Three reasons to be appalled by the Obama tape, each more disgusting than the last »
Posted By Klarissa 1 year, 1 month ago in News
The Drudge Report this morning led off with a link to audio of Barack Obama on WBEZ, a Chicago public radio station.
And this time, Barack Obama was not eight years old when the bomb went off.
Barack Obama, in 2001:
"And uh, to that extent, as radical as I think 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 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, 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. . . .
You know, I’m not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts."
[Note: Our Constitution has worked because it limits government. I cannot imagine any American citizen using the courts to throw out our Constitution and its protections from tyranny.]
Read Full Story at article.nationalreview.com »
9634 Views Share Story 100 Comments Report
Submitted By:
Klarissa
Berkeley conservative. Don't ask to be my friend unless you have a real bio.Eat your dessert first, life is uncertain. Bridge player, water ...
Who Also Submitted: All »
Other Related Articles: All »
Why not submit a story?
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentShowing 282 of 401 Comments (view all)
-
36%
Klarissa1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Wikipedia:
Reply
Tyranny . . . in the classical sense, the word simply means one who has taken power by their own means as opposed to hereditary or constitutional power (and generally without the modern connotations). This mode of rule is referred to as tyranny. Many individual rulers or government officials are accused of tyranny, with the label almost always a matter of controversy.
We need to keep our Constitutional powers intact.-
68%
alakazam1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You know something?
Reply
I have sat here for years listening to Republicans openly mock people for having the temerity to complain about Bush running roughshod over the Constitution.
Klarissa, You are a Liar and the Truth is not in you.
You are attempting a very poor bait and switch in an what I can only assume is an attempt to secure the final destruction of the Constitution by the con men who have hijacked the Republican Party.
Nope...too many people posting about jackboot fittings last time.
I think Americans are tired of Jackboots. -
25%
Karlyc1 year, 1 month ago
-
PsychoHosebeastComment removed: Spammer, Abusive6 Replies
-
26%
Karlyc1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Oh Klarissa, you are being so uppity again! Can't you just be quiet! NOT
Reply
Instruction from the Poliburo: Stop that uppity Klarissa. Stop her! Stop her!
You know you found a great article when the democrats, all around the same time (hmmmmm) start to comment bomb you. -
-
82%
ETproductions1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Klarissa, After hearing about this, I listened to the whole thing in context. What Obama was saying is that the thinks the Civil Rights Movement in the 60s made a mistake by relying too much on court action while ignoring community orgainizing to help the poor minorities learn how to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, to be self sufficient instead of relying on government. That is the kind of redistribution he was talking about, and I fully agree with him. If that had been done in the 60s, we would live in a much better, less crime ridden, more prosperous country today.
Reply -
-
70%
MRCOFFEECAKE1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
For a person who is in a small clan who has claimed for 8 years that a president can't be responsible for anything that goes on, you sure seem worried about Obama.
Reply
So let's get this straight:
Your 8 year defense of how a president can't do anything on his own has turned into a fear that the next President will all of a sudden begin acting like a real leader and actually show America that a President isn't an impotent fool like you've made Bush out to be??
Aren't you being a huge hypocrite??..But of course you are. We expected nothing less from you! -
boots72Comment removed: Spammer
-
-
82%
Bucotch1 year, 1 month ago
-
-
-
-
84%
ETproductions1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
We wouldn't have any government if nobody worked for it. But at the same time, you are right, the government should work for us. Let's see how it's been doing. The economy driven into the ditch -- we stand on the edge of the next great depression. We're $11 trillion in debt. We've got ourselves into two wars with no end in sight. Our energy policy is to import $700 billion in oil each year, much from states that would live to finance our destruction. How's it working for you? Want more of the same?
Reply
Over 28 years of Republican rule, the wealthiest 1% have gone from owning 1/4 of the nation's total wealth to holding half of it. Real income for the middle class is down 8%. Much of this "redistribution" of wealth from the middle class to the uber wealthy has come under G. W. Bush. McCain was riding shotgun while Bush drove the economy toward the cliff, and now he wants to grab the wheel and step on the gas.
