Obama: "Constitution is flawed because Redistribution of Income was left out"

[12secGT]

A 'marxist' energy take over? Are you nuts? A cap and trade style system was put in place by G Bush in the 1990 clean air act.  Palin and McCain, yes your favourite woman, campaigned on the basis of having a 'cap and trade' system going forward to reduce emissions.

As for health care i guess every country with a government assisted or run health care program is a marxist state is that right?  So schooling run by Government is a marxist idea? Police, fire, the Armed forces are they too marxist ideas?  

Oh, I thought Republicans were anti environment??
Show me where gov't run ANYTHING is successful? The Obama admn couldn't get the cash for clunkers program to work right and we were "only" talking about a few billion... What it is, is that the gov't run healthcare plan will cause those WHO HAVE healthcare have to pay for those WHO DON'T. This my friend is why the majority of America WANTS reform, but not the public option. The math put forth doesn't add up, we can't pay for it, just like the trillions we will be in debt on Obama's stim plan.

[Soul Crusher]

It is never to be questioned? Haha seriously? You must want to live in a dictatorship.  Do you even want liberty? You must question and challenge things.  If the constitution is never to be questioned why is it challenged in court, why is it added to and amended?  And why is this accepted practice? Because it's all part of the democratic process.

We have an amendment process, if you want to get 3/4 of the states to change it, go try.  

BTW - watch the bullets fly your way when you try to enshrine mandated redistribution of wealth via constitutional mandate.  

[12secGT]

It is never to be questioned? Haha seriously? You must want to live in a dictatorship.  Do you even want liberty? You must question and challenge things.  If the constitution is never to be questioned why is it challenged in court, why is it added to and amended?  And why is this accepted practice? Because it's all part of the democratic process.

KB, Honestly... amendments to the constitution are one thing. But you don't change the structure or you don't have a document to govern from. This document is the embodiment of freedom. You might want to read it once.

[Soul Crusher]

So you are advocating the giving away of tax payer funds and to never have an oversight into how it is used? You must support lunacy.

KC - you are seriously uninformed.  Go look at who was behind that - Geithner, Paluson, Summers, etc.

Watch that movie "The Warning" - the same criminal gang who started this mess is still there.  

    

[12secGT]

So you are advocating the giving away of tax payer funds and to never have an oversight into how it is used? You must support lunacy.

No, what I am saying is you can put checks and balances in place, without "OWNING" and determining who gets what and when they get them. The take over is just a start to something grander in his agenda.

[kcballer]

Cap & Trade, as was passed by the House of Reps. is a massive giveaway to GS.  It taxes the crap out of us, literally, based on junk science.  did you know that Ken Lay and Al Gore met to create this scheme?  You remember Ken Lay right?
 

Oh please.  'Junk science'  Not this rubbish again.  You can take your minority of sources who dispute the truth and go stick your head in the sand.  No major country on the face of the earth believes climate change is not being helped by the current wastage being released by man.  Not China, not India, not Russia.  Not ONE of them.  Not the vast majority of the worlds or America's scientists.  

Except you.

[Soul Crusher]

Oh please.  'Junk science'  Not this rubbish again.  You can take your minority of sources who dispute the truth and go stick your head in the sand.  No major country on the face of the earth believes climate change is not being helped by the current wastage being released by man.  Not China, not India, not Russia.  Not ONE of them.  Not the vast majority of the worlds or America's scientists.  

Except you.

And you dont think its a prblem that Russia, India, and China refuse to go along with this while we knee-cap our economy and pay massive new tax rates on energy? 

[kcballer]

We have an amendment process, if you want to get 3/4 of the states to change it, go try.  

BTW - watch the bullets fly your way when you try to enshrine mandated redistribution of wealth via constitutional mandate.  

Um i think you're living a pipe dream there 333 no one is doing anything of the sort.

[kcballer]

And you dont think its a prblem that Russia, India, and China refuse to go along with this while we knee-cap our economy and pay massive new tax rates on energy? 

