Skip to comments.White House Press Secretary: The constitutional lawyer in the Oval Office disagrees with Supreme
Posted on 06/30/2014 12:22:51 PM PDT by PoloSec
(VIDEO)FULL TITLE: White House Press Secretary: The constitutional lawyer in the Oval Office disagrees with Supreme Court on Hobby Lobby (VIDEO)////
White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said on Monday that the constitutional lawyer in the Oval Office disagrees with the Supreme Courts 5-4 decision in favor of Hobby Lobby.
There are now a group of women of an indeterminate size who no longer have access to free contraceptive coverage simply because of some religious views that are held not by them, necessarily, but by their bosses.
We disagree and the constitutional lawyer in the Oval Office disagrees with that conclusion from the Supreme Court, primarily because hes concerned about the impact that it could have on the health of those women, Earnest said.
Cry me a river.
Sounds like Sarcasm, but I doubt it is
I guess that means that the Constitutional scholar in the White House isn’t as smart as he thought he was. Because he got his case wrong.
Can we see his grades to prove he is a Constitutional Lawyer?
Pray America wakes up
“...The constitutional lawyer in the Oval Office disagrees with Supreme”
He’s talking about the guy reading Saul Alynski that pulls his middle finger out of his nose to turn the pages.
(YEAH a cheap shot, so what!)
He never misses a chance to try to elevate himself at the expense of someone else.
There are now a group of women of an indeterminate size who no longer have access to free contraceptive coverage”
As said above, cry me a river. Nothing is stopping them from buying their own.
“....a group of women of an indeterminate size....”
English, the forgotten language.
OMGoodness. it just never stops from him does it?
Well geez. If a leftwing extremist, idiot lawyer in the “White Hut” disagrees with the Supremes all I can say is, “Baby, baby. Where did our love go...”
A Constitutional Lawyer? Is that like how he was a Constitutional Law Professor?
Q: Was Barack Obama really a constitutional law professor?
A: His formal title was “senior lecturer,” but the University of Chicago Law School says he “served as a professor” and was “regarded as” a professor.
When I was in law school, I addressed all of my course instructors as “professors,” regardless of their rank or formal position in the school academic hierarchy (tenured professor, assistant professor, adjunct professor, lecturer, etc.). Was Obama exaggerating or factually wrong in referring to himself as a “constitutional law professor” at the University of Chicago Law School even though his official title was lecturer?
Sen. Obama, who has taught courses in constitutional law at the University of Chicago, has regularly referred to himself as “a constitutional law professor,” most famously at a March 30, 2007, fundraiser when he said, “I was a constitutional law professor, which means unlike the current president I actually respect the Constitution.” A spokesman for the Republican National Committee immediately took exception to Obamas remarks, pointing out that Obamas title at the University of Chicago was “senior lecturer” and not “professor.”
Recently, Hillary Clintons campaign has picked up on this charge. In a March 27 conference call with reporters, Clinton spokesman Phil Singer claimed:
Singer (March 27): Sen. Obama has often referred to himself as a constitutional law professor out on the campaign trail. He never held any such title. And I think anyone, if you ask anyone in academia the distinction between a professor who has tenure and an instructor that does not, youll find that there is youll get quite an emotional response.
Phew! That’s the first thing that hit me!
Ooooo, I’ll bet The Great One will blow a gasket over that line.
so just what is a group of women of a intermittent size? would that size be 19 josh? Did you hear someone laugh in the background when they said constitutional lawyer? or was that a cough?
The constitutional lawyer (has anyone said they were in his class?) who circumvents the constitution whenever it suits him.
If you have surrendered your law license you can hardly be a constitutional lawyer.
Cry me a river.Julie will help
“constitutional lawyer in the Oval Office disagrees with the Supreme Court”
What kind of snooty ass comment is that supposed to be?
Maybe the scrawny little c*cksucking super lawyer (has this moron even argued in front of the high court?) should have went there and made the argument himself?
caugh of laugh at 22 in video
....a group of women of an indeterminate size....
English, the forgotten language.
Maybe he is taking Michelle as his starting point.
sorry...cough or laugh at 22 sec into tape.
notice josh is trying to keep a straight face as well.
In EVERY case, there’s always ONE lawyer who disagrees with the ruling.................
“There are now a group of women of an indeterminate size”
This screams for it’s own thread... with photos.
“constitutional lawyer”?????????? The bum was (at best) a sometime lecturer. Didn’t he turn-in his license to avoid further problems with the bar (as did his beard, moochelle)? But, hey...who really knows???? This anti-Free-America creep’s history is sealed.
No wonder lawyers have such self regard! When I was in college we addressed Professor as Professor. We addressed Doctors as Doctors and other teachers as Mr. or Mrs. No one got away with addressing a non-Professor as Professor!
If he had said that there IS now instead of there ARE now. LOL
Just about everything the Left loves can ultimately be traced back to their moronic belief in overpopulation, and disbelief in God’s command to be fruitful and multiply, therefore calling God a liar.
That’s why birth control and baby murder are so important to them. That’s why homosexuality is so important to them. Both eliminate human beings from the population prematurely, a desired goal. Additionally, murdered babies can’t produce offspring, nor can homosexuals, so they’re both VERY desired behaviors, as far as their sick minds are concerned.
This is also why they’ll inevitably support incest (since the offspring will likely die young), bestiality (since there will be no offspring), and child molesting (since young children can’t get pregnant.)
If someone wants to dance and I’m not invited, let them pay the Piper! :^}
There are now a group of women of an indeterminate size...”
Is that like “binders of women”?
Is Obama even licensed?
Plan B and Ella are pretty expensive when you use them as your only method of birth control, month after month.
The truth is men and women like having procreative sex, it is how we are designed, these drugs allow risky sex behavior with the promise of a pill to “fix” things after the deed.
Can someone show me the FDA studies proving no long term ill effects of using either of these two drugs as a primary birth control method?
“but by their bosses”
Getting lucky on 1 of 16 rulings doesn’t place his opinion in high regard.
Could the “Constitutional Lawyer” in the Oval Office please present ONE brief he has submitted to the Supreme Court? He was a lecturer at U Chicago, that’s it. It’s the lowest level on the academic totem pole, requiring no special expertise, just a friend who can get a job for you.
The Marxist, Mooslim, Kenyan, Steaming Pant Load disagrees with the Constitution.....
The bongo playing menthol smoker in the white hut disagrees?
I think this is another English error. Shouldn't it be "There IS now a group...", even if we don't know whether the women are size 18 or size 4.
His batting average is about 0.0000001
9-0 earlier in the week about his recess appointments, and two major losses this week. I’ve asked before, and ask again: show us ONE Supreme Court brief he drafted, signed, and submitted to the Supreme Court, just one.
...12 by unanimous decisions!
That’s probably THE error and I should have included that part of the sentence.
What kind of snooty ass comment is that supposed to be?
It’s the 2014 edition of “I won.”
Looking forward to this buttheads state of the union speech.
Sooo, what’s the over under on which of the Supremes show for it???
1. The *Constitutional lawyer*...was not Obama. He was only a lecturer on the Constitution...and he had a misguided agenda that determined his perspective. As for the law...he did not practice very long. I don’t think he really has any respect for law. All of his actions seem to demonstrate that.
2. There are now a group of women of an indeterminate size who no longer have access to free contraceptive coverage ...
There is NO SUCH thing as FREE coverage. Also, if any woman wants contraception she can afford it (since it is not expensive)...or she CAN get it. She has tons of ACCESS.
What do the women's sizes matter in this?
Seriously, the White house brainiacs worked half the day to come up with an official response, and they can't even construct a sentence that is grammatically clear, actually saying that the size of the women is indeterminate.
I know, they meant to say the size of the group is indeterminate, silly boys.
I thought the occupant of the White Hut was an ass loving, choom smoking queer.
We are long overdue for some rational truthful discourse on Barack Hussein’s qualifications for being labeled a “constitutional” lawyer, or a professor of law noted for teaching a course on the U. S. Constitution.
All he knows about our Constitution is that he despises it, as would any Socialist Autocrat.
Okay....then I’m sure the ‘constitutional lawyer’ can point to this in the constitution, right.