If you are one of the richest 1%, then voting McCain/Palin is in your financial best insterest. If you're in the next 4%m you may do reasonably well. If you are part of the other 95% of us who make less than a quarter million in taxable income, a vote for McCain & Palin is a vote to have your government go to work on you, shaking money out of your pockets and trucking it off to the wealthy.
-
-
41%
nostalgia1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA:
Reply
There is a special hell for you “journalists” out there, a hell made specifically for you narcissists and elitists who think you have the right to determine which information is passed on to the electorate and which is not.
That hell — your own personal hell — is a fiery lake of irrelevance, blinding clouds of obscurity, and burning, everlasting scorn.
You’ve earned it.
THE THIRD CIRCLE OF SHAME
This discovery will hurt Obama much more than Joe the Plumber.
What will be left of my friend, and my friend’s family, I wonder, when the press is finished with them?
They are going to be absolutely tyrannical
Looked what happened to one of the journalism students with the Palestra,net who broke the story on the Ohio voter fraud
SENATOR OBAMA CAMPAIGN LAWYER TRYING TO INTIMIDATE STUDENT JOURNALISTS ?? why because they CAUGHT and EXPOSED actual fraud
http://gretawire.foxnews.com/2008/10/27/obama-camp...-
PsychoHosebeastComment removed: Spammer, Abusive10 Replies
-
-
-
oicu8122Comment removed: Spammer
-
-
30%
GLee1 year, 1 month ago
-
89%
JamesMarcus1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If the redistribution of wealth equals socialism, then we've been a socialist republic since 1913, when the Sixteenth Amendment gave Congress the power to implement a progressive income tax. You know: the rich pay more, the poor pay less. Most Americans, Democrats and Republicans alike, have accepted that basic principal for nearly a century. Meanwhile, the recent bailout of investment banks is more extravagantly socialistic than anything Obama could have dreamed up.
Reply
-
-
33%
dandt16121 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
A lot of us think Bush is bad. He is a greedy man and has caused this country A LOT of grief.
Reply
Well this Obama is down right scarier. His supporters think change is coming, their right but, it's not the kind of change they are thinking of. I hope I'm wrong but I got a bad feeling about this if Obama wins.-
-
67%
donald511 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Repugs promised us the same with Bill Clinton!
Reply
McCarthyism is alive and well in the repug terrorist party, the party of torture, preemptive war, eavesdropping w/o a warrant, Gitmo and rape of the middle class!
Over 1.2 million dead Iraqis not enough for you repugs?
-
-
76%
jordan111 year, 1 month ago
-
28%
Klarissa1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If Obama turns really turns out to be an empty suit it will be the fault of the media. It is very hard for us to know what he really stands for and how he intends to implement his plans.
Reply
Have his campaign speeches been his words, or someone else's.
He has always been employed in roles dealing with poverty programs, public and private funding, and voting.
Does he have the smarts and wisdom to LEAD the country, rather than form committees and get a consensus. Will he put the country first, or will he put the payback to his donors and unions first.
Journalists have a code of ethics, I hope that they have been following them.-
77%
Ratskii1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I love the way you folks deceive yourselves. First, surely you know that the far left, like the far right, is a variety of different things. Which far left do you mean? Don't come back with the word, 'Socialism.' Its just a word, and the Bush and Reagan executives practices a lot of it. The biggest difference is between state socialism and populist socialism. Any idea what that means?
Reply -
28%
FairNBalanced1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I don't think Obama is his own man. He is a talking head for the far left. They have power at the center of their efforts.
Reply
McCain is going to win. Too many people have got to see through this. There have been 300% more polls than ever before. Confusion is high. Obama is NOT leading in the polls as the left would have you believe.
McCain is in this thing and he is going to win!! -
82%
UpholdOurConsitution1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The "code of ethics" applies to everyone. Too bad politicians are n't paying any attention to it. No one knows if either candidate is going to do these things you claim Klarissa. We are all such fools that we merely think we know. Baaaa said the sheep.
