Comrade Obama's "Bombshell Redistribution of Wealth Audio Uncovered" (Congress, thought)

[Sporin]

Originally Posted by dixiegirl7

He definitley will be pushing for reparations when he gets elected. That is one of things he thinks the civil rights movement failed to do.

No. He has repeatedly throughout his campaign and before come out strongly against reparations.

[Miborn]

Originally Posted by southward bound

What I understood him to say is that the changes desired got lost in the civil rights movement and that the court wasn't radical enough to address them; that the court was uncomfortable tackling all the issues connected with redistribution of wealth and viewed it (then) as an administrative task.

It's clear, with the direction he has taken, that he now believes the courts can be the vehicle to accomplish the changes he wants. If he wins, he'll appoint his judges to do just that.

If you think now that the Constitution has been tampered with, just wait. We won't hardly recognize it after they get through with it.

scary thought isn't it!

[GregW]

Even if Obama was a complete collictivist, I do not have anything left worth collecting.

[padcrasher]

Originally Posted by southward bound

What I understood him to say is that the changes desired got lost in the civil rights movement and that the court wasn't radical enough to address them; that the court was uncomfortable tackling all the issues connected with redistribution of wealth and viewed it (then) as an administrative task.

It's clear, with the direction he has taken, that he now believes the courts can be the vehicle to accomplish the changes he wants. If he wins, he'll appoint his judges to do just that.

If you think now that the Constitution has been tampered with, just wait. We won't hardly recognize it after they get through with it.

Yes, I think it went over your head. Try reading in context.

[cobolt]

This was just sent to me in an email. Make of it what you will.....


Confirming web sites at the bottom of this email...



You might want to copy and save for future reference.





Stay informed on what you are actually voting for in November!

2008 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE COMPARISON

TALKING POINTS

ISSUE JOHN McCAIN
BARAK OBAMA

Favors new drilling offshore US
Yes
No, but might consider

Will appoint judges who interpret the law not make it
Yes
No

Served in the US Armed Forces
Yes
No

Amount of time served in the US Senate
22 YEARS
143 DAYS

Will institute a socialized national health care plan
No
Yes

Supports abortion throughout the pregnancy
No
Yes

Would seek to pull troops out of Iraq immediately
No
Yes

Supports gun ownership rights
Yes
No





Proposed programs will mean a huge tax increase
No
Yes

Voted against making English the official language
No
Yes

Voted to give Social Security benefits to illegal aliens
No
Yes

CAPITAL GAINS TAX

MCCAIN
0% on home sales up to $500,000 per home (couples). McCain does not propose any change in existing home sales income tax.

OBAMA
28% on profit from ALL home sales.

(How does this affect you? If you sell your home and make a profit, you will pay 28% of your gain on taxes. If you are heading toward retirement and would like to down-size your home or move into a retirement community, 28% of the money you make from your home will go to taxes. This proposal will adversely affect the elderly who are counting on the income from their homes as part of their retirement income.)

DIVIDEND TAX

MCCAIN
15% (no change)

OBAMA
39.6%

(How will this affect you? If you have any money invested in stock market, IRA, mutual funds, college funds, life insurance, retirement accounts, or anything that pays or reinvests dividends, you will now be paying=2 0nearly 40% of the money earned on taxes if Obama becomes president. The experts predict that 'Higher tax rates on dividends and capital gains would crash the stock market, yet do absolutely nothing to cut the deficit.')

INCOME TAX

MCCAIN

(no changes)
Single making 30K - tax $4,500
Single making 50K - tax $12,500
Single making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 125K - tax $31,250



OBAMA (reversion to pre-Bush tax cuts)
Single making 30K - tax $8,400
Single making 50K - tax $14,000
Single making 75K - tax $23,250
Married making 60K - tax $16,800
Married making 75K - tax $21,000
Married making 125K - tax $38,750

INHERITANCE TAX

MCCAIN
- 0% (No change, Bush repealed this tax)

OBAMA
Restore the inheritance tax - Many families have lost businesses, farms, ranches, and homes that have been in their families for generations because they could not afford the inheritance tax. Those willing their assets to loved ones will only lose them to these taxes.

NEW TAXES PROPOSED BY OBAMA

New government taxes proposed on homes that are more than 2400 square feet.

New gasoline taxes.

New taxes on natural resources consumption (heating gas, water, electricity)

New taxes on retirement accounts.

New taxes to pay for socialized medicine.


You can verify the above at the following web sites:

Election 2008: The candidates and your money - CNNMoney (http://money.cnn.com/news/specials/election/2008/index.html - broken link)

Taxes - Issues - Election Center 2008 - CNN.com
Home - FOXNews.com Elections

McCain, Obama Offer Different Visions on Taxes
Fact Checker Archive by Category

Fact Checker Archive by Category

[Mamama Mia]

Since I have been in Chicago for my entire life. I have been able to hear all of the Obamaisms ad nauseum for way too many years.
So many supporting him know so little about what his politicial beliefs are. Most don't care to know.

[dixiegirl7]

Originally Posted by Sporin

No. He has repeatedly throughout his campaign and before come out strongly against reparations.

That is not what the tone of this audio tells me. Wait and see.

[Marlow]

I'm going to put this newest revelation in the "McCain Volunteer Mutilated by Obama Supporter: Warning: Graphic Content" file.

[cohdane]

Originally Posted by cohdane

Since I worked in advertising and personally supervised mixing sessions at sound studios, I don't trust "audio" evidence.

This recording has a lot of "scratch" in the background, which can cover a world of sins in editing bits and pieces together.

A similar, but more obvious example of a doctored speech is this one:
YouTube - RARE BANNED BUSH SPEECH


I am not saying whether or not this audio is authentic. I'm just saying that with technology being what it is today and the bad behavior that occurs during any election season, people should listen to this with a healthy dose of skepticism.

Wait till it's confirmed either by the station itself, an official transcript or some other objective source.

Forgive me quoting myself, but I wanted to be sure that everyone knows I'm trying to be objective. The interview took place. I found a link to the original station that conducted the interview and they are posting the interview(s) here in their entirety:

Chicago Public Radio Blog » Barack Obama’s Radio Days | News and Notes from WBEZ

I haven't listened to the whole thing yet, because I don't have time right now, but more than likely, the YouTube has sliced and diced to make a point. I'm hoping the original station releases a transcript.

Hearing it in context is important before making judgments. Goes for remarks by any candidate.

For what it's worth, it's already being spun in different directions depending on who you ask:

Fear of an Anti-Capitalist Planet - The Opinionator Blog - NYTimes.com

[fizbin]

Hilarious. Much ado about nothing that the Reps will try to spin for a day or two. People are smart enough to read this for what it is, which is nothing controversial at all.

Originally Posted by padcrasher

Here's his full quote in context. Not the edited audio designed to confuse.

Nothing new or controversial here. He said the civil rights movement focused too much on change via the courts at the expense of change via their own making by way of politcal and community organizing....[YAWN]

"You know if you look at the victories and the failures of the Civil Rights movement and its litigation strategy in the Court, I think where it succeeded was to invest 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 as long as I could pay for it I would 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 I think people try 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 its been interpreted and the Warren Court interpreted it 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 and that hasn't shifted.

And 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 and 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."