Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Obama: Breaking Free from the Constitution


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Obama: Breaking Free from the Constitution Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Obama: Breaking Free from the Constitution - 10/27/2008 4:35:40 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

I saw this headlined on Drudge

Well, you saw it linked to. The headline was not true. Drudge said, "2001 Obama: Tragedy that redistribution of wealth not pursued by Supreme Court." That is not what Obama said at all.

The tragedy in Obama's view was that the Civil Rights Movement, "became so Court-focused... that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activites on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change."

Obama does not approach redistribution of wealth as a legal issue for the Court, he approaches it as a political issue for the legislature. The flaw he perceives to exist in our Constitution is, that although it says what the Federal government and State governments cannot do, "it doesn't say what the Federal government or the State government must do on your behalf."

K.






< Message edited by Kirata -- 10/27/2008 4:40:35 PM >

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: Obama: Breaking Free from the Constitution - 10/27/2008 5:03:07 PM   
Roselaure


Posts: 672
Joined: 4/12/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Irishknight

Hold on.  If there is a woman out there who needs help figuring out what to do with her vagina, I may be able to help. 



*snort* Now there's the spirit of generosity!

_____________________________

Once conform, once do what other people do because they do it, and lethargy steals over all the finer nerves and faculties of the soul.
-Virginia Woolf

(in reply to Irishknight)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: Obama: Breaking Free from the Constitution - 10/27/2008 5:32:53 PM   
slvemike4u


Posts: 17896
Joined: 1/15/2008
From: United States
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Roselaure

quote:

ORIGINAL: Irishknight

Hold on.  If there is a woman out there who needs help figuring out what to do with her vagina, I may be able to help. 



*snort* Now there's the spirit of generosity!
Wouldn't that be a redistribution of wealth!!!!!

_____________________________

If we want things to stay as they are,things will have to change...Tancredi from "the Leopard"

Forget Guns-----Ban the pools

Funny stuff....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNwFf991d-4


(in reply to Roselaure)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: Obama: Breaking Free from the Constitution - 10/27/2008 5:44:21 PM   
MmeGigs


Posts: 706
Joined: 1/26/2008
Status: offline 		I don't think that the links you provided really fit with your subject line, and I'm not sure what you're finding so inflamatory about the bits you linked to.  It would have been helpful if the folks posting those snippets had provided some context.  What question was he answering?  What was the context of the discussion?  The editorial pop-ups (accompanied by dramatic music) in the first link misinterpreted what was actually said.  In the first link Obama said he thought that the civil rights movement had put too much focus on the courts and not enough on the politics and community organizing.  The pop-up sliced and diced that into Obama wanting the constitution reinterpreted to force redistribution of wealth.  If you listen to what he actually said, that was a pretty bizarre interpretation.

Obama said that the Constitution says nothing about budgetary priorities or economic fairness, so these are things that the judicial branch of govt could not address.  He said that it's up to the other branches of government to sort out taxes and spending.  Those are facts.  He says flat out that the Constitution says what the federal government must not do to you but does not say what it must do on your behalf.  Seems to me that this is a statement with which most conservative folk would agree. 

I understand that you may not agree with Obama's goals, but what he's saying about acheiving them through political action and community organizing are the methods that many of the social conservative groups have used.  It shouldn't be too much of a shocker that the social progressive groups would use the same methods. 

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: Obama: Breaking Free from the Constitution - 10/27/2008 5:47:23 PM   
bestbabync


Posts: 1061
Joined: 7/25/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

quote:

and we still have a bunch of white men that want to tell me how to use my vagina (and want to pass laws about that)


Oh lord I hate this rhetoric.

Honey you can do whatever you want with your vagina. But if your vaginal choices happen to result in the creation of another life, you shouldn't have the right to go stabby stab sucky suck and commit feticide.

You have the right to do whatever you want with YOUR body. Your body ends where your DNA ends, so unless that fetus is a clone it's not YOUR body.

As far as the OP goes I saw that NPR segment yesterday, and I found it pretty disturbing. I do take comfort in the fact that he can't do any of that without congressional approval, but lord knows what sort of Congress we'll have in a few months.


great post Elisa!!!.........amen!!!!

_____________________________

"A woman is the only thing I am afraid of that I know will not hurt me" Abraham Lincoln
"Choose Life, your mother did!"
www.howobamagotelected.com
http://www.lp.org/platform
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2CaBR3z85c

(in reply to Elisabella)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: Obama: Breaking Free from the Constitution - 10/27/2008 6:12:12 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MmeGigs

He says flat out that the Constitution says what the federal government must not do to you but does not say what it must do on your behalf.  Seems to me that this is a statement with which most conservative folk would agree. 

Someone at the Harvard Law Review once commented that two people with different views could listen to Obama speak and both come away feeling that he agreed with them.
 
The clips, taken together, suggest to me: The fact that the Constitution does not say what the government must do on your behalf is what he perceives to be the "blind spot" of the Founders and its fundamental flaw.
 
K.
 
 
 

< Message edited by Kirata -- 10/27/2008 6:13:16 PM >

(in reply to MmeGigs)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: Obama: Breaking Free from the Constitution - 10/27/2008 7:30:06 PM   
rexrgisformidoni


Posts: 578
Joined: 9/20/2008
Status: offline 		The constitution needs a complete re-write as far as I am concerned. I heard the audio clip and was more than disturbed, I was horrified. To me, it further reinforces the fact obama is not fit to be president. Of course its my humble opinion and if I had my way we'd have a president like Andrew Jackson, Teddy Roosevelt and maybe a touch of Julius Caesar when he was made Dictator of Rome. Maybe I'll make a time machine and steal dna and make the perfect president. 

_____________________________

when all you have is a hammer, everything begins to look like nails

“I am the punishment of God...If you had not committed great sins, God would not have sent a punishment like me upon you.”

Genghis Khan

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: Obama: Breaking Free from the Constitution - 10/27/2008 8:00:18 PM   
hizgeorgiapeach


Posts: 1672
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NormalOutside
As mentioned, Ron Paul is going to get a lot of votes, and the more the better.  He actually deserves votes, unlike anyone else running.  He would actually "CHANGE" life for the better in the US, and protect the people's rights.  If you don't think your rights are important, well, ignore this because you're already lost.



As I tried to point out in my reply to Dy saying something about voting for a 3rd party candidate - Ron Paul isn't on the Oklahoma Ballot.  If he Were on the Oklahoma ballot - the ballot which I will be casting, as it is my state of residence and where I am registered to cast a ballot - I would be doing so.  As it stands, the only 3 names on the ballot for PotUS in My State are McCain, Obama, and Nadar.  All of the other parties/candidates "filed to late" or "failed to file all necessary paperwork" etc ad nauseum.  As it stands, I feel essentially forced to waste my vote casting it for Nadar, whom I consider a joke - because I'll at least be able to still look myself in the eye the next day, unlike what would happen were I to vote for either McCain or Obama.  If by some absolute miracle of miracles I get to the polling place and find that Ron Paul's name DID somehow make it, even though every source I've been able to check indicates that it didn't - then that's who I have intended all along to vote for.  Having grown up in Oklahohum, with our convoluted system that barely manages to remain even nominally within the bounds of constitutionality, I don't hold out much in the way of hope for that though.

_____________________________

Rhi
Light travels faster than sound, which is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.
Essential Scentsations

(in reply to NormalOutside)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: Obama: Breaking Free from the Constitution - 10/27/2008 8:11:45 PM   
hizgeorgiapeach


Posts: 1672
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

 The flaw he perceives to exist in our Constitution is, that although it says what the Federal government and State governments cannot do, "it doesn't say what the Federal government or the State government must do on your behalf."


In my often not so humble opinion, the only thing the government should have clearly stated as a "must do" - is to stay the fuck outta my personal life, and take care of the stuff that actually IS the fed's business - regulating interstate and international trade, keeping us out of wars or calling us to arms if someone decides to try to invade, conduct QUIET diplomacy with the governments of other countries.  But for fuck's sake, it absolutely needs to stay OUT of the Morality Business.  That's for the Church - whatever denomination you happen to adhere to, if any at all - and NOT for Politicians, nor for Anyone other than the Individual In Their Own Life.

_____________________________

Rhi
Light travels faster than sound, which is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.
Essential Scentsations

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: Obama: Breaking Free from the Constitution - 10/27/2008 8:28:52 PM   
blacksword404


Posts: 2068
Joined: 1/4/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: hizgeorgiapeach

Yes, but do you honestly think that a 3rd party candidate actually has a real chance of getting into the white house this year?  I don't.  What I think the 3rd party candidates CAN accomplish is to take just enough votes from one or the other main party candidates to keep them from getting into office.
 
You also have to consider that each state has it's own local laws concerning how a party gets on the ballot For That State.  Here in OK, the laws are twisted enough that there are no viable 3rd parties.  Hell, most of the parties that have a candidate aren't listed on the ballot in this state at All.  I'll be more than a bit surprised if there are any choices listed other than repugnican and democrap.  (Yes, the misspellings are intentional.)
 
I'm not voting for Any of the incumbents that are on the ballot for reelection at the local and state level.  I may not particularly "support" their specific opposition, but I know I dislike the incumbents and their various screw ups sufficiently to vote against them - even if I had to vote for satan himself - and I don't even believe in the existance of satan!  On the national level, I could have voted for Ron Paul with a clear conscience.  None of the others - McCain, Obama, Nadar, any of 'em - have my confidence or my vote.  And it PISSES ME OFF being forced into a position of voting for "the lesser of known evils".  The lesser of evils is Still Evil, and Still a Bad Choice.


3rd party candidates don't get elected precicely because people like you don't vote for them. You believe a 3rd party guy is the best choice but instead vote for someone else because everybody else is. Why should you care who others will vote for? As long as i vote for who i think is best why should i vote for two shitty candidates instead. To keep the worst of the two main candidates from winning? I am one vote not all of them.Vote for who you like best not against who you like least. If the worst wins then how does that matter to you? The people who vote for Obama or Mccain will do so regardless of how you vote.

_____________________________

Don't fight him. Embrace your inner asshole.

Tu fellas magnus penum meum...iterum

Genuine catnip/kryptonite.
Ego sum erus.

The capacity to learn is a gift, the ability to learn a skill, the willingness to learn a choice. Dune HH

(in reply to hizgeorgiapeach)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: Obama: Breaking Free from the Constitution - 10/27/2008 9:50:51 PM   
corysub


Posts: 1492
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

The Warren court "didn't break break free from the essential contraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution."

Redistributive Change
 
Constitution fundamentally flawed

K.





If the constitution was perfect, blacks would still be classed as not fully human and 90% of Americans wouldn't have the vote. The world turns and as it turns it changes.


I think most of us believe the "founding fathers" understood full well that the Constitution wasn't a perfect legal document and made provisions for it to be amended.  The "context" of what he was saying in those clips, to me, was that at the time of the interview he was a legislator, as he stated, and his focus was not on him being able to one day be potentially in the position of actually "appointing" Supreme Court judges!  All through this election cycle, the democrat primary race, and the general election campaign, we have seen Barack change his stripes for his audience. Does anyone doubt that should he be elected his nominations for the Court will  be judges with the most radical views towards changing society via interpretation rather than the legislative approach he thought better as a State Senator seven years ago.   I have no doubt that he will appoint left to far left federal judges to courts across the land, Courts of Appeal, Attorneys General, and would love to know his choice now for Solicitor General, a position that has tremendous influence cases taken to the Court by the "government".

The amendment process is slow and torturous for a reason...so that on group could not easily revise the law of the land based on their agenda.  The Warren Supreme Court established itself as "legislator of last resort" when it felt the process was not adjusting, in their view, fast enough to reflect the "times". 

