Obama: Racist/Socialist

The news of the day reveals an audio tape of a radio interview Senator Obama did in 2001, while he was a law school lecturer. World Net Daily posted a video containing a substantial portion of the interview.

WBEZ claims to have an audio tape; I could not make the download work. I transcribed the following from the version posted at WND.

If you look at the... victories and failures of the civil rights movements, ... 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 a lunch counter an order 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 sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society and uh to that extent and as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, uh it wasn't that radical, it didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by by the founding fathers in the Constitution at least as it's 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 must do on your behalf, and that hasn't shifted and I think one of the tragedies of the civil rights movement was , because the civil rights movement became so court focused, I think
there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing 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.

I'm not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts, the institution just isn't structured that way. You just look at very rare examples where during the desegregation era, the court was willing to, for example, order uh, changes that cost money to a local school district; and the court was very uncomfortable with it, it was hard to manage, it was hard to figure out; ah, you start getting into all sorts of separation of powers issues in terms of the court monitoring or engaging in a process that essentially is administrative and takes a lot of time... . The court's just not very good at it, and politically, its just, its very hard to legitimize opinions from the court in that regard, so I think that although you can craft theoretical justifications for it legally, I think any three of us sitting here could come up with a rationale for bringing about economic change through the courts.

The reference to the civil rights movements sets the context: Obama is focused on race relations: Black vs White, just like the focus of the church he attended for twenty years. The first reference to redistribution of wealth establishes the subject. Barrack Hussein Obama was talking about empowering the Federal Government to take money from 'rich' Whites and give it to 'poor' Blacks. He was making a pitch for Black votes at our expense. What could be more racist?

The subsequent reference to 'economic justice' confirms the obvious, removing all doubt. Next, Obama dives into the Warren Court's interpretation of the Constitution, saying that it was not radical because "it didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution". No court in its right mind, faithful to its oath of office, would break free from those essential constraints. We must assume that Barack Hussein Obama would appoint Justices who would perform that act of unconstitutional injustice.

Obama continues on the Constitution: "but it doesn't say what the Federal Government or the State Government must do must do on your behalf". For a Constitutional lawyer, he seems singularly unaware of the significance of the philosophy held by the founders. The Federal Government is not your mother: it does not wipe your ass & nose. The Federal Government is not Santa Clause: it does not bring you presents. Those are not its functions.

Now we must listen between the lines: I think one of the tragedies of the civil rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court focused, I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing 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. The Civil Rights movement was about obtaining civil & legal equality, not redistributing wealth. Obama switches its focus retroactively to convert it into a means of obtaining money from Whites. It should have shunned litigation and brought about redistribution of wealth through organizing coalitions of power. Armed robbery, perhaps? Or racial politics, in which a minority would convert the Federal Government for robbery by proxy?

Next, Obama reveals his strategic objective: I'm not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts, the institution just isn't structured that way. We know what he wants to do. It ain't just, moral nor constitutional. Now we know what he will set out to do legislatively.

We have learned that Obama is a divider, a racial divider, not a uniter. We have learned that he intends to take our income and give it to his Black constituency in the slums of Chicago. We have learned of his intense contempt for the Constitution and the principles upon which it is founded. We can only conclude that his political career must come to an end with his first term in the Senate, for which he is both unworthy & unqualified. God forfend and voters forbid he should ever cross the threshold of the White House!