Reply
-
-
42%
liquidkaos1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If Obama's agenda is to redestribute wealth. He is making a grave mistake. If you enable poor people to not work by giving them something for nothing, business will no longer become viable. I understand some programs are needed in this country but lets not make the mistake of allowing people to abuse it. Where is the incentive to start a business if I am going to get heavily taxed just to see middle income and lower class folks become lazy who are not intersted in having a business. Take more money lay off workers. Layed off workers get more money for being layed off leads to a weaker workforce and the economic destruction of the US dollar. This is not russian roulette this is without a doubt suicide as with Obamas plan every chamber has a bullet. Surely this glorified community organizer has an ability to look outside his "community" to see a nation. This man has a degree?? In what....obviously not business or economics. Socialist and Marxist B.S. This is crazyness!!
Reply-
FairNBalancedComment removed: Spam
-
77%
jordan111 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This "redistribute wealth' is nonsense in the context you CHOOSE to define it. But I will say this. I'm all for my tax dollars being left in my community, and not one more GD dime to the poor red states who get back MORE than they pay in! How does that work for ya?
Reply -
-
-
-
-
73%
HateKoolAid1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What a joke! Cons implying the Warren court was radical. Was it the Warren court that stuck its nose into states rights by overturning a state supreme courts decision (remember 2000) Was it the Warren court that turned a blind eye to a insidious piece of legislation that neutralized half of the Bill of Rights (Patriot Act)?? Was it the Warren court that ruled in favor of developers taking over private property for profit?? Cons=hypocrites.
Reply-
20%
beavith11 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
you lefty clowns go on and on about how the constitution has been trashed and i fail to see one example of anything LIKE that.
Reply
educate me. can you give me one example of our rights being trampled? or direct me to a litany?
i'm far more worried about Kelo vs New London with regard to setting a terrible precedent... -
29%
Endoscopy1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The 2000 decision that told the Florida Supreme Court two times that they had to abide by the law in place when election day came. That was a federal law passed by a large bipartisan majority of congress after a big stink where things were modified after the election. They made sure that would never happen again. But liberals always want to do what ever they feel is good not what the law says.
Reply
It was the right of the state to make their laws but since it was a federal election that federal law rules.
-
-
-
-
92%
CaptainLucid1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
She is busy raising 2 intelligent and well mannered children. For republicans out there this is called FAMILY VALUES. Family values has nothing to do with depriving gays of civil rights. When the so called family values party runs a guy who cheated on his wife and then dumped her in the hospital when she was in critical condition to marry a young rich beauty queen. And for Palin her first kid was a junkie so they hoped sending him to Iraq would straighten him out, and the second one got knocked up at 17 so they are going to hold a shotgun wedding. Mrs. Obama is doing fine by comparison.
Reply -
-
-
29%
Endoscopy1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Gee. A story about what Obama said in 2001 and listen to the liberals attack everyone with ad hominem attacks or try to change the subject. They can't attack the story since it is very factual but they then attack everything and everyone else.
Reply -
-
79%
cemickle1 year, 1 month ago
-
-
71%
kedirian1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Ah, Klarissa<AGnossis<Luvmyprez, here you go again! By now you've undergone almost as many "metamorphoses" as has your team presented "attacks" on their opponent - none of which have stuck, by the way...
Reply
Your dogged proselytizing on behalf of a morally bankrupt ideology razorsharply amplifies Bill White's statement,
"The United States of America — five percent of the world’s population — leads the world economically, militarily, scientifically, and culturally — and by a spectacular margin",
by its absence of the word INTELLECTUALLY..... -
88%
scott42611 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Oh, if we only still had the ability to sink a story!
Reply
Keith Olbermann spoke to this issue tonight:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/
And here's the actual segment from the 2001 interview, in context:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_xNyrzB0xI -
70%
scott42611 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Now the following are the rights that the USAPATRIOT Act has compromised (at the very least) and violated (at the very worst):
Reply
1) 1. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
2) 4. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
3) 5. No person shall be held to answer for capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.
4) 6. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trail, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of counsel for his defence.
5) 7. In suits of common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of a trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of common law.
6) 8. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
---
I think about American life before George W. Bush, I read the U.S. Constitution, and I weep for my country...
