Skip to comments.So, Obama was a "Constitutional Law Professor", was he?
Posted on 06/17/2008 12:18:47 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Barack Obama, while doing a fundraiser in 2007 claimed, "I was a constitutional law professor, which means unlike the current president I actually respect the Constitution..."
Yet this constitutional law professor establishes the following as his criteria for selecting judges:
"We need somebody who's got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it's like to be a young teenage mom," Obama told a Planned Parenthood conference in Washington, D.C., in 2007 "The empathy to understand what it's like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old. And that's the criteria by which I'm going to be selecting my judges." Of Justice Alito, Obama once said:
"I've seen an extraordinarily consistent attitude on the part of Judge Alito that does not uphold the traditional role of the Supreme Court as a bastion of equality and justice for United States citizens." A constitutional law professor should, one would think, understand the role of the federal judiciary. As should be apparent to anyone with a clue, and I don't include Senator Obama in that particular group, what he is claiming isn't anywhere close to the traditional role of the federal judiciary. What he is advocating is legislation from the bench based on emotion and empathy, not the Constitution.
Here, in plain English, is the role, of the federal judiciary found in an introduction to the US Federal Court System for Judges and Judicial Administrators in Other Countries. It may be something a particular constitutional lawyer may wish to avail himself of:
The federal judiciary is a totally separate, selfgoverning branch of the government. The federal courts often are called the guardians of the Constitution because their rulings protect the rights and liberties guaranteed by the Constitution. Through fair and impartial judgments, they determine facts and interpret the law to resolve legal disputes. The courts do not make the laws. That is the responsibility of the Congress. Nor do the courts have the power to enforce the laws. That is the role of the President and the many executive branch departments and agencies. But the judicial branch has the authority to interpret and decide the constitutionality of federal laws and to resolve other disputes over federal laws.
Not a thing in that brief description approaches the Obama criteria for federal judges.
And folks, given the fact he may win this election, that should scare you half to death.
In the Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution,
they make a statement that everyone should remember:
“Constitutional Law” has little or nothing to do with the actual Constitution.
—and Wm. J. Clinton also claims to be a professor of “constitutional law”—
History says whoever has his ear is in control.
My goodness, Barrack H. Obamarama wants the Supreme Court justices to do the work of the legislature.
These are some of the most dangerous statements I’ve seen in some time. Dangerous, that is, to the concept of a constitutional republic with executive, legislative, and judicial branches.
I wholheartedly agree with that statement.
“dangerous” implies intent.
I’m getting the impression that this guy is CLUELESS.
He’s just too damn dumb to be president.
He sure is.
Regime change in the courts. Impeach activist justices!
Yo, Barak Mugabe Hussein, the constitution of what country?
I think his “professorship” was on the level of an adjunct, the academic equivalent of a day laborer.
“We need somebody who’s got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it’s like to be a young teenage mom,”
First of all, a mom who is still in her teens ain’t too smart. Do you really want judges THAT stupid?
His statement just translates into ‘judges who can think of new ways to take more of YOUR HARD EARNED MONEY away from you’ and give it to people who have chosen to take NO RESPONSIBILITY for their own lives!!! Ain’t that special?
“Do the democrats care that this guy is an empty suit, or is that the plan in the first place?”
I’m afraid — very afraid that is the plan. B-Hussein-O is someone’s puppet. I’m not sure who that is, but someone definitely has his hand up Hussein’s back, making his mouth move.
Looking at our current supreme court it appears that studying con-law makes most people dumber, especially with regards to what the Constitution says as opposed to what people like Obama think it should say.
Undeniable truths about liberalism:
Liberalism is essentially using force to make the responsible and innocent pay for the consequences of the choices of the irresponsible.
Liberals support no individual freedoms that do not pertain to sexual behavior.
Yep, the courts don’t make the laws, right? They just interpret the law.
Well, Obama’s saying he wants judges who can empathize and sympathize with people in difficult life circumstances. Which will lead to judges legislating from the bench, as they “interpret” the law to fix the ills of society from the bench.
Obama was happy with the Supreme Court ruling on Gitmo detainees. This particular law was written with previous court decisions in mind. They actually tried to bend over backwards to protect the rights of the detainees, but this wasn’t good enough for the Supreme Court. This is a good example of just throwing out a law that judges don’t like.
Well, there’s that school of thought that the Constitution is a living breathing document that has to be re-interpreted with changing times. I keep hearing examples of changes, such as how do you apply the Constitution ban against unreasonable search and seizure to the monitoring of e-mail. But the fact that we have electronic communications that the Founding Fathers couldn’t conceive of doesn’t change the underlying principles.
"And WHEN I'm elected, I'll nationalize..."
Just like the LSM is thrilled to refer to Larry Tribe as a “constitutional scholar” and that is only because he happened to have penned the last book that was supposedly about the US Constitution.
Actually, given the pervasiveness of 'comparative legal studies', and 'critical legal studies', I suspect a randomly selected constitutional law professor is less likely to respect the Constitution than a person randomly selected from the population at large.
So, Obama was a "Constitutional Law Professor", was he?
Not to defend Obama the Antichrist but he was misquoted about the "Constitutional Law Professor" thing. What he actually said was.....
"I had a CONSTIPATED LAW PROFESSOR".
We know the MSM, they always twist things around.