[This article was updated Apr 5, 2011]
I had listened to the following two versions of Barack Obama's WBEZ Chicago interview from 2001, which were both edited:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck
This one left out the portions of the interview that had no relation to the subject matter.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v34yRmKPnDQ&feature=related
This one was posted as a rebuttal to the above, however, it makes a claim regarding the original that is patently false. This editor omitted a portion of the first video which would make the statement on screen untrue.
Well i decided to look for the very original from the station (http://apps.wbez.org/blog/?p=639 Link changed to http://audio.wbez.org/Odyssey/CourtandCivilRights.mp3). At the original link they had, low and behold as it was an election year, posted all of Obama's interviews with a statement by WBEZ Program Director Steve Edwards regarding the first Youtube link above (see following paragraph), however this entire web page is gone and I found the following by a search at the WBEZ blog,http://www.wbez.org/jandrews/2008/10/barack-obamas-radio-days-2/7912 with the following paragraph again included:
"Some of you have inquired as to why we didn’t request a takedown notice for the YouTube video. Here’s the deal: As an organization we strive to be an impeccable source of independent, unbiased news and information. While our audio content in this case was excerpted and repackaged in way that wasn’t in keeping with our own editorial standards, the source audio was available to others on the web and its use in this case was within generally acceptable fair use provisions. Thus, we didn’t have any clear legal claim to intervene one way or the other. And more importantly, to do so would have been tantamount to intervening on behalf of the Obama campaign. To take actions that could be construed as helping either campaign (Obama’s or McCain’s) is contrary to our own standards of reporting in an unbiased and independent manner. Instead, we believed the best approach was simply to make available the original source of the audio - in its entirety - for others to listen to themselves and to decide what Senator Obama said and meant."
Compelled to reply and thank WBEZ for not seeking to have the youtube video taken down, I posted the following comment on their site, I hope you enjoy it:
"Well honestly after listening to both, I can appreciate the actions of Steve Edwards regarding taking no action to have the clip taken down.
Those who are for Obama may have seen great creative license taken, however, there are others who posted rebuttal, and in like manner, omitted sections of the discussion.
As a former Chicagoan I found that there is evidence of Senator Obama having beliefs consistent with a variety of notions of expanded government. That the course of the subject of this conversation, when taken entire with his initial statements about the court not addressing wealth redistribution as an assertion in argument with another guest who previously spoke of how the court had so engaged, does inform well. And that overall, Senator Obama contradicts his initial statements about the court in that assertion in rebuttal to another, in that Obama's assertion indicates an interest in why the court didn't get involved and expand interpretation of the Constitution. While in discussion with the caller he virtually answers his own question.
Yet I have concern with the Senator's failure to recognize the 10th Amendment in the firstplace, as that particular Amendment designates most particularly why other powers not delegated to the National government, nor assumed by the states, will not be interpreted as any obligation to act on the behalf of the governed. In it's own way this reservation of rights creates an exclusion upon the government of the United States (State and National taken together) from assuming any such role without the American People seeking government intervention by due process of legislative enactment.
Thus the people of this nation, though not subjects of the government by it's duty to act on our behalf, do remain subjects to their own course and the responsibility thereby. I believe the U.N. identifies this in their Declaration of Human Rights as "The Right of Self-Determination," a fundamental right of all peoples in every nation that seems to be an outcropping from our capitalist system and the equity decentralization that had led to the creation of this nation as a capitalist, as opposed to feudal, society.
Also please note that if Senator Obama hadn't spoken to "Joe the Plumber" in such a candid manner, on the assumption there were no open mics, this 2001 radio broadcast which exposes his views when no one is looking for his consistency with his presidential policies, would not be of as great an interest as it is now.
Agree with him or disagree, his fundamental interests carry a socialist tone, and pronouncement of American Capitalism having failed. This conclusion is easy to arrive at when you consider his accurate statements of how the Constitution is interpreted, including the 10th Amendment. I do hope this is not the case for the lack of knowledge people have in regard to the equity decentralization which capitalism provides, thus meaning we can all be as wealthy as a king if we apply ourselves to our community and seek an entrepreneurial manner, capitalism is a redistribution of wealth in and of itself when considered against the backdrop of where the people of the colonies came from, Europe and it's feudal system.
Our Founders concluded that this equitable decentralization is necessary to keep a people free from an oppressive tyrant, and, when you consider the private contributions to Senator Obama by people who have a personal net worth exceeding a billion dollars, you realize why our Founders expressed their conclusions in such a succinct manner by the Constitution and it's Amendments.
Google "The Man Who Broke The Bank of England" if you wish to get a better feel for what our Founders were guarding against, and Senator Obama may be unwittingly, though intentionally by his beliefs, allowing to occur and placing our nation in jeopardy.
My apologies to any that may have taken offense for that is not what I intend. I love my country and I believe wolves in sheep's clothing, that may be manipulating our well intended, need to be something we are aware of.
Apologize for typos and any grammatical errors.
Thank you for reading."
Toddy Littman
P.S. WBEZ appears to have removed the page and the comment I posted to it above and that's too bad.
Friday 31 October 2008
News Categories |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
