About Me

Name: Daemonocracy
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Roll

 

Obama Audio proves his Income redistribution intentions!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck


"Obama Bombshell Redistribution of Wealth Audio Uncovered" is the title of a video recently posted on youtube.  I have the above link, check it out.  In it Obama frankly discusses his views on wealth redistribution on a left leaning Chicago public radio station.  He wants to radically reinterpret the Constitution to redistribute wealth, specifically to African Americans.  It seems as if this is some form of reparations he is advocating, but he clearly supports the idea of income redistribution all around.

Karl Marx said "From those according to their abilities, to those according to their needs."  A quote Joe Biden scoffed at when a Florida TV reporter, Barbara West of WFTV, mentioned it in an interview.  Biden asked if "she was joking..." and her answer was that she was not.  Well apparently, neither is Obama.

This is right from the horse's mouth and much more in depth than what some excused as a throw away line Obama said to "Joe the Plumber" not too long ago.  He is uncharacteristically frank in his support of this policy, says clearly that since the courts are unlikely to pursue such a policy, the legislature must.  No typical Obama nuance here, he is preaching to the choir on this radio station, but now hopefully the rest of America will get to hear how he truly feels about this issue.
 
8 days to go until the election, who knows if this will catch on.  Too long to put into a short ad effectively but hopefully, maybe this time, the Mainstream Media will do their job for once and challenge their favorite candidate on his own words.
 
Below is the transcript for the Interview:
 

TRANSCRIPT:

MODERATOR: Good morning and welcome to Odyssey on WBEZ Chicago 91.5 FM and we’re joined by Barack Obama who is Illinois State Senator from the 13th district and senior lecturer in the law school at the University of Chicago.

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 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 the lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it I’d be okay.

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 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, at least as it’s been interpreted, and the Warren court interpreted it in the same way that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. It says what the states can’t do to you, it 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 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 and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributed change and in some ways we still suffer from that.

MODERATOR: Let’s talk with Karen. Good morning, Karen, you’re on Chicago Public Radio.

KAREN: Hi. The gentleman made the point that the Warren court wasn’t terribly radical with economic changes. My question is, is it too late for that kind of reparative work economically and is that that the appropriate place for reparative economic work to take place – the court – or would it be legislation at this point?

OBAMA: Maybe I’m showing my bias here as a legislator as well as a law professor, but I’m not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts. The institution just isn’t structured that way.

You just look at very rare examples during the desegregation era the court was willing to for example order changes that cost money to a local school district. The court was very uncomfortable with it. It was very hard to manage, it was hard to figure out. You start getting into all sorts of separation of powers issues in terms of the court monitoring or engaging in a process that essentially is administrative and takes a lot of time.

The court’s just not very good at it and politically it’s very hard to legitimize opinions from the court in that regard. So I think that although you can craft theoretical justifications for it legally. Any three of us sitting here could come up with a rational for bringing about economic change through the courts.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama's "Quayle Moments"

Alot of attention has been paid to Sarah Palin's gaffes and mis-statements, and the media have jumped all over McCain for his "100 years in Iraq" line, completely taking it out of context.  SNL is poking more fun at Bush and Palin tomorrow, and I noticed a poster going by the alias of "HarleyDavidson" list some of Obama's stupid moments which would make for great comedy if poking fun at the Obamessiah wasn't blasphemy.
 
Obama:
 
- Obama said he campaigned in 57 states.

- Obama said Kentucky is closer to Arkansas than his home state of Illinois. Kentucky borders Illinois, but not Arkansas.

- Obama asked the UN Security Council to condemn Russia. Russia has veto power over the UN Security Council.

- Obama said we have too few interpreters in Afghanistan, because they are all in Iraq. In Iraq and Afghanistan the citizens speak different languages.

- Obama said Kennedy talked to Khrushchev to get missiles out of Cuba. They talked in 1961. The missiles went there in 1962.

- Obama said his uncle in the American military liberated Auschwitz. The Russians liberated Auschwitz.

- Obama blamed Bush for the rise of Hugo Chavez. Chavez was elected 2 years before Bush.

- Obama said the treatment for child asthma is: Give them a Breathalyzer.

