Posted by: Lipstick Piggy | October 27, 2008

Obama’s Marxist Interview — His view on the US Constitution

Well, we have all been hearing of this interview — Now here what Obama feels about our Constitution

Listen to Obama in his own words.



  1. Palin’s own words: “And Alaska—we’re set up, unlike other states in the union, where it’s collectively Alaskans own the resources. So we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs. … It’s to maximize benefits for Alaskans, not an individual company, not some multinational somewhere, but for Alaskans.”

    WOW they “Share the Wealth” in Alaska, they must be Socialist up there in Alaska also…

  2. Wrong Chris. If the citizens own the resources collectively (ie, not the companies using them) is just given them back a piece of what is rightfully theirs to begin with. This is quite different from taking money (increasing taxes) from one social and economic class and giving it to another DIRECTLY ..AS IN A CHECK.(not even indirectly via government spend programs)..which is Obama;s tax plan…this is truly socialism or welfare.

  3. Thank you for the truth truthteller…if obama is elected our country is going to become a scary place.

  4. Collective ownership is referred to as communism, sharing the same common root as communal and community. I believe Chris is nearly correct (communism, not socialism.)

    According to Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary: Com”mu*nism\, n. A scheme of equalizing the social conditions of life; specifically, a scheme which contemplates the abolition of inequalities in the possession of property, as by distributing all wealth equally to all, or by holding all wealth in common for the equal use and advantage of all.

    According to The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition:
    1. A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.

    It is clearly distinguished from capitalism by the belief that private ownership fundamentally robs the community of what is by right theirs, whereas capitalism tends to allocate resources to those willing (directly or indirectly) to invest the most in them. Typical capitalistic societies attempt to protect equal opportunity to act rather than equal ownership, on the theory that this maximizes the efficient allocation of resources and thus, the economic productivity of those resources.

    The differing priorities reflected in these systems (economic productivity vs equality) are reflected in the successes and failures of each system. Pure capitalism generates enormous resource productivity gains, but has difficulty maintaining equal opportunity for all, which hampers it’s effectiveness, and intensifies economic disparity. Pure communism, in theory, guarantees equal ownership and consumption but has difficulty allocating resources, creating work incentives, and maintaining equal ownership. Both contain feedback loops which cause them to function sub-optimally over time.

    These competing ideologies have yet to function in a whole society without elements of the other (though black markets may be involved). What balance of each is considered appropriate is essentially ideological, as differing goals make direct comparisons largely meaningless.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: