Forget all of the guilty associations. This audio of Obama shows his full colors flying for total government control over all human economic realities.
Centralized state-controlled wealth/property redistribution = no real private property = effective enslavement and subjugation.
I find his view that the Constitution is insufficient, just a document of "negative" rights, profoundly disturbing. The Constitution's essence is not merely as a document of prohibitions on what government can do to us, while anything else is up for grabs.
The Constitution is an eternal mandate that government exists to secure our innate rights as free people. It does not give us freedom, it exists to protect it against collective encroachments, by government above all. It does not "vest us" with rights, as Obama characterized the high court's decisions ordering government to equally protect the rights of African-Americans.
The Constitution has been our one and only bulwark against government that would vest itself as the "determiner" rather than defender of our liberties. Would-be social engineers and statists have long been vexed by what they view as its rigidity and failure to produce their desired outcomes. Obviously they are oblivious that the thwarting of such ad hoc collectivism is the whole point of the Constitution.
It is self-evident that the power to "vest" is also the power to "divest". Those who need to justify property confiscation and re-distribution, in the name of engineered "economic justice", require such an arrangement of purported "self-governance".
I don't care that Obama is a neighbor or buddy of someone like Bill Ayers. I am far more frightened that Obama, not 7 years ago, sounded like Ayers' sophisticated pupil, complete with leftie crypto-megalomania.
Redistributive change? Repackaged socialism is more like it....
Centralized state-controlled wealth/property redistribution = no real private property = effective enslavement and subjugation.
I find his view that the Constitution is insufficient, just a document of "negative" rights, profoundly disturbing. The Constitution's essence is not merely as a document of prohibitions on what government can do to us, while anything else is up for grabs.
The Constitution is an eternal mandate that government exists to secure our innate rights as free people. It does not give us freedom, it exists to protect it against collective encroachments, by government above all. It does not "vest us" with rights, as Obama characterized the high court's decisions ordering government to equally protect the rights of African-Americans.
The Constitution has been our one and only bulwark against government that would vest itself as the "determiner" rather than defender of our liberties. Would-be social engineers and statists have long been vexed by what they view as its rigidity and failure to produce their desired outcomes. Obviously they are oblivious that the thwarting of such ad hoc collectivism is the whole point of the Constitution.
It is self-evident that the power to "vest" is also the power to "divest". Those who need to justify property confiscation and re-distribution, in the name of engineered "economic justice", require such an arrangement of purported "self-governance".
I don't care that Obama is a neighbor or buddy of someone like Bill Ayers. I am far more frightened that Obama, not 7 years ago, sounded like Ayers' sophisticated pupil, complete with leftie crypto-megalomania.
Redistributive change? Repackaged socialism is more like it....
Comments