OBAMA'S FUNDAMENTAL DISLIKE OF THE US CONSTITUTION

Transcript (to the best of my ability and time constraints)

I think that we can say that the Constitution reflected the enormous blind spot in this culture that carries on until this day and that the framers had this same blind spot. I don't think the two views are contradictory to say that it was a remarkable political document that paved the way for where we are now and it to say that it also reflected the fundamental flaw of this country that continues to this day.

Notice that he refers to the constitution in the past tense. To me this is the scariest and most disturbing aspect of this statement. What is the fundamental flaw of the US Constitution that continues to this day? Certainly not slavery that was taken care of with the 13th Ammendment.
 
I think it has everything to do with the fact that it is a pro-individual document which limits the power's of the government  and hinders the quick restructuring of society. Obama, I feel, is in love with the concept of the power of the state as a force for good and thinks that the proverb: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions." does not apply to him or other "forward-looking" progressives.

EDIT 10/28

I was bothered by Obama calling the US Constitution a "remarkable political document" but didn't fully flesh out my objections. I just read Kim Priestap's excellent post at the wizbangblog (October 27th).

Second, he calls the Constitution a "remarkable political document." I think it's fair to say that our Constitution is more than just a political document. It's the supreme law of our nation. It's the foundation of our republic. It outlines our freedoms by stating clearly what the government can't do to us and there's a reason why our Founding Fathers deliberately structured it that way. The President of the United States is required to swear to uphold and protect the Constitution of the United States. However, by listening to what Obama said in this interview and the 2001 interview that Steve posted earlier it's clear: he thinks the Constitution is fundamentally flawed. And based upon his words what other logical conclusion can someone come to other than Obama doesn't think the Constitution should be protected but should be radically altered so it reflects his leftist views.

http://wizbangblog.com/content/2008/10/27/more-obama-audio-constitution-reflects-fundamental-flaw.php

Beautifully put.

That post led to another clip on Obama that I think ends once and for all any debate on what Obama means when he says that the constitution is fundamentally flawed.

Speaking of the Warren Court Obama said

"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's been interpreted and more important interpreted in the same way that, generally, the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties; says what the states can't do to you, what the federal government can't do to you, but it doesn't say what the state government or federal government must do on your behalf."

Anybody who thinks we have "positive" liberties -- an oxymoron in my opinion -- is a socialist. If you don't understand the above statement please read more philosophy and history books.

Hear Obama discussing the Warren Court below: