“Constitutional lawyer”? My Aunt Fanny!

OBAMA yes I can SCOTUS no you can't

The Leftstream media keeps calling Barack Obama a “Constitutional lawyer”, as if this somehow makes him qualified to stick his nose in the air and sneer at SCOTUS decisions he doesn’t like.

But the fact is that Barack Obama was never a professor of Constitutional Law and never once argued a case before the Supreme Court. He isn’t even licensed to practice law, having surrendered that right in 2008.

The most common reason for a lawyer to “retire” at such a young age is to avoid being brought up on charges. In his autobiography, Obama says he was known for years as Barry Soetoro and that he used marijuana and cocaine. On his bar application, he said he had never used another name nor used drugs. Lying on your bar application is grounds for disbarment.  Obama avoided having this on his record by voluntarily retiring.



Filed under Barack Obama, Constitution, Supreme Court

7 responses to ““Constitutional lawyer”? My Aunt Fanny!

  1. Oh, but Barry Soetero is a student of the Constitution, though. He has studied it in a manner different from how you and I might, however. Sort of the way the 2001 Sep 11 terrorists studied the World Trade Center towers.

    President Obama talks about the ‘flaws’ in the U.S. Constitution to students at Barnard College in New York City:

    “The Constitution … had flaws. Flaws that this nation strove to protect [sic] over time. Questions of race and gender were unresolved. No women’s signature graced the original document. Although we can assume there were Founding Mothers, whispering things in the ears of the Founding Fathers. [cheers, applause] …

    “What made this document special was that it provided the space, the possibility, for those who had been left out of our charter to fight their way in. It provided people the language to appeal to principles and ideals that broadened Democracy’s reach. It allowed for protest. And movements. And dissemination of new ideas that would repeatedly, decade after decade, change the world. Constant forward movement that continues to this day. Our Founders understood that America does not stand still. We are dynamic, not static. We look forward, not back.”

    Now, you don’t get any more Constitutionally scholarly than that.

    It’s not about creating a government of checks and balances, limited in its scope, and protecting a self-governing people from institutional excesses. It’s not about upholding law and providing stability. Not for Barry. No, government is all about moving forward and being dynamic and broadening Democracy’s reach, which obviously means including the whole world in the American umbrella, so open the borders and let everybody vote!

    September 2001 Chicago public radio program

    “Barack Obama, what are your thoughts on the Declaration and Constitution?”

    “I-I-I think it’s a remarkable document –“ he began haltingly.

    “Which one?” Helfrich interjected.

    “The original Constitution as well as the Civil War Amendments,” he replied. “But I think it is an imperfect document, and I think it is a document that reflects some deep flaws in American culture, the Colonial culture nascent at that time.

    “African-Americans were not — first of all they weren’t African-Americans — the Africans at the time were not considered as part of the polity that was of concern to the Framers. I think that as Richard said it was a ‘nagging problem’ in the same way that these days we might think of environmental issues, or some other problem where you have to balance cost-benefits, as opposed to seeing it as a moral problem involving persons of moral worth.

    “And in that sense,” Obama continued, “I think we can say that the Constitution reflected an enormous blind spot in this culture that carries on until this day, and that the Framers had that 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 to say that it also reflected the fundamental flaw of this country that continues to this day.”

    Obama did not elaborate on the “fundamental flaw” that persists.

    I’ll stop there. Two-link limit. 🙂


  2. Um, can someone edit my comment to close the first link? Looks like I messed that up.

    Aaaand, since I seem to have another comment slot going…

    Obama’s calm baritone can make anything sound reasonable, even a frustrated lament that “the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth” and disappointment that “as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical.” …

    But in the cold form of text, one recoils from a potential President uttering the words that he is frustrated that the Warren Court “didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution.”

    Those constraints are there for a reason.

    Obama says, “Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change.”

    —Jim Geraghty, National Review


    • Mindful, which link is it that you want fixed?


      • Link begins at “President Obama talks about the ‘flaws’….” and the close-tag should have been after “…in New York City:”

        I didn’t think one even could have a blockquote inside a link tag, but the link as is goes on for paragraphs.

        In the primitive 1990s software on Ace of Spades, there are only a few basic tags, no links, and if you forget to close, say, a strikeout tag, the strikeout will continue over all comments until someone posts a close-strikeout tag.

        The punishment for this infraction is called The Barrel….


        • Okay, thanks for clarifying. I thought this would be an easy fix, since adding or removing links in a post is a fast, easy process… but for some reason when a link appears in a comment, WP does not make it easy to remove it, at least not without jumping through a lot of hoops. (The block quotes got lost in the process — sorry — but since the quotation marks are still there, it’s probably no big deal; it’s easy to see where the quotes begin and end.)


  3. First time I’ve seen that graphic with the info all in one spot. Thanks, Chrissy!