- Daily Photo: Obama Jokes Around at G-20
- Blackwater gets replaced in Iraq
- Daily Photo: U.S. Marines Look Out for Taliban in Afghanistan
- Hillary Clinton the Tomboy and Her "Ah-Ha" Moment
- Obama Administration Sudan Envoy Headed to Region
- Daily Photo: Potential Flashpoint in Iraq
- Clinton Says New Afghanistan-Pakistan Plan Depends on Diplomacy
- Exclusive: Three Israeli Airstrikes Against Sudan
- Additional 4,000 Troops to Be Ordered to Afghanistan
- Daily Photo: Navy Submarine Trains in the Arctic
- Alarm Over North Korea Missile Prep
- Anti-Terror Stimulus? US Offers Rewards for Top Terrorists
- Daily Photo: Pakistani Women in Refugee Camp
- Condoleezza Rice Appears on "The Tonight Show"
- Diplomat and Aid Group Sound the Alarm on Darfur Camp Situation
- auto industry rescue
- Ballotwatch
- Biden, Joe
- Bush, George W.
- Clinton, Bill
- Clinton, Hillary
- Dodd, Chris
- Edwards, John
- Giuliani, Rudy
- Gravel, Mike
- Huckabee, Mike
- Hunter, Duncan
- Inauguration
- Iraq
- Kucinich, Dennis
- McCain, John
- Obama, Barack
- Palin, Sarah
- Paul, Ron
- Romney, Mitt
- Tancredo, Tom
- Thompson, Fred
- Veepstakes
- Vote 2008: Democrats
- Vote 2008: Republicans
- Washington
- White House
« Previous | Main | Next »
Palin Suggests Obama Would Re-Write Constitution
October 29, 2008 7:57 AM
ABC News' Imtiyaz Delawala Reports: Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin went beyond her running mate's recent attack on Sen. Barack Obama -- inaccurately claiming that Obama called the lack of "redistributive change" during the civil rights movement a "tragedy" -- and used Obama's 2001 interview to insinuate that he wants to re-write the U.S. Constitution and appoint radical Supreme Court justices and judges who would confiscate the property of American citizens.
At two rallies in Western Pennsylvania last night, Palin referenced at the top of her remarks a 2001 public radio interview with Obama that surfaced this week, in which Obama discussed the role of the courts in the civil rights movement.
"There he was talking about the need for quote 'redistributive change,'" Palin said on the campus of Shippensburg University Tuesday night. “Sen. Obama said that he regretted that the Supreme Court hadn't been more radical. And he described the Court's refusal to take up the issues of redistribution of wealth as a tragedy. And he said he also regretted that the Supreme Court didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers there in the Constitution”
Obama had in fact argued the opposite in the 2001 interview, saying that the civil rights movement had become too focused on making change through the judicial system, rather than from the ground up through community organizations.
But Palin used Obama's words to follow an argument Sen. John McCain has made this week that Obama has long-advocated for "spreading the wealth." "Obama says that he wants to spread the wealth," Palin said to boos from the crowd. "In other words he thinks that it's your job to earn the wealth and it's his job to spread it."
But Palin then went beyond any argument McCain has made, using the 2001 interview to insinuate that Obama wants to re-write the U.S. Constitution and appoint radical Supreme Court justices, while also suggesting that under Obama, judges would confiscate the property of American citizens.
Referencing the interview, Palin said, "So you have to ask, is this a suggestion that's he’d want to re-write the founding document of our great nation to accomplish his goals. And what does that say about his ideas on future Supreme Court justices?"
"Let me remind Barack Obama of something else. When judges don’t confiscate your property and your hard-earned -- all of your hard-earned money and then re-distribute that, he may call that a tragedy. But I call it fairness and adherence to our U.S. Constitution," Palin added later in her remarks.
In the interview, Obama described one of the "tragedies of the civil rights movement" was that "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 suffer from that," Obama said in the interview.
When a caller asked whether economic redistribution should come through the courts or the legislative process, Obama replied, "I'm not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts. The institution just isn't structured that way."
Obama's 2001 interview made no mention of judges confiscating property. The Palin campaign did not provide clarification on what Palin was referring to with the remark.
Palin said the 2001 interview revealed Obama's "real ideology" and that his goal to "spread your wealth around" would only spread "scarcity and poverty and bureaucracy" and would stifle the country's entrepreneurial spirit. She asked those in the crowd to support the Republican ticket to preserve the "uniquely American system that our founding fathers created."
"Sometimes in politics it's those candid little moments that give us the whole picture," Palin said at a second rally on the Penn State campus in State College, PA last night. "But our opponent's ideological commitment to spread your wealth around has been tried in other societies, and the only thing it ever spreads is scarcity and poverty and bureaucracy, and it stifles the entrepreneurial spirit that made this country the greatest country on Earth."
The comments were similar to remarks Palin made at rallies this weekend in Iowa, where the Republican vice presidential nominee seemed to move from accusing Obama’s economic plans of having elements of socialism to also allude to the problems faced by communist systems.
October 29, 2008 in Biden, Joe, McCain, John, Obama, Barack, Palin, Sarah, Vote 2008: Democrats, Vote 2008: Republicans | Permalink | User Comments (685)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Obama scares the h*ll out of me!
Dem for McCain/Palin
Posted by: emma | Oct 29, 2008 8:03:11 AM
Read Obama's own autobiographies, in which Obama talks favorably about Marxism and about how he seeks out Marxists as friends.
Posted by: tina | Oct 29, 2008 8:08:35 AM
Emma, if after reading this, you are scared of anyone but Palin--who will accuse her opponents of wanting to rewrite the Constitution, even when they have never expressed any such desire--then I really am afraid for the future of our political discourse.
Isn't this the same Palin who just "redistributed" oil revenues in checks to all of her Alaskan constituents?
Posted by: ethel08 | Oct 29, 2008 8:09:25 AM
Palin's statements are simply over the top and incorrect. Obviously she has neither read the transcript of the entire interview nor has she ever studied the Constitution in depth. She appears to have been fed some half truths here and spews them badly in her speech.
I want an intelligent, articulate person in the White House - Sarah Palin is NOT qualified.
Posted by: Sara, Wisconsin | Oct 29, 2008 8:17:49 AM
If only rewriting the Consitituion was as easy as Palin makes it out to be. Has Palin ever actually erad the Consitition? Obama was a Consititutional Law professor.
Posted by: Jenny Rome Ga | Oct 29, 2008 8:18:19 AM
Where is this woman’s Prozac? Someone get a straight jacket and a gag. She should be held liable for all her lies.
Posted by: Elizabeth from NC | Oct 29, 2008 8:18:30 AM
Ethelo8 you are joking right? You are somebody who sticks your head in the sand and does not realize what this guy is all about. You been drinking his Koolaid and need to stop!
In his own books he hints around about it, and in his speach in 1996 and radio interview in 2001 he even said the Courts were not radical enough to adress the redistribution of wealth and that the constituion in which this country was founded was too narrow!
If Obama is elected and we have a Dem control House and Senate this alone will allow him to push for a Constitutional Amendment which we could not stop.
Now that the MSM is finally opening their eyes on this guy and all the stuff with his relationships and his speaches are coming out the American people are finally realizing this guy is a Marxist!
Good for Palin for stating the clear agenda of this guy, people need to know if he is elected Freedom of Speach and a lot more of our rights will go out the door!
Posted by: chuck | Oct 29, 2008 8:19:41 AM
Palin scares the hell out of me. IFfelected, her only objected is to drive a wedge throught the middle of this nation and continue her uninformed rants. She has the same objectives as many other Repubs, keeping the rich richer and the poor poorer, and the hel with the middle class. She lies without a second thought. She is the prefect example of a politician who will continue to deminish the US standing as a world power. If she become the VP, the US will be a laughing stock. Do you think any world leader is going to take her seriously.
Posted by: Mike | Oct 29, 2008 8:22:09 AM
THIS JUST IN:
Sarah Palin claims that Barack Obama is actually a lesbian crossdresser hatched from an egg in a secret government laboratory.
Honestly, now that we know about Palin's willingness to knowingly lie about her opponent (Question: Is John McCain a socialist because he defended wealthier Americans paying higher tax rates on Meet the press? Does John McCain intend to end the redistributionist Social Security system?), nothing that comes out of her mouth shocks me anymore.
Posted by: John McCain's conscience | Oct 29, 2008 8:23:16 AM
News producer Jesse Watters takes you on a tour of Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s new mansion — including Greek columns, endless garages, golf course, and more…
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/28/a-tour-of-jeremiah-wrights-new-mansion/
Posted by: Kim | Oct 29, 2008 8:24:18 AM
If only rewriting the Consitituion was as easy as Palin makes it out to be. Has Palin ever actually erad the Consitition? Obama was a Consititutional Law professor.