My worry, my concerns, my fear, is that Obama, with the help of  Pelosi/Reid, will turn the courts upside down, and inside out, and change the legal landscape so dramatically with "imbedded" radical jurists that our country will be dramatically torn apart.  
From my pespective, Americans over the past few week are finally looking at a man who with a week to go is still being vetted, a man who probably would not have won his parties nomination based on the events of the day against more experienced democrat candidates.  A man who chose associations with people and groups not to the left of center, but radical leftist like Ayers who believe there is nothing wrong with setting of bombs if the end is justified, to Wright, and ACORN.
Until today Barack's arguement for being elected is "no more Bush"!!  The next week will tell if this is enough rather than a thin resume that shows nothing accomplished legislatively success as an executive, or maturity to lead the country in crisis, as Biden warned.  
It remains to be seen if the polls are right and that he will  get the vote of a majority of the "center of the country's politcal thought"...those who are truly moderate in their views and not like those of us here, like me, who have an unshakeable political point of view.
Kinda interesting that with a tsunami breaking over the republican party, well deserved, with $600 million or so of his own campaign funds, or more probably, support from the media, and special interest groups, the best ground game in politics, he is still probably 6-8 points ahead on average in the polls. 
I don't think he has made the sale yet...and I sense this even in his smooth, calm, studied, voice. Win or lose, the man is one of the best political organizers I have ever seen....but so were a lot of other people in history who I also would not want to be my leader.

edited for spelling typo's and trying to improve some sentence structure..but gave up...

< Message edited by corysub -- 10/27/2008 9:55:53 PM >

(in reply to meatcleaver)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: Obama: Breaking Free from the Constitution - 10/27/2008 11:55:18 PM   
hizgeorgiapeach


Posts: 1672
Status: offline 		Oklahoma does not allow write in on ballots.  Any ballots that have write ins on them are invalidated and not counted at all.  Since I would - due to the way things are in Oklahoma - be forced to Write In the name of the one candidate that I DO feel any sort of confidence in, I would be sabotaging myself to vote for him.  It would not count - not for the candidate I would prefer, nor against any of the candidates that I loath.   Casting an uncounted write in, to me, is even more grossly negligent than not casting a vote at all - especially knowing that in doing so, I invalidate and silence my own voice.

_____________________________

Rhi
Light travels faster than sound, which is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.
Essential Scentsations

(in reply to blacksword404)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: Obama: Breaking Free from the Constitution - 10/28/2008 12:10:52 AM   
lynnlouise


Posts: 16
Joined: 10/27/2008
Status: offline 		Hi everyone:
  Wow - we have some life altering choices to make, but it's clear to me.  Do you want big government - leading to socialism - big brother?
  Remember & be careful - the bigger the government the less rights you will have as an individual.  No brainer - McCain & there's no doubt he's 100% American - no anti-american traitor stuff coming from his past or his mouth

So yeah peach - it's personal & so is abortion - pro choice - don't tell me what to do with my body - I'll decide & fetices are not babies
and yeah - that's my only issue w/McCain - we can't go back to coat hangers

< Message edited by lynnlouise -- 10/28/2008 12:23:34 AM >

(in reply to SilverMark)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: Obama: Breaking Free from the Constitution - 10/28/2008 12:28:49 AM   
atypicalsub


Posts: 284
Joined: 4/11/2008
From: an atypical sub
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: lynnlouise

Hi everyone:
  Wow - we have some life altering choices to make, but it's clear to me.  Do you want big government - leading to socialism - big brother?
  Remember & be careful - the bigger the government the less rights you will have as an individual.  No brainer - McCain & there's no doubt he's 100% American - no anti-american traitor stuff coming from his past or his mouth



This statement is meaningless without you defining what *you* mean by "100% American" and "anti-american".  Remember when the US first went into Iraq the administration said anyone who didn't support it "anti-american".  Now most US citizens say it was a mistake for us to ever go there.  We also got the Patriot Act because it was "anti-american" to oppose it but nothing else in the history of this country has brought us closer to big brother.


_____________________________

Polyamorous, solitary eclectic pagan, pansexual slut, and personal pet of MistressYes

"Do not do anything you are ashamed of, and don't be ashamed of anything you do"
(although I'm sure my bio-family wishes I did less and was ashamed of more)


(in reply to lynnlouise)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: Obama: Breaking Free from the Constitution - 10/28/2008 3:54:38 AM   
SilverMark


Posts: 3457
Joined: 5/9/2007
Status: offline 		I am not so sure that if you indeed did your homework on a strict constitutional government you would like it quite as well as you think(those who think that is the way to go).  http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.php <---that is if these people really are that...not so sure myself.....
The interview is much longer than shown on u tube with quite different context than what is shown. But, what the heck, would for the most part make people think about the meaning of what is said and honestly might show that Obama isn't the boogey man that those from the right wish to paint him as. As for redistribution and other such socialistic terms....well, the closest we have come to nationalizing something has just recently taken place and at the hand of a Republican administration. We are now or soon to be stock holders in a number of the very banks that have helped lead us right down the economic tubes....it has become necessary and before it is over there will be more. I am not so sure that before we inaugurate our next President we might also own a piece of some very large auto makers....I might be wrong....but, the possibility exists. As I write this I got e-mail from a an acquaintance that is a constitutional party nutbag....like the guy, but he is just a tad right of the lock the boarders and arm the kids way of life of the militia types....but, always adds something to the discussion, keeps trying to give me a handgun? thinks the government should issue them at birth or something.....

< Message edited by SilverMark -- 10/28/2008 3:59:25 AM >

(in reply to atypicalsub)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: Obama: Breaking Free from the Constitution - 10/28/2008 4:16:20 AM   
SilverMark


Posts: 3457
Joined: 5/9/2007
Status: offline 		p.s. the hardest hit the Constitution has taken might very well be the Patriot Act...as far as our individual rights go...also under the same Republican President....strictly MY OPINION!

(in reply to SilverMark)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: Obama: Breaking Free from the Constitution - 10/28/2008 4:19:50 AM   
MmeGigs


Posts: 706
Joined: 1/26/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata
The clips, taken together, suggest to me: The fact that the Constitution does not say what the government must do on your behalf is what he perceives to be the "blind spot" of the Founders and its fundamental flaw.


Why would you assume that he was talking about the same thing in both of these clips?  They didn't seem to have anything to do with each other, other than that they both had to do with the Constitution. 

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: Obama: Breaking Free from the Constitution - 10/28/2008 4:36:01 AM   
Irishknight


Posts: 2016
Joined: 9/30/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

quote:

ORIGINAL: Roselaure

quote:

ORIGINAL: Irishknight

Hold on.  If there is a woman out there who needs help figuring out what to do with her vagina, I may be able to help. 



*snort* Now there's the spirit of generosity!
Wouldn't that be a redistribution of wealth!!!!!

I'm just trying to do what I can for my fellow human beings.... at least the hot ones.

(in reply to slvemike4u)
Profile   Post #: 38
RE: Obama: Breaking Free from the Constitution - 10/28/2008 11:21:14 PM   
lynnlouise


Posts: 16
Joined: 10/27/2008
Status: offline 		Hi - traitor talk m-m-m-m-m         Maybe not responding to 9/11

the extreme muslims want us eliminated - so yeah - we better go to pakistan & afganistan and wherever they multiply and stomp them out before they stomp us out ---- or do you have a plan to do nothing  -- if so, better start learning arabic

(in reply to Irishknight)
Profile   Post #: 39
RE: Obama: Breaking Free from the Constitution - 10/28/2008 11:32:12 PM   
Hippiekinkster


Posts: 5512
Joined: 11/20/2007
From: Liechtenstein
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

quote:

and we still have a bunch of white men that want to tell me how to use my vagina (and want to pass laws about that)


Oh lord I hate this rhetoric.

Honey you can do whatever you want with your vagina. But if your vaginal choices happen to result in the creation of another life, you shouldn't have the right to go stabby stab sucky suck and commit feticide.

You have the right to do whatever you want with YOUR body. Your body ends where your DNA ends, so unless that fetus is a clone it's not YOUR body.

As far as the OP goes I saw that NPR segment yesterday, and I found it pretty disturbing. I do take comfort in the fact that he can't do any of that without congressional approval, but lord knows what sort of Congress we'll have in a few months.
 I don't see you giving any good argument as to why a woman should be forced to carry a fetus. Your argument seems to boil down to "Cause I said so." Sorry, your opinions don't mean Jack to me. Let the little parasite take care of itself.

_____________________________

"We are convinced that freedom w/o Socialism is privilege and injustice, and that Socialism w/o freedom is slavery and brutality." Bakunin

“Nothing we do, however virtuous, can be accomplished alone; therefore we are saved by love.” Reinhold Ne

(in reply to Elisabella)
Profile   Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Obama: Breaking Free from the Constitution Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.141