Obama actually said no such thing. As my father was fond of saying "don't believe anything you're told and only half of what you see."

From the Washington Post Fact Checker

You can read the entire transcript of the interview here, courtesy of Fox News, but here is the passage in which Obama explains that courts are "not very good" at redistributing wealth:

Maybe I am showing my bias here as a legislator as well as a law professor, but you know I am not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts. You know the institution just isn't structured that way.... Any of the three of us sitting here could come up with a rationale for bringing about economic change through the courts. I think that, as a practical matter, that our institutions are just poorly equipped to do it.

In other words, Obama says pretty much the opposite of what the McCain camp says he said. Contrary to the spin put on his remarks by McCain economics adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin, he does not express "regret" that the Supreme Court has not been more "radical." Nor does he describe the Court's refusal to take up economic redistribution questions as a "tragedy." He uses the word "tragedy" to refer not to the Supreme Court, but to the civil rights movement:

One of the tragedies of the civil rights movement was that the civil rights movement became so court focused, I think, there was a tendency to lose track of the political and organizing activities on the ground that are able to bring about the coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change.

One of the problems with the McCain/Drudge/Fox minions, is that they care not for the truth, and like the wicked witch's flying monkeys, spread their poison far and wide, long after it has been debunked.

Guys - stop quoting WaPo and FoxNews and maybe venture your own opinions. I listened to the full audio clip. I agree that McCain's camp went overboard with their interpretation but what Obama said is still VERY VERY SCARY.

He very clearly says "If you look at victories and failures of the civil rights movement...I think where it succeeded was to invest formal rights in dispossessed peoples. BUT (my emphasis) the supreme court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth". (ie that was the failure of the movement that it didn't venture into ROW)

He says it's a tragedy that the civil rights movement was so court focused and it lost track of the community organizing. BUT that doesn't mean that he's not supportive of giving the SC power to make ROW decisions.

When the female caller asked him the specific question (not about the 1960s but about the 21st century) he said he wasn't "optimistic" and it would be politically challenging. But he should have come out and said it's not the Supreme Court's job to be making those decisions. But he didn't say that. Fasten your seatbelts.