empower the public, and work with local officials to change whatever your campaign is focused on, i.e. zoning laws.  As a community organizer YOU don;t change the laws, YOU just organize the campaign to get people to listen.  Also if you are looking for this job you can look for the keywords as follows:  grassroots organizing,policy change,building codes, zoning laws, or sustainable building.  And just in case you want to be President someday her is the website.  http://www.wiserearth.org/job/view/a21caf72e3e540128d5093d097e0bb7f

But let’s give Senator Obama the benefit of doubt.  Perhaps he was a full time community organizer, what are his responsibilities then? 

LA has an opening for a Hospitality Industry Community Organizer, full time.  There is no education requirement, is categorized under Activism and Organizing,  with salary of $40-$46,000.  Your responsibilities in this position require you to develop strategy, reach out to the community and develop leaders in this organization.  It also requires you to be a public speaker and work with others to advocate policy changes.  The full -time requirement does tie up your weekends and isn’t 9-5.  They do prefer previous campaign experience but it is not necessary.  Also you must engage the community to talk about working conditions in this position.  Again just in case you want to apply:  http://www.idealist.org/if/i/en/av/Job/306821-281

Okay one more, this time in Chicago and dealing with the issue I think is one of the most important, education.  Again, to be a lead organizer for the AFT Great Lakes Region, there is no education requirement.  It is full time and the person must be focused on education, human and civil rights,  job training and issues in the workplace.  As the lead organizer in Chicago you would motivate people (they call them activists but in light of the RNC protests we’ll let that go),   build relationships and organize plans that support the overall campaign you are organizing as the head of this organization.  Here are other qualifications direct from the website:

LEAD ORGANIZER:
• Experience running an organizing campaign in a tough employer environment
• Demonstrated commitment to empower workers through the labor movement
• Proven ability to direct work and lead by example
• Good written and verbal communication skills
• Self starter with the ability to work under supervision
• Knowledge of Chicago labor and politics (preferred)
• Willingness to work nights and weekends as required
• Computer literacy
• Valid driver’s license/ car

Once again, here is where to go if you ever thought about being President one day:http://www.idealist.org/if/i/en/av/Job/306016-138

I could go on but anyone doing a search  will find a good explanation of what a community organizer does.  Sen Obama fits the description of all of these positions.  He speaks fluently and hopefully can write, although just as he and his supporters have said about Sarah Palin’s speech, I doubt he writes his own speeches.  He has proven he can organize a large group of people to listen to him.  He even works well with interest groups that promote their own agenda.  But, as shown in these descriptions, he has never done anything more than PROMOTE change.  As a community organizer that was “above his pay grade” as he likes to say.  Do we really want a President whose main source of experience required him to speak and write effectively and motivate supporters of special interest groups and know the inside workings of Chicago politics?