Tuesday, October 28, 2008

The Constitution of the United States and Obama. Huh?

Back in the 2001 radio interview which just surfaced, in which Barack Obama reveals more of his "spread the wealth" ideology, I found this one statement so stunning that my jaw dropped while I was at work hearing it.

"The Constitution reflected the enormous blind spot in this culture that carries
on to this day. The framers had that same blind spot ... the fundamental flaw of
this country."

Let me understand this right. A man who could very well become our next US president - that is, one who is charged with upholding the Constitution of the United States finds it....well...imperfect???

There is no way to spin his words. Of course, the media elites are either not bothering to cover it, or they are downplaying it. There's more in the interview that is quite disturbing.

It's bad enough that a court, legistlating from the bench, managed to pervert the US Constitution in Roe v. Wade in order to permit the killing of unborn citizens, with unborn black babies being burned and dismembered at a rate of 5x that of white babies. The US Constitution guarantees the right to life, not the right to kill. Now, we have someone who will look for an opportunity to turn the Supreme Court and federal courts into one kangaroo court system to advance more of the same.

Related:




Te Deum Laudamus! Home

The obedient are not held captive by Holy Mother Church; it is the disobedient who are held captive by the world!

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I have to say that I think you are creating a problem here that doesn't exist. There is no fundamental contradiction with taking an oath to uphold the Constitution and also finding it, as you put it, "imperfect". There is nothing that says that one who does not treat the Constitution as some sort of inspired document to hold sacred couldn't agree to enforce it as the law of the land while at the same time working to point out any problems and deal with them.

I have found, as I have become more and more interested in pro-life matters, that the pro-life movement is bizarrely tied into a certain school of thought on constitutional issues. It is almost as if being against killing your baby implies being a "strict-constructionist" or an "originalist". I myself am against the murder of an unborn baby, but I don't necessarily agree with the Scalia method of Constitutional interpretation.

I also find the length of the recording frustrating. I would appreciate a better context as to what Obama sees the flaw to be. I don't consider the Constitution to be perfect or holy writ.

Michael Enright