Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 1 decade ago

Obama voters, will you explain this for me?

Here is the Oath of Office:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Barak Obama - 2001 interview.

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.

"It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution" -- " Supreme Court and the redistribution of wealth"


How can you "preserve, protect and defend" something that you believe is "wrong" and desire to "change".

Obama Audio here

7 Answers

  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    So I take it you are in favour reverting to the constitution as it was originally penned. You are obviously against all amendments to the constitution - after all you can't support the constitution if you think it needs those amendments...

    Do you see the flaw in your logic?

  • 1 decade ago

    What we need is a guy that will suspend Habeas Corpus, because that is nothing but a relic from the Magna Carta.

    Oh wait...

    I know "spreading the wealth" (whatever that means) is a slippery slope, but Obama can't be any worse than the current administration.

  • 1 decade ago

    Bush also thought the Constitution was wrong and needed to change when he proposed the Protection of Marriage and the flag-burning amendments. I ask you, then, the same question.

  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    His imaginative and prescient is to craete a greater robust u.s. by employing locking up the Republican Do-Nothings in Gitmo. that's inventive calculated timing by way of fact they themselves voted to do away wirth a rapid trial for incarcerated individuals. that's fairly the President performing interior the regulation of the Patriot Act.this might of direction meet alongside with your approval, patriot.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    Get over it Fox News Fool.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    done explainin' on Nov. 4, buster. Voce populi voce dei.

  • Shark
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    the game has changed - he's in charge now

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.