Cross-posted from The Clarion’s Call on October 28, 2008:
Regarding the candidacy of Senator Barack Obama for the Presidency of the United States, questions must be raised.
The President of the United States must take an Oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States. In this context, Obama’s perspective and views on the U.S Constitution are highly relevant.
In 2001, Barack Obama (then an Illinois State Senator) participated in a radio interview on Chicago’s WBEZ-FM program, Odyssey. Two statements are particularly interesting. The first is Obama’s view that the U.S Constitution reflects the fundamental flaw of the United States:
I think it’s a remarkable document…
The original Constitution as well as the Civil War Amendments…but I think it is an imperfect document, and I think it is a document that reflects some deep flaws in American culture, the Colonial culture nascent at that time.
African-Americans were not — first of all they weren’t African-Americans — the Africans at the time were not considered as part of the polity that was of concern to the Framers. I think that as Richard said it was a ‘nagging problem’ in the same way that these days we might think of environmental issues, or some other problem where you have to balance cost-benefits, as opposed to seeing it as a moral problem involving persons of moral worth.
And in that sense, I think we can say that the Constitution reflected an enormous blind spot in this culture that carries on until this day, and that the Framers had that same blind spot. I don’t think the two views are contradictory, to say that it was a remarkable political document that paved the way for where we are now, and to say that it also reflected the fundamental flaw of this country that continues to this day.
To illustrate what he perceives as the Country and its Constitution’s flaw, Obama demagogues race. It is ironic that someone who claims to be a great unifier is so obsessed with our divisions. Here it is race, which can be taken alongside gender and class demagoguery. For a person basing his campaign on change we need to unite the United States, how does he propose to do this while dividing us on race, class and gender? What exactly is this so-called fundamental flaw of the United States that is reflected by the Constitution? How does this so-called fundamental flaw continue to this day?
Perhaps Obama believes this fundamental flaw is the distribution of wealth in the United States. Taken with his statement about “Spreading the Wealth” to “Joe the Plumber,” the second statement from his WBEZ appearance may provide some clarification:
If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement, and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to vest 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 and order, and 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 to that extent, as radical as I think people tried 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, as least as it’s been interpreted, and Warren Court interpreted 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.
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 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 stuffer from that.
Obama may regard the Country’s lingering flaw as the same thing which the civil rights movement failed to achieve given its “court focused” approach: the distribution of wealth. Obama regards the courts as an institution ill-equipped to conduct wealth redistribution which he suggests is achievable though political and community organizing. That is, community organizing which ultimately leads to a take-over of the legislative and executive branch. This suggest the question: is Obama’s vision of wealth redistribution to be achieved through a Presidency with a filibuster-proof Democratic majority? On top of that, why should the U.S. government be concerned with wealth redistribution which has an air of central planning? Of course one should note that central planning is socialist, by nature.
The whole issue of race and wealth redistribution comes straight out of black liberation theology; to which Barack Obama is no stranger given his twenty years at Trinity United Church with the likes of Jeremiah Wright. Since black liberation theology is rooted in Marxism, why is it inappropriate to ask Obama and his running mate whether of not Obama’s statement on “spreading the wealth” is Marxist?
Obama seems to believe that the U.S. Consitution reflects the fundamental flaw of the United States which is based (at least on) race and class. While the founders crafted a Consitution which enshrined personal property rights, Obama perceives a flaw that may be corrected by removing this protection in order to bring about redistributive change. This is contrary to the founding the United States and given this, Barack Obama does not intend to uphold the Consitution of the United States, and is therefore unfit to take the Oath of Office of the Presidency of the United States.
Do you not think that the legitimization of chattel slavery in Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3 of the U.S. Constitution was a ‘fundamental flaw’?
‘Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.’
Pingback: Sadly, No! » At Last, A Socialist President!
George W. Bush on the Constitution
* “You need to have a president who understands you can’t win this war with legal papers. We’ve got to use every asset at our disposal.” –May 13, 2003, ABC News’ Nightline.