- Obama claimed 10,000 people died in a Kansas hurricane. The real number was 12.

- Obama said our nation honors “fallen heroes, and I see many of them standing here today.” Fallen heroes are dead so he must have seen ghosts.

- Obama referred to the town of “Sunrise” as “Sunshine” and Sioux Falls as “Sioux City.”
 
- and I will add, "uhhh, ehh, ummm, ohhh, ahh, durrr..." whenever he is without a teleprompter or script.
 
I remember all of these Obama moments clearly now that they were brought up again, but they faded from memory because both the news and entertainment media never pick up on them.  Intentionally of course.  Then there is...
 
Joe Biden:
 
- "Look, John's last-minute economic plan does nothing to tackle the number-one job facing the middle class, and it happens to be, as Barack says, a three-letter word: jobs. J-O-B-S, jobs."

- "A man I'm proud to call my friend. A man who will be the next President of the United States — Barack America!"

- "When the stock market crashed, Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the, you know, the princes of greed. He said, 'Look, here's what happened." ( Television in 1929?  Herbert Hoover wasn't President in 1929? )

- "Hillary Clinton is as qualified or more qualified than I am to be vice president of the United States of America. Quite frankly, it might have been a better pick than me."

- "Stand up, Chuck, let 'em see ya." ( Chuck is wheelchair bound)
 
- "Mark my words. It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama.  The world is looking.  We’re going to have an international crisis … to test the mettle of this guy.  I guarantee you it’s gonna happen."  ( How comforting )
 
- He said he would be honored to be John McCain's running mate
 
- He complimented Obama for essentially being an "articiulate" black man (as opposed to what?)
 
 
This is comedic gold, right?  Some of it should be politically devastating even, right?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Mac Blew it

I just finished watching the debate on my DVR (had to finish some work first).  I am disappointed in McCain.  Very disappointed.  I thought he blew it.  Palin set him up real well with her aggressive words blasting Obama for accusing our troops of air raiding civilians in Afghanistan, his shady relationship with Ayers and his willingness to meet with dictators who hate America without preconditions.  McCain was also gaining some steam it seemed with his Palin-esque speech the other day where he laid into Obama and the Democrats over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and seemed to effectively tap into the anger many felt over the Bailout.  He had a new and promising theme, "who is the real obama" he could have worked with, but ignored it completely. 

This debate was dull, boring and a repeat of the first.  He did not go after Obama, let alot of attacks against his record go unanswered, did not link Obama to the unpopular Democratic congress and the bailout debacle effectively, ignored the Ayers connection, did not defend the Free Market and our capitalist system and worst of all, dropped some insane bombshell about having the Feds (The Taxpayers) buy out all of the bad mortgages.  What the hell was that?  Nationalization?  The only part of the debate that woke me up made me wish I was sleeping.  McCain is talking about how important it is to cut spending and how government is not the answer, yet he completely contradicts himself with this socialist policy.

Tom Brokaw should retire as well, that was no Town Hall meeting, it was the same old structured crap we always see, but with an audience.  Tom Brokaw's ego wouldn't allow him to sit this one out and just let regular people ask regular questions, instead it sounded like another boring network news interview.  I have not bothered watching or reading the debate impressions yet, but my guess is everyone is saying the debate was dull, nobody scored any knockout punches and as a result, Obama wins by default.  I was excited for this debate, I thought Mac was going to let him have it, instead he proposes nationalizing bad mortgages and endorsed Warren Buffet as a potential Treasury Secretary and snubbed Mitt Romney.  Nice Job.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Blue State Secession?

Is there a way we can just divide the nation up? Once the red states are torn into poverty and debt since the blue states control 75% of the GDP, they'll come begging back. They'll miss our entertainment too, left to consume hours upon hours of country and christian music.

 

The above text was posted in response to an article on Politico.  I have heard this sentiment quite a bit from those on the left, especially those in well off liberal areas normally located in Northern California.  Though some in my area of New England have mused similar thoughts.  If their candidates can't win in our Democratic system (which must be broken or corrupt!) and their judges can't legislate from the bench (to bypass the "flawed" democratic system) then perhaps the more enlightened Blue States of America should dump the excess baggage that are the Red States and go at it on their own.  I take it these people are not fans of Obama's 2004 Convention speech.  You know, the one about one nation, no Red or Blue States but the United States?

