BARACK OBAMA AND THE DESTRUCTION OF THE CONSTITUTION
The audio that has been front and center over the past few days in the 2008 Presidential election in which Barack Obama outlines how redistribution of wealth could be accomplished, and how the Supreme Court failed in the rulings concerning Civil Rights to bring about redistribution is also a telling showcase in how Obama views our Constitution.
Several times during the interview Obama talks of what he believes as Constitutional short comings and even mentions that the Court in its ruling failed because it chose to adhere to Constitutional constraints.
So the question must be asked does Barack Obama even believe in our Constitution especially in light of the fact that he running for President and that the primary responsibility of the office is to ,"preserve and protect the Constitution."
When referencing the Supreme Court and the Court rulings concerning Civil Rights in the sixties Obama in his own words believed that the court failed to address redistribution of wealth because the court, "didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution." In other words Obama believes that the court should over step Constitutional limitations or legislate from the bench regardless of whether that which is before the Court is in adherence to the Constitution.
This one statement reveals Obama's idea as to what he believes is the duty of a Justice of the Supreme Court. To ignore the constraints that are placed in the Constitution on the responsibilities of the court and use the power of the court to create law rather than administer law as defined in the Constitution.
Obama as stated in the audio does not believe that the Constitution is adequate in addressing the idea of not only redistribution of wealth but government intervention in the lives of the people. He stated, "the Constitution is a document of negative liberties [that] 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."
Does he not understand that the reason that the Framers of the Constitution did not state, "what the federal and state government must do on your behalf," was because the Founding Fathers believed that government was not the solution or the fix and that the people should have the right and ability to achieve without government intervention ?
When this Nation was founded we fought a Revolution to escape the tyranny of European Socialism as governed by the British Monarchy and Parliament and as such when the Founders framed the laws of this land in the Constitution they declared the limited powers of the government as allowed by the people which prevent the tyrannical involvement of the government in the rights of each citizen breaking free from the Socialistic practices that had been forced on the Colonies by the British.
Obama continues in the interview to try and make the case for redistribution with this statement, ,"so I think that although you can craft theoretical justifications for it legally...... I think that as a practical matter that our institutions are just POORLY EQUIPPED to do it."
Out institutions are , "poorly equipped, " to institute redistribution because this blatant Socialism is not what our Founders formed as even a possibility within our government. Redistribution steps on the rights and freedom of those in whom the wealth is being redistributed from. Also in the redistribution plan that Obama is proposing the rights of the recipients are also being stepped on as he is now calling for a work requirement for those who do not pay taxes and would receive a refund check with Obama's plan.
In other words in order to receive money they did not ask for in the first place the government is going to require compensation in the form of community service after the money is forced on the recipient. Many of those who do not pay taxes already work and their income is not enough to tax.
Either Obama is ignorant as to what the Constitution actually means or he does not believe in it. It is obvious that regardless of whether one supports Obama or not anyone can see that he is an intelligent man. That is why I truly believe that he just does not believe in the Constitution and what it stands for. The Framers intentionally left out Constitutional provisions for government involvement in the lives of the people, or as Obama put it what the," government must do on your behalf."
Some try to state that the Constitutions call to, "promote the common welfare," means that it is the responsibility of the government to take care of the people. This it NOT what this phrase means at all. Promoting the common welfare means that an atmosphere of freedom defined within the Constitution is available so that the well being of all Americans is protected by law enabling everyone to have the same opportunity of success and achievement.
The Framers saw the roll of government as limited and also created a form of government that would prevent a Socialistic ideology from controlling the lives of the citizens of this nation. That is why our institutions are ,"poorly equipped," to handle redistribution of wealth because it was never intended to be a part of our way of life as defined in the Constitution.
Before taking office the President of the United States takes a solemn oath which states that as President, "I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States and will to the best of my ability, PRESERVE, PROTECT and DEFEND the CONSTITUTION of The United States."
How can we expect Barack Obama, if elected, to preserve, protect and defend a Constitution that he believes is lacking and that he truly does not believe in ? How can we elect to office a man who believes that the,"essential constraints," of the Constitution should be ignored ? How can we elect to the office of President a man whose very ideology seeks to destroy that which he is sworn to protect ? How can we elect to office a man who blatantly campaigns on a platform that promises to totally deconstruct the fabric and foundational principles that have made this country through freedom and liberty the great nation that it is ?
The fact that this Nation is the bastion of freedom and the most powerful country on earth is not an accident. It is because of cause and effect. The direct result of the constraints on our government as outlined in the Constitution which allows freedom to flourish and everyone to achieve. The ideology and platform of Barack Obama promises to discourage achievement and limit accomplishment thus ending the American Dream and the dream of America.
Ken Taylor
Several times during the interview Obama talks of what he believes as Constitutional short comings and even mentions that the Court in its ruling failed because it chose to adhere to Constitutional constraints.
So the question must be asked does Barack Obama even believe in our Constitution especially in light of the fact that he running for President and that the primary responsibility of the office is to ,"preserve and protect the Constitution."
When referencing the Supreme Court and the Court rulings concerning Civil Rights in the sixties Obama in his own words believed that the court failed to address redistribution of wealth because the court, "didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution." In other words Obama believes that the court should over step Constitutional limitations or legislate from the bench regardless of whether that which is before the Court is in adherence to the Constitution.