Posted by: Jenny Rome Ga | Oct 29, 2008 8:18:19 AM
----------------------------------------
This coming from the woman that thinks the vp actually runs the senate. Well all I can say is maybe she'll read it this time if it's rewritten. However, I doubt it since the only thing she appears to read are talking points and she might very well be getting those in audio thru a ipod.
Posted by: McCain/Palin = Corporations First | Oct 29, 2008 8:25:58 AM
Chuck,
Your ignorance of the constitution reminds me... of Sarah Palin.
A constitutional amendment must:
- Be passed in the house with a 66.7% majority
- Be passed by the Senate with a 66.7% majority
- Be passed in 75% of the state legislatures.
PLEASE CHUCK, don't vote until you take a couple classes in civics. And pass them!
Posted by: John | Oct 29, 2008 8:28:53 AM
Look who is calling the kettle black, she already wants to change the constitution when it comes to the duties of the vice president. This party is running scared. We have had a dictator for 8 years do we need it for another 4 Not me
Posted by: Rose Szymanski | Oct 29, 2008 8:29:02 AM
emma - As a fellow democrat voting for McCain - I will say that I agree with you. Obama supporters have had two distinct focuses in the runup to this election. 1. Get the man elected. 2. trash talk anyone who disagrees with their view.
Obama has demonstrated a lifetime of bad choices in a short period of time. From his admitted cocaine use - that some apologists describe as 'accident of younth' or 'youthful experimentation' - but wouldn't you want to elect someone who hadn't so eagerly consume drugs 'as often as he could afford it' ? his admitted racial hatred and bigotry in his college years is something I find disgusting. He and I are the same age. I grew up in the south and the times I was exposed to bigoted behavior I did not turn to hatred or drugs. Am I stronger than he ? Nope. I just make better judgement calls. His 20 year association with a bigoted mentor (until that friend became a distraction to his campaign). The 'negative' ads McCain has run are about character. Obamas negative attacks have targeted McCains age. That is just wrong. Repect age. Do not respect color. Age brings wisdom. Color you get when you are born. Character is what counts in this race for me. And in my opinion -we the democrats- got it wrong. We were caught up in the flash of this rising star. But he peaked too soon. What I see inspired by his candidacy is a throwback to 1950's style bigotry - only this time the color to be proud of is black. Have we learned nothing. :(
Teach your kids that anyone can be president - regardless of color, not because of it.
Posted by: runCMD | Oct 29, 2008 8:29:13 AM
Gee, maybe it never occurred to Sarah Palin but the President does not have the power to rewrite the constitution. This woman really needs to learn American history.
Posted by: John in Hartford | Oct 29, 2008 8:30:54 AM
Palin is a Bi**h! I can't stand her. I pray that Obama wins. But if he doesn't, I pray that McCain does not die for 4 years. Palin running this country would be more devastating than the last 8 years have been.
Posted by: Lisa | Oct 29, 2008 8:31:27 AM
John,
Great research. Obviously Palin doesn't know crap about the Constitution. First she got the VP duties totally wrong and then she lies about amending the Constitution. Someone needs to give her a civics class.
Posted by: Mike | Oct 29, 2008 8:31:59 AM
i swear that in 5 years we'll be seeing palin on "cops". you know, that lady in front of the trailer with missing teeth and the cigarette? she'll be raving about "them blacks who dun took my meth". any takers?
Posted by: mar | Oct 29, 2008 8:32:03 AM
Palin is a nutbird. Really sick. She leaves me speechless half the time because I can't figure out if she's really this stupid or this evil. Either way, she's dangerous and that's not good for anyone. I can't wait until this is all over and she's either 'shut up' in the back room or shipped back off to Alaska where she can shop at her consignment shop (how pathetic is she) and mooch off the Alaskan government again and not the rest of us.
Posted by: d Lewis | Oct 29, 2008 8:32:36 AM
Chuck,
Could you please read the constitution before spewing claptrap like that.
According to Article V, a constitutional amendment can be proposed by 2/3rds of both houses of congress or through a national convention requested through the legislatures of several states. The changes must then be ratified through the legislatures or ratifying conventions of 3/5ths of the states.
The Democratic majority in congress will not be large enough to even propose a constitutional amendment and does not have the ability to ratify it anyhow.
The president has no role in the constitutional amendment process.
Posted by: Chris | Oct 29, 2008 8:35:17 AM
Post a comment



