New President, New Constitution, New Bill of Rights

Is there a better way for America? Is that grand freedom experiment our Founding Fathers so carefully scripted in the Constitution old hat? Evidently, Barack Obama thinks so. Obama plans to radically reinterpret our founding document, turning it into a state manifesto complete with a second Bill of Rights.

In an interview with a Chicago public radio station, Obama complained that “the Supreme Court [which was created by our Founding Fathers in the Constitution] never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society.”

Obama went on to explain that the Constitution, in his view, was a “charter of negative liberties.” Obama expounded, “It says what the states can’t do to you, it 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.”

Given his remarks, it is clear that an Obama presidency will not “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution,” rather, it will change the Constitution to suit his ideology – an ideology that is far different from the one held by our Founding Fathers.

The Audacity of Deceit cover.
The Audacity of Deceit book cover

Recently, Obama surrogate and U.S. congresswoman, Marcy Kaptur (D-OH), fired-up a crowd before Obama took the stage, telling them that America needed a second Bill of Rights that gives all Americans state guarantees of welfare.

Indeed, this need for a second Bill of Rights, one that guarantees welfare from the state, is something that Obama’s long-time Constitutional advisor, Cass Sunstein, has advocated. In his book, The Second Bill of Rights: FDR’s Unfinished Revolution and Why We Need it Now More Than Ever, Sunstein writes that “all legal rights are, or aspire to be, welfare rights.” Sunstein believes that “if the nation becomes committed to certain rights, they may migrate into the Constitution itself.”

For an example of how welfare rights “migrate” into a Constitution, one need only look at Venezuela and examine the handy work of Dictator Hugo Chavez. Like Obama, Chavez relied on community organizing for his rise to power. Chavez’s revolution depended upon the organization of the poor into powerful institutions, which Chavez called the “tools for building socialism.”

When Obama served as chairman of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, he and Bill Ayers helped fund and develop what they called “Local School Councils.” These Local School Councils are very similar to the program Chavez implemented to control teachers and education in Venezuela and create an authoritarian regime that tramples free speech and free enterprise.

Just two years ago, Ayers (Obama’s former boss) stood next to Chavez at the World Education Forum in Caracas and praised “the political educational reforms underway here in Venezuela under the leadership of President Chavez.” Ayers continued: “I look forward to seeing how … all of you continue to overcome the failures of capitalist education as you seek to create something truly new.” Ayers and Obama tried to undo this “capitalist education” in Chicago, and now, Obama is taking their crusade to America’s national stage.

Chavez was elected by promising the same redistributionist policies for which Obama is now calling. Just as an illusory Obama is depending upon an uninformed American electorate, Venezuelans did not fully realize the extent of government expansion Chavez had in mind.

Once elected, Chavez pushed through vast socialist policies including the redistribution of property, taxing the rich, nationalizing industries and rewriting the Venezuelan constitution. Venezuelans never knew what hit them.

Like Chavez, Obama’s redistributive economic plan is copied directly from a manifesto written by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, which states, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” Or, as Obama has rewritten it, the need to “spread the wealth around.” Marx, Engels and Obama believe in state guarantees of welfare, not the God-given right of freedom.

As Chavez is continuing to rewrite Venezuela’s constitution to cater to his socialist ideology, Obama is cautiously setting the stage for a complete overhaul of the very document that has guaranteed our freedoms for over 200 years.

Obama has long championed policies that promote a secular society, and the best way for him to achieve a secular society is to elevate the state to the level of God. Whereas the Constitution of our Founding Fathers guarantees God-given rights, Obama’s new Constitution would create state guarantees to welfare. In such a society, citizens would no longer look to God and the Constitution for their freedom, but rather, look to paternal government for their rations of bread, clothing and housing.

Chavez’s “permanent revolution” and Obama’s policies are promoted under the guise of charity and fairness, but will result in equal opportunity misery and disaster. This is Obama’s true vision for change.

We Americans are very fortunate. Even as we find ourselves in the throes of geopolitical instability and an economic downturn, our core remains strong. Our economic system is already proving, as it has proven so many times in the past, to be the most resilient in the world. We owe this to the fundamental beliefs enshrined in the Constitution.

While it may take America some time to recover economically, recover we will. And we will recover faster than Europe, Russia, or China because these nations don’t protect their citizens’ God-given rights to freedom, and thus, free enterprise and free speech.

However, should Obama become President and replace our God-given rights with his state guarantees in a new Constitution and Bill of Rights, America’s resiliency will evaporate.

Brad O’Leary is author of The Audacity of Deceit: Barack Obama’s War on American Values. To learn more, go to

By Brad O’Leary