Much has been made about the 2001 radio interview with Obama, wherein he claimed that the Warren Court didn’t do enough to redistribute the wealth in our country. Republicans are shouting SOCIALIST! So is Obama really a socialist? See more below.

Some democrats and constitutional law scholars are coming to Obama’s defense. Cass Sunstein, a Constitutional law professor at Harvard, claims that Obama was actually using ‘Conservative’ legal principles and that what he said has been misinterpreted. Sunstein claims that Obama rejected the idea that courts should uphold social rights, like the right to education, and the right to healthcare.

Maybe Obama doesn’t want the court to take this role, but clearly he does want the legislature to. So despite Sunstein’s efforts to say otherwise, clearly Obama does not side with the conservatives just because he has no faith in the court’s ability to take on such tasks. If they could, Barack would love to have the courts help socialize our country. Let’s not kid ourselves, Obama is pushing a pretty radical social agenda. He disguises it with terms such as progressive, as to not be associated with the liberal name. Yet he borrows principles going back as far as FDR and this second bill of rights idea.

Yes, Roosevelt advocated a new bill of rights that would protect the ‘positive’ rights he thought each of us should have, namely:

* A job with a living wage
* Freedom from unfair competition and monopolies
* Homeownership
* Medical care
* Education
* Recreation

Roosevelt himself was not able to make these ideas part of our guaranteed rights under the constitution. I think we all want these things, but life asks us to earn them. They are not guarantees. They require we work and strive and live in such a way that we deserve them. They require the payment of responsibility. I personally believe it is part of government’s role to make these things available in a fair manner, and accessible, but only to those who are responsible enough to earn them. Much like driving a car is not a right, rather a privilege, conditioned on our following the rules.