Monday, October 27, 2008

Change that will destroy us

I replied in a comment to my last post by Lance, that it wasn't Obama I was equating with Castro (as did the video), but instead, I was saying that the undefined message of change itself, was what we had to beware of.

I'm amending that now.

Obama, himself, because of his ideas on the constitution that have come to light from local Chicago NPR interviews, is the danger. He is a danger himself, because he clearly seeks to undo the constitutional protection of our rights and liberties, in favor of what he would like to change them to be.

Sweetness and Light has npr interview clips of the obaminations views on the constitution, from as far back as 2001, and his views are as opposed to The Founders Constitution as you can get. I'll post them here as soon as I am able.

But the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. And 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 it’s been interpreted. And the 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 State government must do on your behalf.

And that hasn’t shifted and one of the, I think, the tragedies of the civil rights movement was 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 coalitions of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that…

Look at this:
"It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution"
Didn't break FREE!?
"In some ways we still suffer from that…"
Suffer from that?

He is saying that the restraints the Founding Fathers placed upon the Gov't, preventing it from interfering in your life, are impediments, nuisances, obstacles preventing Gov't from doing what Obama wants it to do! This kind of language hasn't been seen in a presidential candidate since Woodrow Wilson - you ought to go back and look at what Wilson did and wanted to do, if you don't understand the significance of that. He brought us as close to a fascist society as we have ever come... Obama intends to push us further.

Make no mistake, don't give him the allowance of possibly being a useful idiot as I have been, he is no amiable gent, Obama's pretence of geniality and declarations of being pro-American are a fraud, they are part of a mask he has consciously been wearing to hide the Halloween horror hiding underneath. He knows exactly what he wants and intends to do, and he intends to wipe out the last remaining vestiges of constitutional rights, in favor of the old Proregressivist/Marxist dream of enabling the Gov't to do what it feels is right to you, in order to 'promote' a change in you.

In any meaningful sense of the words, this creature is anti-liberty, anti-freedom and anti-American.

Those of you willing to focus on his race, either pro or con, are idiots and morons and you do a disservice to our nation. Look at his ideas, listen to him describe what he thinks of the constitution

If you aren't speaking out against this monstrosity - shame on you.

Ladies and Gentlemen, this man is intending to bring change like this nation has never seen.

If you comprehend what he is advocating, and do nothing to speak out against him - shame on you, your children and grandchildren will curse you, and you disgust me.

This is not an election, it is a sea change, and this ship of state is in danger of going down.

Wake Up!


Joan of Argghh! said...

Maybe there's nothing in there about what the State and Fed should do for our benefit because that's already outlined in the word, "Freedom."

Is there any higher benefit?



Good essay.

Niggardly Phil said...

WSJ editorial

Most Presidents Ignore the Constitution
The government we have today is something the Founders could never have imagined.


(Mr. Napolitano, who served on the bench of the Superior Court of New Jersey between 1987 and 1995, is the senior judicial analyst at the Fox News Channel. His latest book is "A Nation of Sheep" (Nelson, 2007).)

"In virtually every generation and during virtually every presidency (Jefferson, Jackson and Cleveland are exceptions that come to mind) the popular branches of government have expanded their power. The air you breathe, the water you drink, the size of your toilet tank, the water pressure in your shower, the words you can speak under oath and in private, how your physician treats your illness, what your children study in grade school, how fast you can drive your car, and what you can drink before you drive it are all regulated by federal law. Congress has enacted over 4,000 federal crimes and written or authorized over one million pages of laws and regulations. Worse, we are expected by law to understand all of it."

Niggardly Phil said...

There is a great book by Bertrand de Jouvenel, On Power, very much worth the read.

It outlines the expansion of power of government. It is a staggering consideration, when put into perspective.

Congress just has too much time on their hands. Legislating has become an ongoing process without regard for need. The minimal notion of the Federal government in the Constitution is violated on a daily basis. Where are the strong State's rights advocates? Everything is being federalized. It's ridiculous.

The more local the government, the more influence it should have on day-to-day life. Yet the very opposite is precisely what is happening. Concentration of power in the hands of the few just goes against the letter and spirit of the constitution.

Niggardly Phil said...

Consider the growth of police - SWAT paramilitary have reached an unprecedented level, to the point where in some jurisdictions they serve warrants! Unthinkable to the founders.

Sorry for the rant, but this seemed a good place for it.