ABC News reports on the Obama team’s response to this story.
First, the thrust of the story isn’t the court system or the constitution, although one can hardly read or hear Obama’s comments as anything other than a lament on the rigidity of America’s founding document. So it is at least revealing on that level.
However, let’s assume arguendo that Obama’s comments in 2001 weren’t centered on the judicial branch. Where did Obama think the race-based redistribution of wealth should happen? Legislatively? But wouldn’t such a shift be unconstitutional as violative of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?
Look, these 2001 comments are in some minimal way innocuous compared with Obama’s recent “spread the wealth” answer to Joe the Plumber. But in every other way, they’re far, far worse. Obama’s socialistic agenda in 2001 was rooted not in class warfare but in racial division! This “redistributive change” would have gone well beyond the spirit of Martin Luther King, Jr. to the point of reverse discrimination.
Message to the conservative blogosphere: drop the overly-intellectualized nuances of constitutional interpretation and hit Obama where it counts–on the race-based redistribution of wealth he advocated just a few years ago. This motivation seems to lie at the heart of his recently expressed intention to “spread the wealth.”
UPDATE: Thank you, Ed, for concurring with my assessment:
The point about the courts is really secondary. In this passage, Obama identifies himself as a redistributionist, even if he’s saying that the courts are not going to be a successful venue for it. Despite Burton’s little bit of misdirection, it’s very clear that Obama is highly sympathetic to “redistributive change” — and with an Obama administration coupled with a Democratic majority in both chambers of Congress, the courts won’t be necessary to effect that redistributive change anyway.
Tags: equal protection and reparations, Jeremiah Wright, Joe the Plumber, Obama campaign explains 2001 comments, Obama's 2001 comments, race-based redistribution of wealth, spreading the wealth
This entry was posted on October 27, 2008 at 11:26 am and is filed under Analysis. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Obama Campaign’s Response to 2001 Comments
By cackconABC News reports on the Obama team’s response to this story.
First, the thrust of the story isn’t the court system or the constitution, although one can hardly read or hear Obama’s comments as anything other than a lament on the rigidity of America’s founding document. So it is at least revealing on that level.
However, let’s assume arguendo that Obama’s comments in 2001 weren’t centered on the judicial branch. Where did Obama think the race-based redistribution of wealth should happen? Legislatively? But wouldn’t such a shift be unconstitutional as violative of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?
Look, these 2001 comments are in some minimal way innocuous compared with Obama’s recent “spread the wealth” answer to Joe the Plumber. But in every other way, they’re far, far worse. Obama’s socialistic agenda in 2001 was rooted not in class warfare but in racial division! This “redistributive change” would have gone well beyond the spirit of Martin Luther King, Jr. to the point of reverse discrimination.
Message to the conservative blogosphere: drop the overly-intellectualized nuances of constitutional interpretation and hit Obama where it counts–on the race-based redistribution of wealth he advocated just a few years ago. This motivation seems to lie at the heart of his recently expressed intention to “spread the wealth.”
UPDATE: Thank you, Ed, for concurring with my assessment:
Tags: equal protection and reparations, Jeremiah Wright, Joe the Plumber, Obama campaign explains 2001 comments, Obama's 2001 comments, race-based redistribution of wealth, spreading the wealth
This entry was posted on October 27, 2008 at 11:26 am and is filed under Analysis. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.