H/T FoxNation
“I actually know the answer to that question. It’s no (well, technically yes…he didn’t). President Obama taught “Con Law III” at Chicago. Judicial review, federalism, the separation of powers — the old “structural Constitution” stuff — is covered in “Con Law I” (or at least it was when I was a student). Con Law III covers the Fourteenth Amendment. (Oddly enough, Prof. Obama didn’t seem too concerned about “an unelected group of people” overturning a “duly constituted and passed law” when we were discussing all those famous Fourteenth Amendment cases – Roe v. Wade, Griswold v. Connecticut, Romer v. Evans, etc.) Of course, even a Con Law professor focusing on the Bill of Rights should know that the principle of judicial review has been alive and well since 1803, so I still feel like my educational credentials have been tarnished a bit by the President’s “unprecedented, extraordinary” remarks…”
Read it all
Loading ...
Tarnished, SOS? yes, I know the feeling.
Every time I hear Obama speak or see him on television, I feel a keen sense of disappointment. There is a man who made it to be president, yet he wasting his opportunity and the country by being a petulant, petty prince. His policies are proving ruinous to the US. All because he has a vision (but he can not see) of what he wants America to look like. A vision, more likely a hallucination, with which only his most ardent sycophants can agree.
In other words, he can’t see the forest because of the teleprompter?
So the only student thus far to admit to being in his class is critical of him? Not a good record….
Maybe for a lawyer admitting that he or she was in a law class taught by Obama is tantamount to professional suicide.
Unless they took the class over again with a real professor. Then they could certainly look back with impunity.
President Obama is a kin to Pyrite, otherwise known as “fool’s gold”.