This one statement reveals Obama's idea as to what he believes is the duty of a Justice of the Supreme Court. To ignore the constraints that are placed in the Constitution on the responsibilities of the court and use the power of the court to create law rather than administer law as defined in the Constitution.
Obama as stated in the audio does not believe that the Constitution is adequate in addressing the idea of not only redistribution of wealth but government intervention in the lives of the people. He stated, "the Constitution is a document of negative liberties [that] 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."
Does he not understand that the reason that the Framers of the Constitution did not state, "what the federal and state government must do on your behalf," was because the Founding Fathers believed that government was not the solution or the fix and that the people should have the right and ability to achieve without government intervention ?
When this Nation was founded we fought a Revolution to escape the tyranny of European Socialism as governed by the British Monarchy and Parliament and as such when the Founders framed the laws of this land in the Constitution they declared the limited powers of the government as allowed by the people which prevent the tyrannical involvement of the government in the rights of each citizen breaking free from the Socialistic practices that had been forced on the Colonies by the British.
Obama continues in the interview to try and make the case for redistribution with this statement, ,"so I think that although you can craft theoretical justifications for it legally...... I think that as a practical matter that our institutions are just POORLY EQUIPPED to do it."
Out institutions are , "poorly equipped, " to institute redistribution because this blatant Socialism is not what our Founders formed as even a possibility within our government. Redistribution steps on the rights and freedom of those in whom the wealth is being redistributed from. Also in the redistribution plan that Obama is proposing the rights of the recipients are also being stepped on as he is now calling for a work requirement for those who do not pay taxes and would receive a refund check with Obama's plan.
In other words in order to receive money they did not ask for in the first place the government is going to require compensation in the form of community service after the money is forced on the recipient. Many of those who do not pay taxes already work and their income is not enough to tax.
Either Obama is ignorant as to what the Constitution actually means or he does not believe in it. It is obvious that regardless of whether one supports Obama or not anyone can see that he is an intelligent man. That is why I truly believe that he just does not believe in the Constitution and what it stands for. The Framers intentionally left out Constitutional provisions for government involvement in the lives of the people, or as Obama put it what the," government must do on your behalf."
Some try to state that the Constitutions call to, "promote the common welfare," means that it is the responsibility of the government to take care of the people. This it NOT what this phrase means at all. Promoting the common welfare means that an atmosphere of freedom defined within the Constitution is available so that the well being of all Americans is protected by law enabling everyone to have the same opportunity of success and achievement.
The Framers saw the roll of government as limited and also created a form of government that would prevent a Socialistic ideology from controlling the lives of the citizens of this nation. That is why our institutions are ,"poorly equipped," to handle redistribution of wealth because it was never intended to be a part of our way of life as defined in the Constitution.
Before taking office the President of the United States takes a solemn oath which states that as President, "I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States and will to the best of my ability, PRESERVE, PROTECT and DEFEND the CONSTITUTION of The United States."
How can we expect Barack Obama, if elected, to preserve, protect and defend a Constitution that he believes is lacking and that he truly does not believe in ? How can we elect to office a man who believes that the,"essential constraints," of the Constitution should be ignored ? How can we elect to the office of President a man whose very ideology seeks to destroy that which he is sworn to protect ? How can we elect to office a man who blatantly campaigns on a platform that promises to totally deconstruct the fabric and foundational principles that have made this country through freedom and liberty the great nation that it is ?
The fact that this Nation is the bastion of freedom and the most powerful country on earth is not an accident. It is because of cause and effect. The direct result of the constraints on our government as outlined in the Constitution which allows freedom to flourish and everyone to achieve. The ideology and platform of Barack Obama promises to discourage achievement and limit accomplishment thus ending the American Dream and the dream of America.
Ken Taylor
posted by The Liberal Lie The Conservative Truth | 9:04 AM
5 Comments:
Your post just reminded me of a picture I have. If Obama wins this (horrible thought) I will post it. Let's hope we don't have to use it! I'll send it to you in an e-mail.
This latest tape is just another further evidence of WHO and WHAT Obama REALLY IS.
He really is a radical socialist.
His lifelong associations to a cadre of comrades and fellow travelers is no mistake.
This is who he is.
God Help Us All!!
You guys are funny! Obama a radical socialist? What do you think George W. Bush is? Bush bankrupted the entire US treasury on a failed war and private contractors, a war five years old and still failing. Then he went into debt to fund more failed policies, like the AIG bailout -- a socialist venture! Now he's looking into "saving" GM and Chrysler. Socialism is going strong with George W. Bush! You gotta love that dweeb.
McCain is the same story. Only he is even more reckless, because he hates Russia, a country with over 14,000 nuclear weapons. Here comes another war! His head is still back in 1955 and he's still mad about Vietnam. He grows more senile every day.
But go ahead -- vote against your own best interests, and kiss any future for your kids good-bye.
We should not only look at Obama's impact on the War with Iraq. It could mean pulling out, yet what about at home? What will he do to the school system? In Illinois he voted for sex education for grades K-12. Will parents be able to decide what is right for their kids? Already some states have school choice. Obama's kids have school choice, why not us, specifically in SC.
(http://thevoiceforschoolchoice.wordpress.com/2008/11/12/obama-has-school-choice-south-carolinians-dont/ )
Also how will the school districts and superintendents use our tax dollars in the upcoming age? The same as they are now?
(http://thevoiceforschoolchoice.wordpress.com/tag/superintendent-spending/)
Post a Comment
<< Home