* “GOP leaders told Bush that his hardcore push to renew the more onerous provisions” of the Patriot Act “could further alienate conservatives still mad at the President from his botched attempt to nominate White House Counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court.
“‘I don’t give a goddamn,’ Bush retorted. ‘I’m the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it my way.’
“‘Mr. President,’ one aide in the meeting said. ‘There is a valid case that the provisions in this law undermine the Constitution.’
“‘Stop throwing the Constitution in my face,’ Bush screamed back. ‘It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!’” –Reported in Capitol Hill Blue, December 9, 2005.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bush_administration_vs._the_U.S._Constitution
First of all, I am not a supporter of Mr. John McCain. Altho I respect his service to his country in a war he was not allowed to win, I have no use for gigolos and adulterers.
But this note is about Mr. Barak Obama. The readers of this forum are, no doubt, atheists, and, as a true American, I support your right to believe whatever religion you want no matter how misguided. But even atheists have absorbed some of the teachings of the Bible: “Where there is smoke there is fire”, for instance.
It is well documented that Mr. Obama was, for many years, a member of a “Christian” church that preached racism and bigotry. It is well documented that Mr. Obama attended an islamic school in his youth and has never publicly renounced his muslim upbringing. It is well documented that Mr. Obama is versed in the godless communistic teachings of people like Bill Ayers. Recent evidence suggests Mr. Obama supports satanism. Polls show that 75% of Jews will vote for Mr. Obama. Mr. Obama professes to be from a working class upbringing, yet attended an Ivy-league college and vacations in Hawaii.
Now I know that “multiculturalists” will claim that these are all plusses, but the average American wonders, “Who is this man, what does he really believe?” Where there is smoke there is fire.
I will admit, Mr. Obama is a snappy dresser and an eloquent speaker, but so are P.Diddy and Kenya West. I think we would all agree that neither of those gentlemen are ready to be the next Commander-In-Chief of this great country.
Most of you are probably too young to remember when Vanilla Ice was scorned and MC Hammer was beloved even though their music was interchangeable.
Before you cast your vote, I urge you to think long and hard about the future of your country. The choices are not good, an American patriot adulterer or a total unknown.
May God give you wisdom to do the right thing.
PS: for those who would immediately “knee-jerk flame” me as a racist, I am not. I dated a colored boy in college, even though my parents forbid me to see him. He was a wonderful boy, unfortunately, like many of his people he got caught up in drugs and I left him. He still occasionally writes me from prison. I also support African children, here is a portion of a letter I recently received from one of my “kids”-
“…with your help I will continue to be able to afford school supplies. My village was able to dig a new well with your help…”
God Bless you all, and may He have mercy upon us in these trying times.
Kenya West
It’s Kanye West. Freud smiles upon you.
“for those who would immediately “knee-jerk flame” me as a racist, I am not. I dated a colored boy in college, even though my parents forbid me to see him. He was a wonderful boy, unfortunately, like many of his people he got caught up in drugs and I left him”
Well. That clears up that then: not a racist. Got it.
“What exactly is this so-called fundamental flaw of the United States that is reflected by the Constitution?”
Slavery. Slavery is the fundamental flaw. It’s been pointed out above. You, um… you oppose slavery, right?
“Recent evidence suggests Mr. Obama supports satanism.”
Where can I find more information on this? As an undecided voter and committed hard-core satan worshiper, this may be just the thing that pushes me to vote Obama. The mainstream media has not been covering the candidates’ positions on satanism nearly enough. Does anyone know McCain’s position on this topic?
\m/
Messing around with the Constitution would be a sure-fire way for Obama to undermine his own brand-new mandate & his own party, for surely many in it would oppose the rancour & divisiveness of a constitutional amendment.
I know of no statement by him anywhere that suggests that he would venture into such treacherous territory – but you can rest assured that if he were to do so, America couldn’t wish for a better candidate for the task: he’s a former president of the Harvard Law Review & a magna cum laude grad with a well-earned reputation as a legal genius … although frankly, I think those stellar credentials are exactly why he won’t touch the idea of introducing any new amendments.