Did you not understand they are making changes, the first time in fact, they have both promised to make emissions changes. 

[2ND COMING]

33, you know this whole story is fake right?

[2ND COMING]

Conservative Blogs fall for Scam Blog Post About Obama Paper on Constitution
Friday, October 23, 2009 | Kristinn

Posted on Friday, October 23, 2009 2:32:03 PM by kristinn

Two months ago, the blog Jumping in Pools, which has been banned from FR for its chain-yanking postings of bogus news stories, posted a bogus story about Time magazine writer Joe Klein supposedly reporting on Barack Obama's writings at Columbia University about the Constitution.

Apparently without doing any research to see if Klein had actually written such an article, respected sites including American Thinker and Pajamas Media got all excited about the story and reported it today as if it were true.

They apparently hadn't noticed there was no source link at Jumping in Pools back to the supposed Joe Klein article. A search of the web produced no original source. A search of Time magazine for the term "Aristocracy Reborn", the supposed title of Obama's paper, returned this message: "Your search produced no results."

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2369455/posts

33, you really gotta stop jumping the gun.

[OzmO]

Obama and the Constitution; He Has His Doubts (college thesis)
PJ media ^

Posted on Friday, October 23, 2009 11:01:50 AM by Sir Gawain


October 21st, 2009 6:46 pm
Obama and the Constitution; He Has His Doubts


I missed this first time around. Brian Lancaster at Jumping in Pools reported on Obama’s college thesis, written when he was at Columbia. The paper was called “Aristocracy Reborn,” and in the first ten pages (which were all that reporter Joe Klein–who wrote about it for Time–was permitted to see), the young Obama wrote:


“… the Constitution allows for many things, but what it does not allow is the most revealing. The so-called Founders did not allow for economic freedom. While political freedom is supposedly a cornerstone of the document, the distribution of wealth is not even mentioned. While many believed that the new Constitution gave them liberty, it instead fitted them with the shackles of hypocrisy.”

That’s quite an indictment, even for an Ivy League undergraduate. I wonder if the prof–and I’d like to know who the prof was–made an appropriate marginal comment, something about historical context, about the Constitution’s revolutionary status in the history of freedom, and about the separation of powers in order to make the creation of any “shackles” as difficult as possible.

Maybe instead of fuming about words that Rush Limbaugh never uttered, the paladins of the free press might ask the president about words that he did write. Maybe he’d like to parse “the so-called Founders,” for example. I’d like to know what he thinks of those words today. And what about the rest of the thesis?

________________________ ________________________ ______________

Unfreaking real. 

IS THIS WHAT YOU VOTED FOR?  ? ? ? ? ?

I don't know that the title matches the quote.

Is the "Redistribution of Income" the same thing as the "distribution of wealth?"

Was Obama talking about the wealth of the government?

[Kazan]

I don't know that the title matches the quote.

Is the "Redistribution of Income" the same thing as the "distribution of wealth?"

Was Obama talking about the wealth of the government?

What wealth does the government have? They get their money from the tax payer.

[OzmO]

What wealth does the government have? They get their money from the tax payer.

Exactly.

Is redistribution of income is different from distribution of wealth or are they the same thing?

Redistributing my income is deciding how much and where my income goes.

Distributing wealth (government's tax revenue) means how it is spent. 

But i hold no illusions to the "very socialists" base form which he speaks. 

[Soul Crusher]

Exactly.

Is redistribution of income is different from distribution of wealth or are they the same thing?

Redistributing my income is deciding how much and where my income goes.

Distributing wealth (government's tax revenue) means how it is spent. 

But i hold no illusions to the "very socialists" base form which he speaks. 

Did you listen to those clips I posted?

1.  "The constitution and nation is fatally flawed from its founding"

and

2.  The Warren Court was not radical enough because it did not address redistribution of welath.

These are direct interviewes, not college papers.  Whether the college paper is accurate or not, the sentiments expressed in the clips I posted are exactly the same thing as reported in the paper.

I still dont know how Obama could take the oath to uphold and defend a document that he believes is fatally flawed.   

[Soul Crusher]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2369455/posts

33, you really gotta stop jumping the gun.

2nd - did you listen to the youtubes clips I posted?

If not, please do so.  These are direct interviews of Obama himself where he says explicity that he wants redistrubtion of the wealth and that the fatal flaw of this nation is that the constitution did not include that. 

[2ND COMING]

2nd - did you listen to the youtubes clips I posted?

If not, please do so.  These are direct interviews of Obama himself where he says explicity that he wants redistrubtion of the wealth and that the fatal flaw of this nation is that the constitution did not include that. 

33, the article is completely fake man. Youre making a habbit of posting bunk shit before you even read up on it. 

cmon, pajama media? Youre better than that.

ive seen those vids before, but this is about the article.

[Soul Crusher]

33, the article is completely fake man. Youre making a habbit of posting bunk shit before you even read up on it. 

cmon, pajama media? Youre better than that.

ive seen those vids before, but this is about the article.

Fine, even Michael Ledeen posted this on his site.  Ledeen is a noted author. 

As far as those clips go, they are saying directly what was quoted in the paper.  Because Obama have never authorized the release of any of his records, we still will have to wait. 

The info on those clips is still shocking to me. 

[OzmO]

Did you listen to those clips I posted?

1.  "The constitution and nation is fatally flawed from its founding"

and

2.  The Warren Court was not radical enough because it did not address redistribution of welath.

These are direct interviewes, not college papers.  Whether the college paper is accurate or not, the sentiments expressed in the clips I posted are exactly the same thing as reported in the paper.

I still dont know how Obama could take the oath to uphold and defend a document that he believes is fatally flawed.   

You are missing my point or confusing someone else's point with my.  The title doesn't match the quote.  Is it just blatant spin on your part or what?

[Soul Crusher]

You are missing my point or confusing someone else's point with my.  The title doesn't match the quote.  Is it just blatant spin on your part or what?

What is the difference of income or wealth?  Its just a semantic point that avoids the overall picture.  Listen to those clips I posted and I think he makes himself very clear.   

[OzmO]

What is the difference of income or wealth?  Its just a semantic point that avoids the overall picture.  Listen to those clips I posted and I think he makes himself very clear.   

You don't see a difference between income and wealth?  Aren't you self-employed/business owner?

What overall picture does it avoid?  Obama is a democrat who is way to the left.  What else is old?  But your title doesn't match the quote.   Its a spin job.

[Skip8282]

Exactly.

Is redistribution of income is different from distribution of wealth or are they the same thing?

Redistributing my income is deciding how much and where my income goes.

Distributing wealth (government's tax revenue) means how it is spent. 

But i hold no illusions to the "very socialists" base form which he speaks. 

Ok, I'll bite.  Please explain to me the difference between, "how much and where my income goes" and "how it is spent".  You seem to indicate there's a difference, but I'm not getting it.

[240 is Back]

I'm just reading this thread for the first time.

I finally see the light about Obama.

great article, great point.  I can't believe Obama wrote such a thing.

Thanks Rush for bringing this to attention.

[Kazan]

I'm just reading this thread for the first time.

I finally see the light about Obama.

great article, great point.  I can't believe Obama wrote such a thing.

Thanks Rush for bringing this to attention.

You'll never see the light about Obama, so the thesis was a scam, there is enough information out there without it. I have a question for you, explain to me how taking from the productive to give to the unproductive is good for America? There is going to come a time if this country keeps going in the direction that it is that the productive are going to go elsewhere. Then what are the unproductive going to do? Maybe the fed can just keep printing money and handing it out. America will look like 1936 Germany, and you can use the dollar to wipe your ass with, because thats about all it will be worth.

[2ND COMING]

33, why dont you edit the thread title? thats like the 3rd or 4th time you posted something that was 100% fake and still left the title up

would you be giving shit to 240 for example if he posted a fake story and left the title up