In spite of that, I did not, and would not believe that America would elect a candidate like Barack Obama. I simply would not believe it, and stated I would only believe it when I saw it.
Well, here we are.
In my opinion, we should be fighting the inauguration of this man, his principles and the rest of his party on every front we can and not give an inch of metaphorical ground until they have taken it and we will not be able to get it back. Here are some quotes from Barack Obama:
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 invest formal rights in previously dispossessed people, so that now I would have the right to vote. I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order as long as I could pay for it I’d be o.k. But, the Supreme Court never ventured into issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society.
To that extent, as radical as I think people try 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, at least as its 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 doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that.
"..I think we can say the Constitution reflected a 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, uh that paved the way for where we are now, and that it it also reflected the fundamental flaw of this country that continues on to this day.
Keeping in mind the content of these quotes, we should read the Oath of Office for the Presidency that Obama is expected to swear upon his inauguration:
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that 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.
In light of Obama's quotes that I included above, is there anyone here who doubts for one minute he and his kind have no intention whatsoever of preserving the Constitution? To begin the destruction of the document, it has to begin somewhere, and the first place that happens is with Article II, Section1, Clause 5 of that document.
This is my opinion.
I readily admit I would enjoy the irony of a man denied office on a technicality (even though there is nothing technical or minor about a constitutional requirement) given that he gained public office and maintained it both by having his opponents thrown off the ballot on technicalities in order to run unopposed, then winning the general election by having proxies expose sealed divorce records.
I admit that, but it does not make me wrong.
We are in agreement......seeing the same big picture.
I agree with you fully on the absolute nightmare that an Obama presidency will be. But I just want to make sure that all of us are looking at all the facts and independently confirming statements that are made here.
I would love to see O kicked out while he’s still almost the first almost-black president, but I want to make sure that we have the facts and we aren’t hanging our hat on wishes and dreams.
That said, though I don’t think this holds water, I’m still looking into it and happy to read all info that I can.
Someone posted that there are two sides to this. I beg to differ; we all oppose Obama. In that, we are all on the same side.
>>>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 invest formal rights in previously dispossessed people, so that now I would have the right to vote. I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order as long as I could pay for it I’d be o.k. But, the Supreme Court never ventured into issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society.
To that extent, as radical as I think people try 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, at least as its 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 doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that.<<<
Thanks for the quotes. Very damning and damnable.