Your defense of legalized human slavery is both nauseating & absurd. Perhaps you should Google “The UN Charter Of Human Rights & Freedoms” sometime. I believe you’d find its contents highly educational.
after november 4th, all your base are belong to us!
We love to funk you Dr. Funkenstein, your funk is sure the best.
Black Planet babyeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
Dig it.
Listen to the interview. The flaw was that the Constitution allowed SLAVERY. The USA has been correcting flaws in the Constitution since it existed. That’s what the Amendments to the Constitution are. Or do you think the Amendments should all be done away with as ‘un-American’? Your desperation is showing.
Meanwhile, the GOP VP candidate spoke at a conference of a group that wants Alaska to leave the USA — this year. Wouldn’t treason be near as un-American as you can get?
The 3/5 Compromise was not a flaw. It was a necessary piece of legislation. When the founding fathers were divvying up Congressional representation, the Southern States wanted all their slaves to count as part of the population, but the Northern States didn’t want to count them because it would have given the slaveholders a majority in Congress. So they came up with a compromise which would allow the South to count 3/5 of their total slaves as part of their overall population. It was a compromise that kept the union together and probably brought a quicker end to slavery. If 100% of the slaves were counted like the South wanted, the South would have ruled Congress and the slave trade would have roared on unabated. But the North retained power and slavery was slowly being phased out. If the Constitution had abolished slavery entirely, the South never would have signed onto it and the slave trade would have gone on unabated for generations in all but a few Northern free states. Furthermore, Obama is wrong when he says the compromise is a flaw that exists to this day, because the abolition of slavery rendered it moot.
“Slavery. Slavery is the fundamental flaw. It’s been pointed out above. You, um… you oppose slavery, right?”
And where is slavery mentioned in the Constitution?
The Constitution itself brought slavery down, in the end. No changes were necessary. Only an adjustment of a cultural blind spot.
Article I, Section 2: Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.
Arcticle IV, Section 2: No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, But shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.
XIII Amendment
XIV Amendment
XV Amendment
Midwest Mom: You dated a “colored boy” in college. How neat of you. You are indeed a racist. The very fact that you used the term colored brands you so. You don’t like to think of yourself that way, but you are, as are most of the people who will not vote for Obama who insist that he’s untried and therefore not presidential. If he were white, you would vote for him in a heartbeat. And that’s so sad.
Crystal,
Obama’s right:
http://tinyurl.com/5h3qcu
Midwestmom says Obama is not worth voting for, because among many things (like color?) he is a Satanist and holidayed in Hawaii.
Satan worshipping uppity blacks wearing lai’s should NEVER be President!
Of course, the fact his Grandmother lives in Hawaii has nothing to do with it. She’s probably the boss of the local coven!
If i was Midwestmom’s ex-black-b/f – i’d do drugs too.
Like what Senator Ted Stevens did respected the constitution.
Uh huh.
MidwestMom,
You say you won’t vote for Obama because he doesn’t condemn Islam, and polls show the Jews support him. Also because he went to Columbia and Harvard and spent part of his life in Indonesia and vacations in Hawaii, where he was born and his family still lives.
What a sad life you must live. If you ever got out in the world and met some Jews or Muslims or college graduates or Indonesians or Hawaiians you would realize that they are all nice people who aren’t that different from yourself.
Pingback: Limited government again » Blog Archive » Against all enemies, foreign and domestic
MidwestMom wrote “The readers of this forum are, no doubt, atheists, and, as a true American, I support your right to believe whatever religion you want no matter how misguided.”
I’m a Christian, a true American and a proud Obama supporter. You know how you can identify a true American? For one thing, they’re NOT pretending to be the decider about who is and who isn’t a “true American”. I’m thinking you use Constitution toilet paper at home…
Admendment 14
section 4
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
We paid with our guns, time and many lives to give Slaves their freedom and they still hate us. The debt is Paid In Full.