Obama's Speaks about his Constitutional Philosophy

On Jan. 18, 2001, then-state senator Barack Obama appeared on a public radio chat show to discuss "The Courts and Civil Rights."

"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 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, as least as it's 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 it doesn't say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf.  Obama added, "one of the, I think, the 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 activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change, and in some ways, we still stuffer from that."

It isn't a shock to me that there are some out there that believe this way in regards to our Constitution, what is a shock to me is that someone that believes this way can plainly state it and then get elected President of the United States.  It isn't groundbreaking for a Conservative like me to say that the Constitution isn't a living document.  It IS a document that will and can adapt through the processes placed inside it to any future circumstances in that it allows for our legislative process and the Amendment process.  The idea of it simply being twisted in a way that would make Cirque du Soleil performers humbled is terrifying.  Those that interpret our Constitution the way our current President does are not confident it can be changed through legitimate constitutional mechanisms.  I invite the opposition to openly and plainly petition the American people for Amendments as Obama would like them.  I'm not scared of the will of the American people.  The American people as a whole are not ideological, but they are governed by common sense and a sense of self-interest (not selfishness, there is a big difference) that will not allow them to agree with a redistribution of wealth scheme or a scheme that would openly take away their freedoms.

President Obama, our Constitution IS a charter of negative freedoms because it was designed to govern a free people.  For instance, the negative rights that tell the Federal government what it can't do also allow the States or the people to decidedly DO those things (refer to the 9th and 10th amendments).  For instance, there is no provision in the U.S. Constitution for Universal Health Care, Government-run Health Care, Government-controlled Health Care, a Right to Health Care, a Patient's Bill of Rights, or anything of the kind unless you torture the 'general welfare,' 'interstate commerce,' or the 'necessary and proper' clauses to death.  However, the polity of any particular state could get together and vote in such a thing, much like Massachussetts did under Mitt Romney.  If you take this example to its Constitutional conclusion you can see that we would have 50 different laboratories around the country to try out any idea that a FREE people decide to try, and its possible that ALL 50 might decide to do such a thing but the federal government has NO RIGHT!   The biggest restriction upon the states is that they are Constutionally required to maintain a republican form of government.  Most people don't understand that an overturn of Roe v. Wade would simply allow each state to decide for itself whether or not to allow abortion to be legal, it would not illegalize abortion but would leave it up to the people of that particular state.  Also, legalization of marijuana and other drugs.  Imagine a constitutional America where the the upper NW like Oregon and Washington legalized pot and abortion but the SE U.S. is still no-drugs and no-abortion.  Imagine what that would be like, a country where we stand united against the world and for our allies but we have the freedom to live how we see fit by exercising our vote, our voice or ultimately, our feet (by moving to a state that reflects our views).  I believe THAT is a simplified example of the vision our Founder's saw, modernized.  Its also called 'Federalism.'

Once again I would love to see your comments here at the Guerrilla Conservative.

Thanks,

Tom