If the Republicans had ANY sense about them at all, Ron Paul would have won THEIR nomination. Unfortunately, the GOP has become a party of talking point lemmings who wouldn't recognize a true conservative. And I don't think they realize how devastating this election will be for them, now that their "big tent" has collapsed around the religious nuts and neo-con Nazis....
----
Now I don't want to hear any more LIES about Obama and the Constitution....-
81%
italymeetsdixie1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It is the most vile piece of litigation ever, EVER to be passed into law. How they can point to Obama as taking anything from the people of this country with a straight face is a LIE that they are not only telling themselves but are trying to convince others of. sickening.
Reply
America is what is it is because of the freedoms we enjoy. Our forefathers, who I have heard Klarissa and Endo bring up an enumerable amount of times had envisioned these rights as well. Since they did not state how much money we should pay to the government, I would have to assume that even they thought maybe the basic tenants of civil rights were more important that a percentage point or two of income.
-
-
-
65%
Aotearoa1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
bobrandy....The truth is out. Obama is finally exposed as the true Marxist he is. He will destroy our country as we will no longer be a democracy but a communist country like Russia
Reply
Naahhh king george w bush has already ruined America with his executive veto proof powers. Obama is going to try and fix the mess the neocons have done to America.
leve leva e malanga kae tau
-
-
81%
sumptuousdigs1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Uh..bob, Russia is emulating the worst that America has ever offered. Organized crime, rampant commercialism, and a return to the lopsided economy that helped usher in the Revolution of 1917.
Reply
In this sense you'd be talkin' about the neo-cons... -
65%
majal491 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Obama is right, of course. And, he is not talking about what the cry-baby conservatives are desperately trying to pin on him--the forced seizure of wealth by the State and random redistribution thereof, aka "socialism" (although that is not necessarily what "socialism" means). Obama is talking in theory: that the Supreme Court is not the best way to bring about economic equality or social parity (meaning, simply, the equality of opportunity for any group or individual to acquire wealth). Obama states that it is better to bring about change by citizen advocacy groups and/or individuals using the electoral process than it is by relying on the Supreme Court to adjudicate such changes. By relying on the electoral process, change comes through consensus which requires the electorate to be educated and informed about the issues that serve their individual or collective self-interest. The recent exchange between Obama and the phony "Joe-The-Plumber" character shows not Obama's desire to "spread the wealth" (via forced seizure and redistribution of assets) but the liberalization of economic opportunity for any one individual. Obama made a poor choice of words in an "off-the-cuff" conversation, this is certain. But the desperate attempts by the crybaby-conservatives to find something/ANYTHING to pin on Obama that would taint him as "the other", someone "alien" to a perceived economic template that is truly "American" shows just how morally and intellectually bankrupt the "conservative" mindset has become.
Reply -
33%
Hansford1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I do not believe that either Obama or his wife have any respect for the Constitution of the United States of America, not do they have any respect for the principles upon which the fundamentals and basis of our laws were formed. Does either of them admire our founding fathers?? Have they ever?? When a person grows up admiring a man who was a Stalinist Communist (Frank Davis), and later greatly admires and respects a minister who despises white people and hates our nation, and listens to that man for twenty years without being at all upset by his views (and he DID know what those views were), is it likely that he values the contributions of our forefathers to this nation, or that he appreciates the generosity of the citizens of this country over many decades?? If he is a close friend of a former spokeperson for the PLO and Arafat, a man who founded a rabidly anti-Israel network in this country, is he likely to protect Israel? When his wife said that this is a "mean" country did she think the mass killings in Africa by her husband's cousin and his political group were superior to the behavior of Americans?
Reply-
31%
corl641 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"greatly admires and respects a minister who despises white people and hates our nation, and listens to that man for twenty years without being at all upset by his views (and he DID know what those views were),"
Reply
What gets me about this is that nobody ever brings up the fact that he had his two young children in that same church listening to Wright. What does that tell you about his concern for others. He wanted to hear what was being said and have his wife and family there to hear it also.
-
-
29%
Painesright1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This needs to get out for the American public to hear and judge for themselves... It is Obama quoting his spiritual mentor Rev Wright and saying: "white folks greed runs a world in need".
Reply
Listen and pass it on...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySM63ES8t4U
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.