Selected in the top 100 Economics Sites

Follow me on Twitter

Tuesday, November 4, 2008

Hey buddy, come here and rub this lamp.

From Senator Obama in 2001: "As radical as I think people tried 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 it has been interpreted -- and Warren Court interpreted it in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. It 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."

The negative liberties are contained in the Bill of Rights and are what the government can't do to you like deprive you of free speech or take away your gun to defend yourself and family.

Senator Obama is talking about "positive liberties" not found in the Constitution, a list of things government must do or provide for you. Or let us call them what they are...economic rights. Thus the Senator has said publically that access to health care is an economic right. At least he has the guts to say it, right to your face. That would be first on the list. Second on down the list of new economic rights would be the right to a "living wage" however you may define that term. The third new right may/would be access to free education for as long as an individual wished to attend school. Fourth (insert your favorite right here).
What about the right to live your life without the intrusion of coersive central power?

No comments: