Pulling the Plug on the "Living" Constitution

The American Spectator ^ | March 25, 2010 | George Neumayr

[Scanian]

Barack Obama has long seen the U.S. Constitution as an obstacle to what he considers progress. In a 2001 interview that surfaced during the presidential campaign, he made this very clear: the Supreme Court under Justice Earl Warren had failed to break "free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution," Obama mused on a radio show.

The Warren Court was insufficiently radical, he said, conceding too much ground to the traditional interpreters of the Constitution as a "charter of negative liberties," which "says what the states can't do to you, says what the federal government can't do to you, but doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf."

The Founding Fathers, he implied, produced a defective document, much too passive in its understanding of government's possibilities. The founders had set up a form of government to protect liberty; he clearly wished they had formed a government to enact equality.

[ROCKLOBSTER]

I like the way it reads just fine and that it needs no interpretation as it is already in English.

I’m no Constitutional law professor/expert, but then again, neither is he.

[BigSkyFreeper]

He understands the Constitution perfectly well. He hates what it says and it destroying it along with the country. The guy passed “menace” a long time ago. He’s evil.

[sodpoodle]

Didn’t he take an oath to uphold and protect said Constitution?

Isn’t this treason?

[Adder]

The Warren Court was insufficiently radical, he said, conceding too much ground to the traditional interpreters of the Constitution as a “charter of negative liberties,” which “says what the states can’t do to you, says what the federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf.”

And implicit is that it doesn’t say what the gov can do TO you....
IMHO thats where he wants to go....

[LibLieSlayer]

obamao... and enemy in all facets of his beliefs... satan worshiping dog and son of a white WH0RE!

LLS

[D1X1E]

The Founding Fathers, he implied, produced a defective document, much too passive in its understanding of government's possibilities

On the contrary, the founders understood the "possibilities" of government quite well. Thus the reason for placing restrictions upon it.

[D1X1E]

The Founding Fathers, he implied, produced a defective document, much too passive in its understanding of government's possibilities

On the contrary, the founders understood the "possibilities" of government quite well. Thus the reason for placing restrictions upon it.

[Falcon4.0]

"Isn’t this treason?"

It surely rises to the level of "Crimes against the Constitution".
He freely admits to wanting to usurp it.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

In a 2001 interview that surfaced during the presidential campaign, he made this very clear: the Supreme Court under Justice Earl Warren had failed to break "free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution," Obama mused on a radio show.

It's getting harder to distinguish between reality and satire.

[Paine in the Neck]

...essential constraints...

The words come out his mouth but don't register in his brain. They are essential because they are intended to prevent the kind of tyranny he lusts after.

[ozark hilljilly]

These must be the “negative liberties” that he spoke about in another radio interview a few years ago.

That phrase just chills me. Only the left could craft a phrase so creepy.

[Jack Hammer]

You said it perfectly.