These people seriously undervalue and underestimate the importance of Red State USA.  The economies in the Red States are easily outpacing the Blue States and the cost of living is much more reasonable.  I reside in Connecticut and if it wasn't for my family I would get the heck out of here in a heartbeat.  We have two Sanctuary cities in this small state and a Puerto Rican friend of mine told me the other day that written on the walls of bathrooms in San Juan are messages urging people to go to Connecticut for a "free ride".  The social services in this state are easily abused and it's killing us.  I love New England, and I would miss this historical area of the country, but at the same time I would not look back if I left.

So some want to divide the country?  Ok lets work this out then, I'll speak directly to the Blue State secessionists on this plan.  You can have the Northeast which includes New York and New England (poor New Hampshire) and you can also have Maryland, Delaware, D.C. and part of Pennsylvania such as the Eastern part.  You can also have the Rustbelt states of Minnesota, Michigan, Illinois and I'll even throw in Iowa for you.  Hands off Ohio and Indiana, those are our babies.  You can also have the left coast, except for southern California.  All California territory south of L.A. will belong to the newly founded Red Faction since they will need access to a pacific port.  Washington State and Oregon are yours though.  Maybe Northern Virginia as well can go your way, they've been acting strange lately with all the Carpetbaggers moving in.

The Bible Belt, the Sun Belt, Rocky Mountain States, Midwest, Deep South and Sotheast will all go to the Red Faction.  The Canadian Provinces of Alberta and possibly Saskatchewan may want to join in as well because the good people of The Red States would not want to limit their energy and oil production like the elitists in Ontario, plus they share alot of the same social values as the Red voters.  Alberta especially clings to guns and religion.

Taxes will be low, cost of living will be reasonable and free market businesses will flourish.  Foreign companies such as Toyota and Subaru are already building massive factories in Red States such as Indiana and Alabama to avoid the stranglehold of unions such as the UAW and with out the Rockefeller Wallstreet Republicans calling the shots from Manhattan, true conservatives in the Red States can end this obsession with large corporations and unmonitored free trade and focus on small business and fair trade.  Some states will be socialy conservative while others will take a more libertine approach to these matters, either way it will be their decision without some unelected, unaccountable activist judge writing fairy tales into law and calling it constitutional.

Soooo, if you really think seceding from America is in the Blue States' best interest, take a closer look at your folly.  The Blue Faction would be divided up into three sections, only accessible by air while the Red Faction would be a powerhouse controlling all of North America's Natural Gas, Coal, Oil and Oil shale Reserves.  The majority of the American Armed Forces is made up of Red Staters and the citizens happen to own all the guns as well.  As for entertainment, the South has produced Blues, Jazz, Rock, incredible food, don't limit Casinos to Indian reservations (not every Red stater is a fundamentalist who hates gambling) and a new Hollywood could be formed with movies focusing on action and guns instead of gay cowboys, white guilt and self hating Americans.  John Wayne and Steve McQueen were Conservatives and it would be nice to see actors like this return to the Big Screen and replace the likes of Ben Afflek and Matt Damon. 

Go ahead and secede though, maybe Ontario will join you?

Or maybe you can just learn to love your country unconditionaly, no matter how "stupid" you might think the people are.  I am no Obama fan and personally feel he would be a disaster as President but if he were to be President I would take a cue from John Wayne and say, "well I didn't vote for the guy, but he is still my President and I hope he does a good job."  Sure I would be frustrated if my candidate of choice didn't get in, I might blame the liberal media and all the liberal academic hacks indoctrinating our youth, but I still trust the American people to do what they in their hearts feel is right.  America has faced tremendous challenges throughout its history and the only thing other than the resolve and spirit of the American people that got us through these challenges were truly exceptional leaders.  Distinctly American leaders.  Elected leaders such as Washington and Lincoln as well as Civil leaders who spoke under the protection of the first amendment.  All the troubles we have faced and all the progress we have made and yet I hear people not so jokingly talk about secession?  Because their guy didn't win?  Absurd.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »