Obama's "Redistribution" Out Of Context

OK, I already wrote that I'm not for Obama, with one reason being I think taxes are going to rise during his administration. But, even with that, I have to say Drudge and "The Right" screaming "redistribution" over Obama's comments, is way out of context as can be seen in this Fox transcript:

33:55 yeah you know one of the things that is interesting and i thnk susan is exaclty right that there is this pruning taking place and that we are aseeing potentially the groundwork being laid for potential future changes being made on substantive issues i mean right now they are sort of obscrure legal issues and at some point this may set the precendent then for trimming 34:15 back on more substantive issues that we care about but there is one other 34:21area where the civil rights area has changed and that is at the state level you now have state supreme cts and state laws that in some ways have adopted the ethos of the warren court 34:39a classic example would be something like public education where after brown v board a major issue ends up being redistribtion how do we get more money into the schools 34:51 and how do we actually create equal schools and equal educational opportunity well the court in a case called san antonio v rodriguez in the early 70s 35:01basically slaps those kinds fo claims down and says you know what we as a court have no power to examine issues of redistribution and wealth inequalities 35:11with respect to schools thats not a race issue thats a wealth issue and something and we cant get into those

hutchinson: and the federal constitution doesnt offer any warrant for intervention

OBAMA

35:18 exactly now what is interesting is though suddenly a whole bunch of folsk start bringing these claims in state court under state constitutions that call for equal educational opportunity and you see state courts with mixed results being more responsive to it 35:34 you knwo the reason i think that is relevant is not to say that i am not worried about the lack of protectiosn coming from the supreme court 35:42 but it is to say though that you have got a cultural transformation that changes hwo states operate and how states think about the protection of individual rights in ways that didnt exist prior to the warren court and that i think is an important legacy 35:56 to keep in mind

Obama was talking about funding education after Brown v Board of Education.

Thanks to P6 for the initial full audio clip and additional links to the text.

Comments

[MIB]

"... with one reason being I think taxes are going to rise during his administration."

As a general statement, taxes -- I presume you're speaking of income taxes -- are going to rise regardless of who wins the presidency. If anything, you should realize by now the tax reforms of 2001 and 2003 were political gimmicks of questionable positive economic impact. Chances are the lower rate for your income bracket has already expired (if its savings wasn't already offset by the AMT). There are specific credits and exemptions that remain in place, however.

More factcheck.org; less Fox News.

[LLR]

Listening/reading that interview reminds me of some other remarks that Obama made. He said something about how he couldn’t take away our guns if he wanted to because he doesn’t have the votes. Now that makes me think that if he did have the votes that he would. But as we see the democrats polling better and better in several races, will we see Obama try and take away guns if he thinks he has the votes?

[DarkStar]

Yes, the tax breaks were a gimmick, one that I wish would stay around. But my concern is beyond those.

[LLR]

I forgot. I am also reminded of a comment that Obama made about single payer healthcare. He said tat if we were starting from scratch (whatever that means) then could support a single payer system. Now even having the most remote support for a single payer system shows that you are to the left of many people (voters).

Let’s assume that there were no Bush tax cuts in 01 and 03, does that mean that Obama would impose a higher tax on “the rich” in order to give millions upon millions of people who pay no taxes (many who are already getting a refundable tax credit through EIC) a $500 or $1K check? I would think that the answer would be “YES.”

I am also sick of hearing the words “economic justice.” It’s just talk for even more gov’t programs. In my opinion economic justice is responsibly spending taxpayer funds. It is having transparent gov’t. It’s keeping taxes low for everyone. It sure ain’t more gov’t agencies like Freddie & Fannie.